During 2009 I had the opportunity to supervise a student completing her honour's year in her psychology degree. We chose to research the idea of compassionate love and see how mothers' expressions of compassionate love impact on the resilience of children.
Compassionate love is shown when a person acts selflessly to make things better for someone else. While similar to altruistic behaviour, compassionate love is not given out of a sense of duty or habit. Instead, our compassionately loving acts are given because we really want to unconditionally make life better for another person.
In our study we were interested in the extent to which mothers gave compassionate love to their children. Unsurprisingly, mothers stated that they were highly compassionately loving to their children.
However, just because we "think" we're being compassionately loving doesn't always mean others perceive our actions the same way. We asked the 77 participants to have their children complete a questionnaire to show us how compassionate they perceived their mums to be. The children also completed a resilience questionnaire. And this is where it got interesting.
While mums all said they were extremely compassionate in their love, not all children agreed. In particular, children who were being raised in single parent households felt that their mothers, on average, were less compassionately loving than mothers in households where marriages were intact.
This difference became very important when we measured the resilience of the children. It appears that children who perceive that their mothers show less compassionate love are also less resilient than children who perceive that their mothers show more compassionate love. And it just so happens that the differences in perception are most pronounced for single mums.
What does this mean? A couple of important things:
1. Single parents really do have a tougher job raising a family. They need support.
2. Children from single parent families also need support.
3. Compassionate love expressions are important in the development of child resilience.
4. Perhaps the MOST important point to come from this research is that what we do is LESS important than what our children perceive.
Monday, 7 December 2009
Want the Children to go to Sleep? Keep them Active!
A recent article in the New York Times highlighted research confirming something we all take for granted, but often fail to act on. If we want our children to sleep well at night, keeping the active during the day is a sure fire way to succeed.
Sure, you say - that's obvious... but here's where the really interesting part comes into it.
Children took between 10 minutes and 40 minutes to fall asleep in the various stages of the study. The amount of physical activity the child engaged in during the day was correlated with time taken to fall asleep. For each hour during the day when a child was sedentary, it took an EXTRA 3 minutes to fall asleep.
Even more important, the children who fall asleep fastest also sleep the longest! For each 10 minutes less that it took to fall asleep, these children received an extra hour of sleep! In other words, children who fell asleep in 10 minutes actually got approximately 3 hours MORE sleep than children who fell asleep after 40 minutes.
You can find the study here (abstract only - although google scholar may have the entire article free somewhere).
You may be interested to know that the same rule applies for adults. If you're always tired and struggle to fall asleep, a run around the block or swim in the pool may be just the ticket - do it with the kids for maximum benefit for both of you!
Sure, you say - that's obvious... but here's where the really interesting part comes into it.
Children took between 10 minutes and 40 minutes to fall asleep in the various stages of the study. The amount of physical activity the child engaged in during the day was correlated with time taken to fall asleep. For each hour during the day when a child was sedentary, it took an EXTRA 3 minutes to fall asleep.
Even more important, the children who fall asleep fastest also sleep the longest! For each 10 minutes less that it took to fall asleep, these children received an extra hour of sleep! In other words, children who fell asleep in 10 minutes actually got approximately 3 hours MORE sleep than children who fell asleep after 40 minutes.
You can find the study here (abstract only - although google scholar may have the entire article free somewhere).
You may be interested to know that the same rule applies for adults. If you're always tired and struggle to fall asleep, a run around the block or swim in the pool may be just the ticket - do it with the kids for maximum benefit for both of you!
Tuesday, 1 December 2009
Overprotecting our Children
The desire to keep our children safe from harm is natural, and deeply important. Yet there seems to be an increasing trend to "over protect" our children from the world we live in.
Most of us reflect fondly on the freedoms of our childhood. When I was in the 3rd grade I was old enough to walk 1km home from school, and let myself into our family home. There, my best friend Andy and I would play marbles and video games until boredom set in. We would pedal our bikes, or simply scurry, to the nearby park - around 800 metres away. We had no supervison. We didn't "need" it. We were safe. Our neighbourhood was a pretty standard middle-class neighbourhood.
Such small distances mean little to me as an adult. I recently visited my old street after being away for over 20 years. My recollection was that the school and park were MUCH farther away from home than they now appear. Such was the perspective of an 8 year-old boy.
Of course nowadays there are few parents who would be comfortable allowing a child to play under such circumstances. Children are supervised, watched over, and worried about.
Is all the worry and supervision necessary?
It is certainly true that bad things can happen to kids. The number of abductions in Australia (per head of population) has changed little in 30 years. And typically the perpertrators of criminal activity against children are known (usually well-known) to the family.
However the growing hype (and even hysteria in some circles) about child safety is causing parents to stop allowing their children to walk or ride to school, and causing councils to stop erecting play equipment due to litigation.
Another form of safety (aside from physical safety) is emotional safety. It is closely tied to academic success. And it seems that we are as overprotective of our children's emotional safety as we are of their physical safety. Parents rush to ensure that their children are "happy", and "wrongs" can be rectified.
This may be seen when children are not allowed to "fail" a class, when children "graduate" from one grade to the next, when a child wants what another child has.
Our children are precious, there is no doubt. It is impossible to argue to the contrary. However as we continue to treat children like porcelain dolls we do not give them opportunity to develop healthily physically or emotionally.
What I am suggesting is that we should allow them freedom. It can be hard to do this, and it is important that it be age-appropriate. Your 10 year-old probably shouldn't be catching a bus to the beach for the day! But perhaps your 10 year-old (or even your 6 year-old, depending on where you live) could ride his or her bike around the block or down to the local park for an hour to spend time with friends. It would be prudent to ensure that all parents are aware, and that friends are there. But nonetheless, freedom to explore is allowed in such a situation.
Likewise, emotionally children need to be given opportunities to grow. In fact, sometimes setbacks can be just the thing for them to develop resilience. I'm not suggesting we knock them down emotionally so they can learn to get back up. Life will do that enough for them. But when friendships fail, or schoolwork suffers, our job is to coach our children. Allow them to determine how to climb out of problems.
Raising our children requires SO much of us. Physically it's hard to let go as they grow. And emotionally we handle them with care as much as possible. But when we go overboard on either, we stunt our children's growth and development and independence.
Most of us reflect fondly on the freedoms of our childhood. When I was in the 3rd grade I was old enough to walk 1km home from school, and let myself into our family home. There, my best friend Andy and I would play marbles and video games until boredom set in. We would pedal our bikes, or simply scurry, to the nearby park - around 800 metres away. We had no supervison. We didn't "need" it. We were safe. Our neighbourhood was a pretty standard middle-class neighbourhood.
Such small distances mean little to me as an adult. I recently visited my old street after being away for over 20 years. My recollection was that the school and park were MUCH farther away from home than they now appear. Such was the perspective of an 8 year-old boy.
Of course nowadays there are few parents who would be comfortable allowing a child to play under such circumstances. Children are supervised, watched over, and worried about.
Is all the worry and supervision necessary?
It is certainly true that bad things can happen to kids. The number of abductions in Australia (per head of population) has changed little in 30 years. And typically the perpertrators of criminal activity against children are known (usually well-known) to the family.
However the growing hype (and even hysteria in some circles) about child safety is causing parents to stop allowing their children to walk or ride to school, and causing councils to stop erecting play equipment due to litigation.
Another form of safety (aside from physical safety) is emotional safety. It is closely tied to academic success. And it seems that we are as overprotective of our children's emotional safety as we are of their physical safety. Parents rush to ensure that their children are "happy", and "wrongs" can be rectified.
This may be seen when children are not allowed to "fail" a class, when children "graduate" from one grade to the next, when a child wants what another child has.
Our children are precious, there is no doubt. It is impossible to argue to the contrary. However as we continue to treat children like porcelain dolls we do not give them opportunity to develop healthily physically or emotionally.
What I am suggesting is that we should allow them freedom. It can be hard to do this, and it is important that it be age-appropriate. Your 10 year-old probably shouldn't be catching a bus to the beach for the day! But perhaps your 10 year-old (or even your 6 year-old, depending on where you live) could ride his or her bike around the block or down to the local park for an hour to spend time with friends. It would be prudent to ensure that all parents are aware, and that friends are there. But nonetheless, freedom to explore is allowed in such a situation.
Likewise, emotionally children need to be given opportunities to grow. In fact, sometimes setbacks can be just the thing for them to develop resilience. I'm not suggesting we knock them down emotionally so they can learn to get back up. Life will do that enough for them. But when friendships fail, or schoolwork suffers, our job is to coach our children. Allow them to determine how to climb out of problems.
Raising our children requires SO much of us. Physically it's hard to let go as they grow. And emotionally we handle them with care as much as possible. But when we go overboard on either, we stunt our children's growth and development and independence.
Monday, 30 November 2009
Reflection for the day
Each day that we spend with our children can often seem to take a long, long time. Yet the years go by faster than ever.
Cherish every moment.
Cherish every moment.
Schools and Children Deserve Better
Those who have read this blog for some time would know that I am strongly opposed to the use of rewards as motivators. As a result of this position, I find it untenable to think that teachers will be give "merit-pay" for their performance in our public school system. The research that has existed for decades indicates strongly that this cannot work, and cannot be good for our children.
It appears that I am one of a growing number of voices expressing concern about this issue.
This article is a brilliant read, and will require only three minutes. Yet it deftly and succinctly illustrates precisely why our administrators need to change the course we are plotting for public education in this great country. The Americans have been having problems in this area for some time now. We don't need to do it to our kids too.
It appears that I am one of a growing number of voices expressing concern about this issue.
This article is a brilliant read, and will require only three minutes. Yet it deftly and succinctly illustrates precisely why our administrators need to change the course we are plotting for public education in this great country. The Americans have been having problems in this area for some time now. We don't need to do it to our kids too.
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
Tough Love Good for Kids?
From abc.net.au:
A new study in the United Kingdom has found that children whose parents take a "tough love" approach are better prepared to achieve in life. The research tracked the lives of 9,000 families over eight years.
The head of the research team, Sonia Sodha, says the tough love style of parenting combines warmth and discipline, and is far more important in a child's success than parents' income or social background.
"Parents are able to set rules, apply them consistently and fairly and that means that children know what the boundaries are to their behaviour," she said.
Ms Sodha says tough love parenting helps children to develop key skills such as emotion control and empathy.
"This set of character capabilities are the skills that are really important in enabling children to make the most of school when they get there."
Wealthy parents
Ms Sodha said the research showed wealthier parents were likely to use the tough love parenting style.
"Parents from poor backgrounds, wealthy backgrounds, average backgrounds, they are just as likely to show warmth and affection to their children," she said.
"Where we notice the difference however was in terms of discipline, so in the ability of parents to set rules and apply them consistently. And what we found was that was a more common trait amongst parents from wealthier backgrounds."
Family structure
"We know that if you are a parent who is parenting alone or if you are a poor parent, you are under a lot more stress than a wealthier parent or someone who is parenting as part of a supportive couple" she said.
The study points out a couple of issues that I consistently find in my own research: parents with higher education and higher incomes typically have better parenting habits than those in lower socio-economic brackets; and the more support parents have from other significant and close adults, the better they're able to support their own children.
I do not like the concept of "tough love" though. To me this phrase has connotations with force, coercion, and even aggression.
When parents "get it right", they set appropriate limits with their children, rather than do things to them. And they work with their children with warmth, compassion, and understanding. This does not mean they go easy on their kids. The limits still apply, but they are maintained with kindness, gentle reminders, and a warm firmness.
A new study in the United Kingdom has found that children whose parents take a "tough love" approach are better prepared to achieve in life. The research tracked the lives of 9,000 families over eight years.
The head of the research team, Sonia Sodha, says the tough love style of parenting combines warmth and discipline, and is far more important in a child's success than parents' income or social background.
"Parents are able to set rules, apply them consistently and fairly and that means that children know what the boundaries are to their behaviour," she said.
Ms Sodha says tough love parenting helps children to develop key skills such as emotion control and empathy.
"This set of character capabilities are the skills that are really important in enabling children to make the most of school when they get there."
Wealthy parents
Ms Sodha said the research showed wealthier parents were likely to use the tough love parenting style.
"Parents from poor backgrounds, wealthy backgrounds, average backgrounds, they are just as likely to show warmth and affection to their children," she said.
"Where we notice the difference however was in terms of discipline, so in the ability of parents to set rules and apply them consistently. And what we found was that was a more common trait amongst parents from wealthier backgrounds."
Family structure
"We know that if you are a parent who is parenting alone or if you are a poor parent, you are under a lot more stress than a wealthier parent or someone who is parenting as part of a supportive couple" she said.
The study points out a couple of issues that I consistently find in my own research: parents with higher education and higher incomes typically have better parenting habits than those in lower socio-economic brackets; and the more support parents have from other significant and close adults, the better they're able to support their own children.
I do not like the concept of "tough love" though. To me this phrase has connotations with force, coercion, and even aggression.
When parents "get it right", they set appropriate limits with their children, rather than do things to them. And they work with their children with warmth, compassion, and understanding. This does not mean they go easy on their kids. The limits still apply, but they are maintained with kindness, gentle reminders, and a warm firmness.
Competition, Rewards, and Motivation
I recently wrote a blog post for a friend who, like me, is a passionate cyclist. While the post is directed to adults who ride bikes, the principles are highly relevant for parents and families.
The article deals with how the use of competitions and rewards (bribes, grades, gold stars, and even praise) can undermine motivation and performance.
Parents and teachers use competition and reward far too much. This article shows why it's better to focus on alternatives.
http://www.cyclingtipsblog.com/2009/11/competition-bad-for-motivation/
The article deals with how the use of competitions and rewards (bribes, grades, gold stars, and even praise) can undermine motivation and performance.
Parents and teachers use competition and reward far too much. This article shows why it's better to focus on alternatives.
http://www.cyclingtipsblog.com/2009/11/competition-bad-for-motivation/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
