Right etiketine sahip kayıtlar gösteriliyor. Tüm kayıtları göster
Right etiketine sahip kayıtlar gösteriliyor. Tüm kayıtları göster

25 Ocak 2016 Pazartesi

Engaging Our Right Brains to Support Parents and Children

"People have to feel something in order to change the way they think and behave." This is a quote from my book Keeping Your Child in Mind. The right brain is the seat of emotional regulation. Most, if not all, emotional and behavioral problems are intrinsically tied to the ability to regulate emotions. Changes in the brain can occur only if the right brain centers that regulate emotion are actually firing.

I was thinking about this idea when I attended an amazing conference at the Picower Institute for Learning and Memory at MIT, New Insights on Early Life Stress and Mental Health. Leaders from a range of disciplines presented the explosion of scientific evidence showing that early caregiving relationships have a significant long term impact on both mental and physical health.

MIT is a particularly left brain place, and there was a lot of hard core science at this talk. One speaker, Robert Anda, did inject a bit of right brain experience. Anda is one of the main authors of the ACES study, a powerful longitudinal research project that shows the cumulative effect of adverse childhood experiences, including parental mental illness, divorce, neglect and abuse, on many outcomes related to physical and emotional health. He used art to make our right brains fire. In a painting he showed, a little boy of about seven sat at the dinner table as his parents engaged in an argument, his father holding a knife and his mother's face distorted by rage. The terror on the boy's face was palpable.

The conference was very much framed around the concept of adversity. Anda kept apologizing for making us depressed. Consider the conference description:
Within the last two decades, scientists have begun to examine the biological repercussions of early childhood stress, and have uncovered clues as to how these early life experiences cause lasting changes in DNA and the brain that predispose individuals to disabling behavioral and psychiatric disorders in adolescence and adulthood.
The whole day I found myself thinking that what was missing was a right brain experience of what it feels like when things go well. We know it is bad for kids when they do not have a secure safe relationship. But what does it feel like when parents and children do connect in a way that makes a child feel safe and secure? Earlier in the day I had had the opportunity to share just such a right brain experience.

I had given Pediatric Grand Rounds at Newton-Wellesley Hospital, where I was introducing the scientific basis of my new Social Emotional Health program, where I see families of children under age six. When families come to see me, parents and children feel sad, angry, and out-of-control. By carefully listening to parents' own experience I help them to reflect on the meaning of their child's behavior, rather than responding to the behavior itself. This approach is founded in decades of longitudinal research at the intersection of developmental psychology, neuroscience and genetics that I describe in my book.

I told my audience the story of a visit with a mother who experienced her 3-year-old son's behavior as an assault. I had reframed the child's behavior in these out-of-control moments as helpless rather than defiant. She said, "I know what you mean." She described one moment when, rather than getting angry, she had held her son firmly on her lap and said gently "What's wrong?" She told me how her son "melted in my arms" and replied softly, "I don't know."

This mother felt this change not only in her brain, but in her body. It is not uncommon for parents to have themselves experienced trauma in early relationships. They react to their child's provocative behavior on a physical level that is related to their own history, not to the child. By carefully listening to parents, in a visit that is not fifteen minutes but an hour, I help them to make these connections. Once their own issues are in a sense moved out of the way, they are free to reflect on their child's experience in a way that is not encumbered by their own trauma history. When a child feels understood in this way, his behavior improves. A positive cycle of interaction is set in place.

When I told this story during Grand Rounds, I felt a tingling in my arms as I spoke of this mother's transformation in my office. The visit with that family had been a powerful experience for me. The fact that I felt something in the telling makes me hopeful that I was able to convey this to my audience. Maybe they understood how this kind of careful listening may actually change brains.

My book is full of stories like this one. If we are going to change this path that was described at MIT, of early childhood stress leading to terrible outcomes, these conferences need to include stories of what goes right; when clinician-parent-child connect in a meaningful way. Once we know what this feels like, we will be closer to understanding what we need to do to set children and families on a better path.

13 Ocak 2016 Çarşamba

Meds for ADHD: They Work, But Is That the Right Question?

Recently my teenage daughter presented me with a moral dilemma. Up to one third of the kids in her high school are prescribed some kind of psychiatric drug, most of them stimulants like Ritalin. Many of the others students buy drugs from those who are getting them by prescription. If a person who has not been prescribed the drug takes it for the SAT's, is that cheating?

My reflexive response was "yes," but on further thought I wondered: If it has become so much the norm to be on stimulants, are the kids who are not taking them at a disadvantage? As my daughter wisely observed, anyone has trouble paying attention when sitting for a 5 hour test.

The point of this story is that there are serious long-term consequences to prescribing stimulant medication to large numbers of children. In addition to the above dilemma, by controlling symptoms with medication, the motivation to provide more comprehensive treatment is lost.

To the statement that they "work" I answer that yes, the drugs, at least in the short term, reduce symptoms of inattention and hyperactivity. They make a child conform to society's expectations. If medication helps a child to learn, then in our current educational and social system prescribing may be necessary. But is it right?

Bruce Perry, a psychiatrist who has developed a comprehensive treatment approach based on brain development captures this dilemma well when he writes:
Human beings are biological creatures. Of the 250,000 years or so that our species has been on the planet, we spent 245,000 years living in small transgenerational hunter-gatherer bands. The human brain has evolved specific capabilities that are hominid and pre-hominid adaptations to the millions of years of living in the natural world in groups of 40-50 individuals in these transgenerational groups.

The relationally-enriched, developmentally heterogeneous environment of our past is what our brain "prefers." Our brain is not well-designed for the artificial light, pervasive visual over­ stimulation from television, the distracting sounds, images, anonymous social interactions and host
of other phenomenon related to life in the modern Western world. The impact of the changes in the way we live, work and raise our children has not been completely examined. While well­ intended, many of our current lifestyle choices are likely contributing to the emotional, social, cognitive and physical health problems in our children. The most alarming is the relational poverty that many of our children are experiencing. This is most disturbing because humans are fundamentally relational creatures.
Relationship-rich interventions include such things as martial arts, music, and team sports (Michael Phelps had severe ADHD), activities that foster relationships and also promote self-regulation. Family systems are often severely strained when a child is struggling, and interventions aimed at supporting the family as a whole are very important. Careful examination of the school setting and accommodations to decrease over-stimulation are similarly necessary. But if the drug makes the symptom go away, there is no motivation to devote effort and resources to make these kinds of changes.

Obama's health care reform takes a small step in the right direction. ACO's (accountable care organizations), if they work the way they are intended to work, will encourage primary care clinicians to take the time to carefully listen to patients stories. In building relationships with parents, these clinician have the opportunity to support healthy development of the next generation in a preventive model.

Last week there was a little noticed news item about reports of the possible association between suicidal ideation and Focalin, a stimulant medication used for ADHD.
The FDA said it received eight reports of suicidal thoughts for children or adolescents who took the drug over the past six years, and four of the cases appeared to be linked to the medicine. The link for the remaining cases was less clear.
Kaitlin Bell Barnett, a journalist who writes very intelligently about psychiatric medication, asks on her facebook page "Based on 8 cases of suicidal thoughts ever reported?" I'm not sure what she meant by this question. But it seems to me that even 4 cases is enough to make us seriously rethink this path we are on to medicate away symptoms rather than address "relational poverty" in a meaningful way.