Shaking Kills: Instead Parents Please Educate and Remember - Shaken Baby Prevention
Friday, November 21, 2008
MCH LIBRARY RELEASES NEW EDITION OF KNOWLEDGE PATH ABOUT DEPRESSION DURING AND AFTER PREGNANCY Depression During and After Pregnancy: Knowledge Path is an electronic guide to recent resources about the prevalence and incidence of perinatal depression, identification and treatment, impact on the health and well-being of a new mother and her infant, and implications for service delivery. The MCH knowledge path contains information on Web sites, publications, and databases. Separate sections present resources for professionals (health professionals, policymakers, program administrators, and researchers) and for women experiencing perinatal depression and their families. The knowledge path is available at http://mchlibrary.info/KnowledgePaths/kp_postpartum.html.
Sunday, August 10, 2008
There's an interesting point about fussy babies: their behavior is much more susceptible to being shaped by their parents.
Hopefully, as word spreads, it will help those parents with colicky babies, or with high need for control, to know that some things are indeed beyond their control.
PS. The asides about professionals in the child advice business are also of interest - when advice works, it may well be because the baby has characteristics that fit the advice, and many professionals resist, or are at least reluctant to acknowledge, the importance of genetic factors.
But I Did Everything Right!
DNA discoveries are revealing why even the best parenting doesn't have the effects experts promise, from breast-feeding to letting kids learn from mistakes.
By Sharon Begley NEWSWEEK
Published Aug 9, 2008 - Aug. 18-25, 2008 issueIf there is one thing experts on child development agree on, it is that kids learn best when they are allowed to make mistakes and feel the consequences. So Mom and Dad hold back as their toddler tries again and again to cram a round peg into a square hole. They feel her pain as playmates shun her for being pushy, hoping s he'll learn to back off. They let their teen stay up too late before a test, hoping a dismal grade will teach her to get a good night's sleep but believing that ordering her to get to bed right now will not: kids who experience setbacks rather than having them short-circuited by a controlling parent learn not to repeat the dumb behavior.
But not, it seems, all kids. In about 30 percent, the coils of their DNA carry a glitch, one that leaves their brains with few dopamine receptors, molecules that act as docking ports for one of the neurochemicals that carry our thoughts and emotions. A paucity of dopamine receptors is linked to an inability to avoid self-destructive behavior such as illicit drug use. But the effects spill beyond such extremes.
Children with the genetic variant are unable to learn from mistakes. No matter how many tests they blow by partying the night before, the lesson just doesn't sink in.
The discovery, reported last December, is part of what is fast becoming the newest frontier in studies of why children turn out as they do. Since the first advice book for American parents appeared in 1811, the child-rearing industry, as well as researchers who have made child development a science, have assumed that, although every child is an individual, there are certain universals. If parents are too take-charge about homework, the child becomes disengaged and eventually gives up; if they are warm and affectionate, kids don't act out. But while most children do respond the way research shows, there have always been "outliers," kids who don't turn out the way experts promise.
After years of ignoring those children, a few scientists now realize that they are telling us something that promises to revolutionize our understanding of child development. In an echo of "personalized medicine" (matching drugs to people's DNA), scientists are finding that how parents treat their children is filtered through the prism of DNA. Parents may intuit that, as they notice that what worked with one child is failing abysmally with another, but now science is pinpointing exactly what combinations of nature and nurture spell gridlock.
It is finally dawning on experts that "individual genetic differences are the 800-pound gorilla of child development," says Jack Shonkoff, director of the Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University. "The promise of genomics is that you will be able to tailor experiences as we tailor drugs."
Research showing that the most scientifically rigorous child-rearing advice can blow up on you couldn't come at a worse time for the millions of American parents who are desperate for direction. They are gobbling up how-to books and DVDs, even hiring coaches and consultants. They are tearing their hair out over conflicting advice on even such basics as sleep—let baby cry herself to sleep? Co-sleep? (As it turns out, the conflicting advice may reflect the fact that the "experts' " experience happens to have beenwith children whose genetic disposition is amenable to their way of doing things.)
More than earlier generations, new parents are panicked that they're going to screw up. That feeling is fed by posts on Web sites such as UrbanBaby, in which someone, somewhere, can be counted on to flame your every parenting decision.
But for parents who look back in sadness—perplexed that although they did everything "right," their child is not as kind, or intelligent, or self-confident, or well adjusted as the recipes promised—the emerging science offers an explanation, and perhaps an out: with the DNA stacked against you, it wasn't your fault.
One of the strongest and most counterintuitive findings in this nascent field is that children with a sweet temperament, which is under strong genetic control, are the least likely to emulate their parents and absorb the lessons they teach, while fussy kids are the most likely to do so.
Fussy children have a hypersensitive nervous system that is keenly attuned to its surroundings—including what Mom and Dad do and say. In studies that are shaking up textbook dogmas, Jay Belsky of Birkbeck University of London has shown that fussy babies are therefore wired to be more strongly shaped by their parents than mellower children are.
It is the fussy baby who, read to night after dutiful night, is likely to develop a love of books; the mellow baby, given the same literary diet, might just as easily grow into a teen who has no interest in reading anything longer than a text message. The mellow baby, immune to your charms, is more likely to show signs of road rage from the day she first takes her tricycle out for a spin, even though she grew up watching your saintly temper control.
Children who go with the flow of new people and new situations are like Teflon: good parenting doesn't stick to them—but neither, necessarily, does bad parenting. They're the young adults who can't form close, meaningful relationships despite the unconditional love you showed them. "Kids with difficult temperaments are more sensitive to the effects of parenting," says Belsky. "You can get by with sloppier parenting if you have a 'good temperament' kid." Even children who fall between the extremes are generally closer to one than the other.
Although whether you have an easy or a fussy child is obvious, other innate differences that shape whether and how a child will respond to how parents raise them are less apparent. But since they reflect the presence of a DNA variant, they are all candidates for being pinpointed with a genetic test that will help parents know what to expect:
• The gene variant that influences whether children learn from their mistakes. With the misspelled gene, brains have about 30 percent fewer dopamine receptors and less activity in the brain's frontal cortex (the site of higher-order thinking, including monitoring negative feedback) and hippocampus (memory) than do people with the more common form of the gene. In an experiment at the Max Planck Institute for Neurological Research in Germany, people with the misspelling weren't able to avoid choices that they were told over and over were incorrect. Numerous other studies have linked this gene variant to addiction, obesity and compulsive gambling, suggesting that the underlying problem is trouble learning the negative consequences of your actions.
• The DNA variant that affects whether a baby's brain development will be spurred by breast-feeding, which has been reported to confer an extra half-dozen or so IQ points by kindergarten. But not all breast-fed babies are little Einsteins, making their mothers wonder why all the milk-stained blouses didn't seem to boost cognitive development. The reason seems to be that there are two forms of a gene called FADS2. In the 90 percent of babies who carry the "C" form, breast-feeding raises intelligence by an average of nearly seven IQ points, scientists led by Terrie Moffitt and Avshalom Caspi of Duke University reported last year. This version of FADS2 produces an enzyme that helps convert the fatty acids in breast milk into compounds that help signals zip along brain neurons and spur neurons to sprout connections, which underlie intelli gence, memory and creativity. The 10 percent of babies who carry the other form of the gene lack the enzyme and therefore derive no cognitive benefit from breast-feeding (though they still get an immune-system boost from it).
• DNA variants can protect children from bad parenting. For instance, most girls who are sexually abused are at higher risk for becoming alcoholics, as well as for developing other mental-health problems. But girls who have a "sluggish" version of the gene called MAOA seem to be vaccinated against this effect, reported scientists led by neurogeneticist David Goldman of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism last year. With the active version of MAOA, the brain's hippocampus—which processes emotional experiences and memories—becomes hyperactivated when it remembers something upsetting, such as abuse, and the woman turns to alcohol for solace. With the sluggish version, those memories lose their awful power.
Another protective gene insulates children from the effects of an emotionally distant mother, one who is cold and uncaring, who turns away when her child feels the pain of a skinned knee no less than from a crushed dream. That is supposed to make a child more likely to develop "externalizing behavior," acting out in a bid for attention. But children with a certain form of a gene called DRD4, which stands for dopamine-receptor D4, are Teflon-coated, at little to no risk of becoming emotionally insecure as a result of mothers who are emotionally distant, found a 2007 study.
The discoveries questioning the connection between what parents do and how children turn out has not exactly taken the science of child development by storm. That seems to reflect a culture clash within the field. Most researchers who study child development were trained as psychologists, and—to overgeneralize, but only a little—are uncomfortable with or even suspicious of genetics. Geneticists tend to see behavioral research as squishy, not hard science.
That produces a body of scientific literature that is remarkably ignorant of genetics. As we reported in this story, we were struck by how clueless so many "experts" in child development were about the new genetics—and how resistant they were to it. Almost all were unaware of the studies showing that genetics acts as a filter between environment and child, letting some influences in and keeping others out. "Even the stuff published in the best journals ignores the underlying genetics," says one leader in the field.
Since companies already offer storefront DNA tests, the day is not far off when parents can determine their child's MAOA or DRD4 status, or the presence of any other variant that influences the effect of parenting. But perhaps it is time to acknowledge that there is only so much influence parents can h ave. In her best-selling book "I Feel Bad About My Neck," Nora Ephron laments how American society "came to believe in the perfectibility of the child just as it also came to believe in the conflicting theory that virtually everything in human nature was genetic." Both views—that everything is genetic and that parents can transform a child like a lump of clay—are as wrong as wrong can be.
Sunday, July 27, 2008
In the hospital they made us watch this really sad movie on shaken baby syndrome (Serene probably doesn't even remember it) and I thought how in the world could someone do that to their baby? I was shocked! Then, after about a week of 1.5 hour catnaps it all started to make sense how someone could lose control. I had to turn on the light sometimes just to make sure that the writhing object in my arms was in fact my baby and not a screaming banshee. I write with some hyperbole to emphasize the point but rest be assured that I never considered hurting my baby even during her most demonic frenzies.
Now, from The Mommy 'n Baby Page, an excellent perspective on what colic means to a mother...
Colic31st July 2008, 06:42 pm Some of us are lucky enough not to have to have a colicky baby, but others aren’t so blessed. My son was never diagnosed with colic, but often he would cry for hours each day, sometimes as many as four or five.
I can’t imagine having a baby who cries more then that, but there are some. My husband’s uncle would tell us stories of the two colicky babies that he and his wife raised. He would talk about two am drives to put the baby asleep and get some peace and quite.
Unfortunatly colic isn’t something we understand. We aren’t sure why some babies re colicky and others aren’t.
Without knowing the cause we aren’t sure how to make it stop either. If you have spent hours singing, pacing, dancing (I used to dance with my son who would sometimes quiet down with this method, at least until I stopped!), driving, crying, feeding, changing, and in all other ways trying to get through it, then you know what it is like to wish there was a way out.
Sometimes thoughts creep up, especailly after hours of hard work trying to make the crying stop to no avail. However, you have to work to combat these thoughts. One of the most common is that you are a bad mom. This thought can creep in as you aren’t making your baby happy.
It is hard to handle, but if you are trying and you care then you are a good mom. You have to remind yourself of the times when your baby isn’t crying and the love you feel then. You’re a good mom who is facing a difficult challenge! You are doing your best and that is better then many. Sure it isn’t easy, but you love your baby (especially when they aren’t crying) and you face it each day.Often times it is easy to feel alone when you are dealing with a colicky baby. Few people admit to having a colicky child because they are feeling insecure and alone too. However, you should look for others who are in the same boat as you are. Colic is something that happens to a lot of families and while it is hard to handle, you most certainly aren’t alone. You can even look for groups of moms with colicky babies online for someone to talk
to. Sometimes it is easy to feel like you are doing something wrong or that you are just nuts (”She only cries when she is alone with me!” or “Am I imagining this?”). This can be heightened by family who just doesn’t believe that your little angel is anything but, a little angel. You can get some relief. Leave the baby with the friends and family who don’t believe at the time time your baby is most colicky. Do some errands, take a break, and make it work for you. You won’t feel so alone and you will be sure to find it isn’t just you and you aren’t crazy! While colic isn’t necessarily something wrong with the baby, it sure can feel like it is and as such can make it feel like you have done something wrong.You may blame yourself or search for something that happened during your
pregnancy or that you are doing wrong that may have “caused” this problem. While
researchers don’t know what causes colic, they do know that it isn’t you. Mom’s
everywhere may feel a little guilty, but they don’t have a right to be. There is
nothing that you could have done to make your baby colicky.When I was eight months pregnant a very kind woman was talking to me about having the baby. She told me that at one time she was home alone and her daughter had been crying and crying. The crying had grated on her nerves and she suddenly thought about throwing her baby out of the window. She didn’t hurt her baby and felt guilty for thinking of that. When hearing this story I was appalled. I couldn’t believe that this woman was telling me this. She ended her story by telling me it was
okay if I had bad thoughts during a crying episode, as long as I didn’t act on themIn the hospital they showed a movie on shaken baby syndrome and I was amazed. How could people do that to beautiful babies? Then one day Marcus cried and cried and cried. I remembered both the story that was told to me and the shaken babies. While I could never shake a baby, any baby, I suddenly understood what prompted others to shake the babies and try and make the quiet. If you think, “I can’t take this anymore!”, if you yell at your baby, or you think bad thoughts you aren’t alone. It isn’t a good thing, but it is understandable. You should seek help if you need it (after all there are many psychological professionals who liken a colicky baby with post traumatic stress disorder). If you are thinking thoughts often, feeling like you might hurt yourself or your baby. Don’t feel ashamed to get help. However, it is fairly normal and if you just have an occasional thought just remember that you aren’t alone!Colic is a horrible thing to have to deal with. You should think ahead. After all, it isn’t going to happen forever. Over time you will find your baby outgrows the colic
and will soon become a little person, one you will probably like a lot more!
When we read a personal story, a narrative that explains one person's reaction, it can make a deeper impression than all the facts in the world: this Scientific American article helps explain why our brains value the evidence provided by compelling anecdotes over evidence produced by the scientific progress...
The reason for this cognitive disconnect is that we have evolved brains that pay
attention to anecdotes because false positives (believing there is a connection
between A and B when there is not) are usually harmless, whereas false negatives
(believing there is no connection between A and B when there is) may take you
out of the gene pool. Our brains are belief engines that employ association
learning to seek and find patterns. Superstition and belief in magic are
millions of years old, whereas science, with its methods of controlling for
intervening variables to circumvent false positives, is only a few hundred years
old.
Friday, April 25, 2008
And it's not just mothers