Childhood Bullying: Words Do Hurt

“Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me.” This proverb is used by parents to try and soothe their child’s tears after they have been the victims of name calling. Taken literally the proverb is correct, but figuratively the saying could not be more mistaken. Most likely the 5.7 million American you, who are victims of bullying would agree that words certainly do hurt; fortunately for them, the general public believes that children are resilient. But how resilient do people expect them to be? The image to the left suggest that one out of ever three U.S. children is affected by bullying. With numbers such as these I believe the country needs to step back and reevaluate the way it sees children. Up until now, the belief has been that bullying by peers has short term mild to severe emotional effects; eventually the bullying will stop, the child will be able to lead a normal life and forget about their past experiences. This however, is not the case. I believe that the short term effects of bullying come with long term repercussions.

A recent study conducted by the University of Florida shows a link between those children who were the victims of social bullying during childhood, and symptoms of depression and anxiety in young adulthood. This evidence should be used as a basis for a change in how the United States views this type of harassment.Wendy Troop-Gordon, Ph.D., an assistant professor of psychology at North Dakota State University, believes it is imperative to understand how past relational bullying affects people in adulthood. “Turning 18 is not a magical age when you leave all of these experiences behind," said Troop-Gordon, who is not affiliated with the study. "People do seem to carry these experiences with them." His statement could not be more correct. In this culture there is a great deal of expectations placed on turning eighteen. One day minors awaken, and are labeled adults. Turning eighteen is supposed to serve as a division between the life they lead, and the life they will lead. Most people would agree that the separation can never be the case, and both parts of ones life are forever intertwined.

Bullying however, is a double edge sword, and though bullies do not face disorders like depression and anxiety, they face problems forming and maintaining relationships with friends and family. Scientists at York University along with those at Queens University was conducted a new study which followed about 871 students, and surveyed then annually about their involvement in peer victimization. The study found that with those children who reported higher levels of bullying tended to be aggressive and lacking in a moral compass. They also experienced a lot of conflict in their relationships with their parents. In addition, their relationships with friends also were marked by a lot of conflict, and they tended to associate themselves with others who bullied. It appears as if no one is benefiting from bullying, although many would suggest that being the bully has no negative effects. It is difficult if not, impossible to judge which group is more advantaged, and safe to concluded that someone should put a stop to this.

However, this form of hazing is difficult to expel because most likely everyone is a guilty of gossiping, and name calling. Whether done intentionally or not social bullying can not be as easily controlled and regulated as school attire. The recent spring of school shootings such as the Columbine incident in 1999, is arguably the worst of its kind recent times. Both Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were victims of bullying, their school experience being the main cause for their murder spree. The Anti-Bullying Alliance, as shown on the right, was founded in 1992 by the National Children’s Bureau and the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, has made an attempt to minimize and ultimately prevent the amount of bullying children incur. The alliance believes that by sharing information and encouraging research to identify what works, they can provide children a safer school environment. Thus far, the Anti-Bullying Alliance has succeeded in their quest, and has seen a marked decrease in the number of bullying cases reported by children. In addition to this program, the United Kingdom, Portugal and Germany have created an interactive role play game which aims to help children to cope with bullying at schools. The game allows for children to witness scenarios without having to be directly involved.

The evidence is clear, bullying, whether being the perpetrator or the victim, in childhood has long term negative effects. Perhaps the country can take and example from our English cousins and establish a national anti-bullying program. Such a program may lead to a reduction if not an elimination of school shoots. Early detection and prevention is possibly the solution to this problem. This brings forth a many questions, such as how early is early detection? Will such a program aid the 5.7 million who are already victims? These questions and concern are valid, but I personally would much rather worry about them after there has been a sincere attempt to stop this problem.

ADHD: Emerging Treatment

While building my linkroll recently, I began to read the blogs that are found on two of the websites I featured. From both websites I found blogs on ADHD and believed they were both interesting and informative. Both of the posts hinted that dietary changes may reduce the risk of ADHD. of The first blog, hosted by Psychology Today, is written by Lawrence Diller, M.D. and focuses on how the drug industry has shaped the way the country currently views ADHD, strictly as a biological disorder. Diller, a clinical faculty member at the University of California, San Francisco Medical School, suggested that the drug industry has the general public fooled on that nature of ADHD, and urges that a solution is found. The second blog, hosted by WebMD, is written by Dr. Richard Sogn, who has spent the past twenty years focused on ADHD and its associated disorders. In his most recent post Dr. Sogn writes about the use of iron supplements as a possible treatment for ADHD symptoms. He states that those who are affected by ADHD tend to have an iron deficiency, iron is needed by the body to produce neurotransmitters involved in ADHD. The image to the right shows the differences in the brain between those who are affected by ADHD and those who are not. My comments to both posts are as follows.

“The Coronation of Pharmarchy”
Comment:
Dr. Diller,
I would like to applaud you on your inaugural post; it was both interesting and informative. I was not aware of the controversies which surrounded ADHD treatment, and personally, I had always been quick to turn to medication as the solution. Since reading your post I have been researching ADHD treatment, and have found myself taking your perspective. It is not hard to believe that the drug industry is controlling medical treatments. In this country it appears that sooner or later, large industry always takes over. They have been very affective in their approach, because until recently I believed that ADHD was simply a biological disorder. However, upon further review I realized that no disorder is purely biological; this ties into the whole nature vs. nurture debate and I believe you would agree with me that everything is a mixture of both.

I was pleased with your term ‘pharmarchy.’ It is unfortunate that the good intentions of researchers are being overshadowed by the personal agenda of the drug industry, and it is our children’s mental health which suffers. I recently read that a home DNA test for ADHD is being offered by many companies (another ploy perhaps). I wonder if such a test could prove to be beneficial if used on newborns. Like the PKU test, early detection may be important. You stated that there is no direct evidence that dietary changes can help those with ADHD, but what if specific diet needs are met since birth? If children were tested for ADHD from infancy, we would be able to explore all avenues before resorting to medication. I also noticed that you failed to mention the use of cognitive behavioral therapy on children with ADHD, do you believe that this sort of treatment is effective? I would like to thank you for addressing such an important topic and I look forward to reading your future posts.

“Iron Supplements for ADHD”
Comment:
Dr. Sogn,
Thank you for an informative post, and although your post was short, it allowed me to raise some questions. I was intrigued by your previous post “Home DNA Testing for ADHD” and believed that a section in that post tied in well with this one. In this day and age medication, such as Ritalin, is used to quickly fix a disorder, but in your previous post I believed you offered an alternative. You stated that a nutritious and balanced diet low in sugar and high in omega-3 fatty acids would be a good diet for children who are at risk of developing ADHD. In this current this post you focus on the effects iron supplements have on ADHD symptoms. It was apparent to me that you believe a child’s’ diet may help prevent ADHD and its’ symptoms; however, I wonder if you have come across direct evidence that supports your claim? I am also curious to know if children may eat food high in iron instead of taking the supplement. Is there a significant difference? Also, is there a reason why children with ADHD have an iron deficiency?

On a side note I was intrigued by your blog description. It states that 3%-5% of children and adults are affected by ADHD. However, the media does make it appear as if there is a higher prevalence of this disorder. I personally know many children who are affected and are currently being treated for ADHD. I would have guessed that the prevalence for this disorder in children was higher than the number you suggested for both children and adults. Do you believe that the public’s perception of children affected by ADHD would lower if alternative methods of treatment, such as diet, proved to be successful? If this did happen, do you feel that people would continue to quickly turn to medication?

Birth Order: Defining Sibling Relationships

Siblings usually differ from each other in terms of their personalities and talents almost as much as unrelated children do. It is unlikely that two siblings will encounter the same set of parents. A times parents may feel that they need to encourage one of their children to be more social, while at the same time feel they need to constantly discipline another. This is most likely due to their differences in personality, and it is often the case where parents look at their children and ask themselves, why are they so different? Some of these differences may be due to temperament and genetics, but to a large extent, the disparity arises because children who grow up under the same roof actually experience very different families. One’s birth order in relation to their brothers and sisters is a key factor in the quality of the relationship between siblings. Although there are many factors that can affect sibling relationships, differences in age, gender, and family environment usually have a profound effect on the sibling relationship. Being the eldest of two, I believe that birth order greatly influences ones personality and relationship with their siblings.

Of the many factors that may affect the relationship between siblings, their ages, or space between each child in years is one of the biggest. Age spacing may also determine common experiences and interests giving them something to share. When there is a significant difference in age issues over power tend to rise. Each child tries to be the dominant one in the family so as expected there is a significant amount of conflict. Sibling rivalry can be healthy for the relationship, and is often unintentionally encouraged by parents. I would hope that parents would become aware of the rivalry and interfere before it escalated as far as the image to the left depicts. First-borns tend to show more authority when dealing with younger siblings. Anything the first born does is a big deal, simply because it's a first for the family. First-borns usually have the luxury of being showered with undivided attention for a couple of years before a second child comes along. As a result, many first-born children end up with a lot of natural confidence. According to a study, first-born children often have higher IQ’s than their siblings, are natural leaders and eager to please. The oldest tends to outshine their siblings academically, leaving the other children to feel inadequate; however the first-born may feel undervalued by parents if they sense that their parents have a close relationship with another sibling. Likewise, younger children feel bitter simply because the oldest child has the advantages of being older. This, however, forms a distinctive bond between them because the oldest feels they need to look after and teach the youngest, while the youngest needs to reach the standards set by the oldest. The study also suggest that in the event the first born were to die, another child were to be treated as the eldest, in that case there were no significant difference in IQ scores. This is because the the other child could benefit from advantages and responsibilities that are placed on the eldest.

Author Kevin Leman, a psychologist and a leading expert on birth order, believes that for parents disciplining their children is much easier when birth order is taken into account. Leman, a father of five and author of The Birth Order Book: Why You Are the Way You Are, says that while every child is unique, birth order determines much of a child’s personality. In his book, Leman states that the oldest sibling tends to be serious, goal-oriented, conscientious, well organized, believers in authority, reliable perfectionists and self-reliant. Leman’s research implies that the middle child does not have a definite list of general characteristics like the oldest and youngest. The personality traits of a middle child are more contradictory. Leman found that middle children are mediators, picky about who they confide in, and tend to have fewer problems than the first-borns. Since the younger siblings are often inexperienced in certain situations, the younger sibling may look to their older sibling for help. This suggests that the middle child is able to experience both the role as an older sibling and a younger sibling. The experiences among siblings lay the foundation for their relationships with other siblings, peers, and determine their personality with respect to the role they play.

Other than age differences, gender and the family environment play a vital role in sibling relationships. The differences in gender greatly affect the roles that are assumed in the family and also affect the relationship with siblings. Same sex sibling pairs tend to be more pro-social and care giving towards each other. They have a higher percentage of constructive interactions and a lower percentage of negative interactions than different sex pairs. However, different sex pairs are better able to stay away from some of the competition that may occur between same sex siblings. This is largely due to children being treated differently by parents and receiving different kinds of attention based on their sex. Likewise, the family environment also influences the quality of sibling relationships. Parents play a vital role in determining the type of relationship their children will have with each other. How parents talk to the first-born about the arrival of another child directly determines how the first-born will view their new sibling. While a new sibling can be viewed as a playmate, the child may feel left out and form resentment towards the sibling.

It is evident that the birth order theory is not without its flaws. An article in Time magazine, as shown on the right, explored the power of birth order, and pointed out some holes in the theory. The effects of birth order are usually always based on a typical or normal family; therefore, dysfunction can throw it out of balance. In a 2005 study, investigators at the University of Birmingham in Britain examined the case histories of 400 abused children and the 795 siblings of the abused children. Overall, they found that when only one child in the family was abused, the eldest child tended to be the scapegoat. When a younger child was abused, some or all of the other children were usually abused as well. Mistreatment of any of the children usually breaks the bond the parents have with the firstborn, turning that child from parental ally to protector of his siblings. At the same time, the eldest child may pick up some agreeableness skills from the younger children, which may aid in dealing with irrational parents. On the other hand the youngest child learns some of the firstborn's self-sufficiency.

This debate will never be entirely settled, and although for centuries parents have looked to birth order to determine what sort of people their children will become it is unclear if this theory has scientific merit. If anything, parents should look to themselves, and evaluate how they treat their own children. It is nearly impossible to treat ones children exactly the same, and small responsibilities, or lack of, that are placd on children actually help shape their personalities. There is no right way to raise a child, and it is important to expect differences, and embrace them. Yes, the theory of birth order and its effects on sibling relationships is not perfect; it brings us one step closer to explaining and understanding our own behavior.