Browsed by
Month: June 2018

The Permanent Effects of Child-Parent Separation

The Permanent Effects of Child-Parent Separation

The tragic news from the border has likely left you wondering … what happens to a child when they are forcibly separated from their parents and how permanent are these effects?  A recent article in the Washington Post by Michael Miller tells us that the damage is catastrophic and permanent.  The child’s heart rate goes up, their body releases a flood of stress hormones such as cortisol and adrenaline, and these stress hormones start killing off dendrites — the little branches in the brain cells that transmit mes­sages. In time, the stress starts killing off neurons and — especially in young children — creates dramatic and long-term damage, both psychologically and physically.  “The effect is catastrophic,” said Charles Nelson, a pediatrics professor at Harvard Medical School. “There’s so much research on this that if people paid attention at all to the science, they would never do this.”

This research on child-parent separation drove many to strongly oppose Trump’s border crossing policy, which separated more than 2,000 immigrant children from their parents in the past month.  The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Physicians and the American Psychiatric Association have all issued statements against it.  These groups represent more than 250,000 doctors in the United States, nearly 7,700 mental-health professionals and 142 organizations that signed a petition urging Trump to end the policy.  “To pretend that separated children do not grow up with the shrapnel of this traumatic experience embedded in their minds is to disregard everything we know about child development, the brain, and trauma,” the petition states. Nelson studied the neurological damage from child-parent separation — work that he said often reduced him to tears.

In 2000, Romanian government officials invited Nelson into its orphanages to advise them on a humanitarian crisis that the country’s previous policies had created.  For decades, Romania’s communist dictator Nicolae Ceausescu banned birth control, outlawed abortions, and imposed a “celibacy tax” on families with fewer than five children. Ceausescu believed that increasing the country’s birthrate would boost Romania’s economy. Instead, the government ended up opening huge state-run orphanages to deal with more than 100,000 children whose parents could not afford to raise them.  At those orphanages, Nelson said, “we saw kids rocking uncontrollably and hitting themselves, hitting their heads against walls. It was heartbreaking. We had to make up a rule for ourselves as researchers that we would never cry in front of the children. Whenever one of us felt ourselves tearing up, we would walk out of the room.”

Those separated from their parents at a young age had much less white matter, which is largely made up of fibers that transmit information throughout the brain, as well as much less gray matter, which contains the brain-cell bodies that process information and solve problems.  The activity in the children’s brains was much lower than expected. “If you think of the brain as a lightbulb,” Nelson said, “it’s as though there was a dimmer that had reduced them from a 100-watt bulb to 30 watts.”  The children, who had been separated from their parents in their first two years of life, scored significantly lower on IQ tests later in life. Their fight-or-flight response system appeared permanently broken. Stressful situations that would usually prompt physiological responses in other people — increased heart rate, sweaty palms — would provoke nothing in the children.

What alarmed the researchers most was the duration of the damage. Unlike other parts of the body, most cells in the brain cannot renew or repair themselves.  The reason child-parent separation has such devastating effects is because it attacks one of the most fundamental and critical bonds in human biology.  From the time they are born, children emotionally attach to their caregiver and vice versa, said Lisa Fortuna, medical director for child and adolescent psychiatry at Boston Medical Center.  Skin-to-skin contact for newborns, for example, is critical to their development, research shows. “Our bodies secrete hormones like oxytocin on contact that reinforces the bond, to help us attach and connect,” Fortuna said.  A child’s sense of what safety means depends on that relationship. In addition, the parts of the brain that deal with attachment and fear — the amygdala and hippocampus — develop differently. The reason such children often develop PTSD later in life is that those neurons start firing irregularly, Fortuna said. “The part of their brain that sorts things into safe or dangerous does not work like it’s supposed to. Things that are not threatening seem threatening,” she said.

Research on Aboriginal children in Australia who were removed from their families also showed long-lasting effects. These children were nearly twice as likely to be arrested or criminally charged as adults with 60 percent more likely to have alcohol-abuse problems and 200 percent more likely to struggle with gambling.  In China — where 1 in 5 children live in villages without their parents, who migrate for work — studies have shown that those “left-behind” children have markedly higher rates of anxiety and depression later in life. 

Other studies have shown separation leading to increased aggression, withdrawal and cognitive difficulties.  “If you take the moral, spiritual, even political aspect out of it, from a strictly medical and scientific point of view, what we as a country are doing to these children at the border is unconscionable,” said Luis H. Zayas, a psychiatry professor at the University of Texas at Austin. “The harm our government is now causing will take a lifetime to undo.”

While most of the research on the importance of parent- child bonding focuses on the benefits to offspring, parents also derive significant health benefits. A recent study in Psychology Today shows that separation deprives parents from the hormone oxytocin, raising the parents’ risk to several health risks. Low levels of oxytocin are linked to increased stress, greater incidence of depression, intensified cravings for drugs and alcohol, inhibited social skills, and disrupted sleep patterns.

The tragic effects that occur to children and their parents when they are denied their rights of physical bonding are undeniable.  Likewise, our responsibility to hold our elected officials accountable is unquestionable.  Parents need to hug their children and politicians need to protect our right to do so. 

 

Being a Fan Makes You Happier and Healthier

Being a Fan Makes You Happier and Healthier

Having spent the past week among fellow Caps fans, I am deeply impressed by the spirit of jubilation that is resonating throughout the DC area. While surrounded by hundreds of thousands of happy fans, I began to wonder about the effects of a championship on the surrounding population. And I have great news … being an invested sports fan is good for you!

Research reveals significant mental health benefits to being a sports fan. Associating with a team is linked to higher levels of well-being and general happiness as well as lower levels of loneliness and alienation, according to sports psychology professor Daniel Wann of Murray State University. Wann, author of the book Sport Fans: The Psychology and Social Impact of Spectators, explains that there are two routes to feeling good through sports fandom.

“One would be following a successful team, and the second would simply be identifying with them,” Wann told The Huffington Post. “You can get these well-being benefits even if your team doesn’t do well; we’ve found this with historically unsuccessful teams as well,” he added. “The simple fact is that people are looking for ways to identify with something, to feel a sense of belonging-ness with a group of like-minded individuals,” said Wann. “People might not understand the sports side of things, but my response to that is: Think of, in your own life, what you care about and what you identify with. Sport is what these fans have chosen.”

“Many fans are motivated to root for a particular team because of that identity with a team, with other fans, and with the community,” says Adam Earnhardt, professor and chair of the communications department at Youngstown State University. Being aligned with a team helps us feel included and engaged. Just wearing your team’s jersey can elicit a thumb’s up or other sign of approval from someone you’ve never met before, simply through that shared connection.

Enthusiastic sports fans love their team through thick and thin. However, even the most passionate fans may feel their loyalty tested when things do not go well. Social psychologists have identified two types of reactions that fans have to their team's performance.

The first reaction is referred to as "BIRGing," and it applies to the phenomenon known as “Basking in Reflected Glory.” When your team is winning, you happily savor the shared joy. Research shows that on the day after a win, ardent fans enjoy increased self-esteem, happily declaring "we" won! The closer you identify with a team, the more likely you are to BIRG and the better chance you will wear your team's gear the day after a win.

"CORFing," on the other hand, means "Cut Off Reflected Failure." Your team flopped and now you want to distance yourself from the team and the related feelings of humiliation. Compared to BIRGing, it is “they” lost, not "we." The last thing a CORFer wants to wear the day after a loss is a shirt or hat with “their” logo on it. This is the test of the true versus the fickle fan. The CORFers are the fickle fans and their identification with their team fluctuates with the ratings. True fans, on the other hand, will don their team’s regalia regardless of performance. True fans will feel disappointment, but their team retains its hero status in spite of defeat.

Experts say that, for true fans, mutual anguish over a team’s loss can be yet another form of bonding and that the misery is more tolerable when it is shared with fellow fans. Hans Selve, an endocrinologist who performed pioneering research into stress response, said we cheer on favorite teams for something called euphoric stress, or eustress. Selve described this as a kind of good or positive stress, as opposed to distress, or bad stress. For example, late in the third period of the first game of the Stanley Cup playoff run against the Blue Jackets, Devante Smith-Pelly scored a beautiful goal to give the Capitals a 3-2 lead. But Washington was later called for two more penalties and a tripping infraction with less than five minutes left in the game and Sabres’ forward Andre Burakovsky tied the game to force overtime. Going into overtime, Caps fans were on the edge of their seats, bracing themselves for what became a disappointing defeat. Depending on how well-equipped each fan was to handle the stress they felt going into overtime and how prepared they were to keep the experience in perspective, they either maintained a form of good stress or they allowed it to dissolve into distress. In the end, however, experts claim that the benefits of fandom outweigh the risks for most people.

Another interesting phenomenon that was highlighted throughout the run-up to the Stanley Cup is known as superstitious conditioning. Sports pubs around the DC area were full of devoted Caps fans who claimed that by watching the game at that particular sports bar during a win, they caused the team to win. Therefore, they continued to frequent the same establishment throughout the series. Others claimed the opposite, avoiding a particular place where they saw the Caps lose, claiming they "caused" the team to lose just by being there. Then there are the lucky jerseys, hats, and other spirit wear. For example, I met a woman who said the first thing she did on Friday morning after the Caps won the Stanley Cup was to wash all her family members’ jerseys, which were long overdue for a cleaning.

So the next time someone gives you flack about your epic fandom, let them know that all the rituals, viewing parties, and dirty jerseys are crucial to your mental health. Then invite them to join you. LET’S GO CAPS!!!

Farm Fresh is Best

Farm Fresh is Best

Imagine yourself standing in the freezer section at your local supermarket. The florescent lights illuminate a dizzying array of colored cardboard boxes full of “food products.” You put on your glasses and examine the packages, looking for the item with the least amount of additives. You toss a few items in the cart and make your way to the check-out line, relieved to get out of the store and into your car.

Now picture yourself talking to a local farmer. A gentle breeze blows through your hair as the morning sun kisses your face. The farmer is telling you about his latest harvest of peaches, as you pop a slice in your mouth. After tasting several delicious fruits, you choose your favorites and walk away with a pleasant memory.

Which one of these scenarios paints the best picture? If you have any doubts, consider these five reasons you should shop at a local farmers’ market:

  1. Farm fresh tastes better. Fruits and vegetables you find at the grocery store are often several days old before they reach the aisles, and most supermarket produce is shipped in refrigerated trucks from thousands of miles away. Produce from your farmer’s market, on the other hand, was probably picked that morning, making it as fresh as if you had grown it yourself. In addition, items from a farmer’s market are usually picked at the peak of their ripeness when natural sugars are at their best.
  2. Farm fresh is better for you. Enjoying produce at the ultimate level of ripeness not only tastes better, but it also provides more nutrition. Enjoying perfectly ripe produce provides a number of antioxidants, which clean free radicals out of your bloodstream and reduce signs of aging by minimizing wrinkles and preserving the texture of skin. Another benefit of ripe fruit is anthocyanins, which provide anti-inflammatory properties, protect brain function, help prevent cardiovascular disease and reduce the risk of cancer. Another great source of antioxidants that is available at your local farmer’s market can be found in raw, local honey. In addition to antioxidants and enzymes, raw local honey contains pollen, which provides you with allergy prevention. Not to mention the fact that raw local honey tastes much better than the commercial, mass-produced honey. As we were recently reminded by the deadly outbreaks of E. coli in romaine lettuce, there is also less chance of illness with farm fresh foods. Such incidences occur mostly in large industrial settings, where food is mass-produced and packaged in mass amounts.
  3. Farm fresh is better for the environment. The chemical-free, organic methods purported by local farmers are better for the environment. Unlike local farmers, giant factory farms grow massive amounts of produce and ship it around the world. These same behemoths drive many local family farms out of business. For the sake of efficiency, industrial farming favors monocultures, where a single field only grows one type of fruits or vegetables. Monocultures sap the soil of essential nutrients, leaving it barren and virtually unplantable. As a result, the soil becomes more susceptible to disease and pests. In general, industrial farming is hard on the land, depletes the soil of nutrients, uses industrial chemical fertilizers and pesticides, and utilizes environmentally unfriendly practices that are not sustainable over the long-term. Many supermarkets receive their produce from hundreds or thousands of miles away. This involves a significant use of fossil fuels for shipping on refrigerated trucks and rail cars. Famer’s market produce doesn’t have to travel far to get from the farm to your table, significantly reducing the use of fossil fuels. Along with conserving fossil fuels, small family farms produce less environmental waste in the form of carbon monoxide, pesticide use, chemical fertilizers, and packaging. They are also less likely to utilize giant processing and sorting machines that contribute to environmental decay. Finally, farmer’s markets usually operate in the open air and thus do not require electricity or heating.
  4. Local farming supports the local economy. As mentioned earlier, the numbers of family farms have decreased over the years as they succumbed to the increasingly stiff competition from giant conglomerate-run farms that produce massive amounts of produce. Purchasing fruits and vegetables from farmer’s markets, however, supports your community and local family farms, giving them the valuable capital they need to keep operating while providing consumers an alternative to mass-produced foods.
  5. Farmer’s markets are fun! Unlike their supermarket counterparts, farmer’s markets are the source of many pleasant memories. Your local farmer’s market can also be a great family activity and a nice way to interact with members of your community.

To find a farmer’s market near you, check out the National Farmers Market Directory on the United States Department of Agriculture’s website: https://www.ams.usda.gov/local-food-directories/farmersmarkets