Here is a story for our times, originally published by Donald B. Ardell, Ph.D. Think about it...

It was many years ago that villagers in Downstream recall spotting the first body in the river. Some old timers remember how Spartan were the facilities and procedures for managing that short of thing. Sometimes, they say, it would take hours to pull 10 people from the river, and even then only a few would survive.

Though the number of victims in the river has increased greatly in recent years, the good folks of Downstream have responded admirably to the challenge. Their rescue system is clearly second to none: most people discovered in the swirling waters are reached within twenty minutes, many in less than ten. Only a small number drown each day before help arrives -- a big improvement from the way it used to be.

Talk to the people of Downstream and they'll speak with pride about the new hospital by the edge of the waters, the flotilla of rescue boats ready for service at a moment's notice, the comprehensive health plans for coordinating all the manpower involved, and the large number of highly trained and dedicated swimmers always ready to risk their lives to save victims from the raging currents. Sure it costs a lot but, say the Downstreamers, what else can decent people do except to provide whatever is necessary when human lives are at stake.

Oh, a few people in Downstream have raised the question now and again, but most folks show little interest in what's happening Upstream. It seems there's so much to do to help those in the river that nobody's got time to check how all those bodies are getting there in the first place. That's the way things are, sometimes.

A few days ago, the American Academy of Pediatrics presented its report about children and ADHD or Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. The report was comprehensive in its discussions about what ADHD might look like, the course of the illness, and how it should be treated. And it included discussions about treatment of preschool-aged children with parent counseling approaches, behavior therapy, and in more extreme circumstances, medication. The authors note that long-term effects of medications on brain development are not known for sure.

ADHD is often described as a neuro-developmental disorder that starts in childhood and is characterized by chronic inattention, impulsiveness, and hyperactivity. Children (and teens and adults) diagnosed with ADHD often have co-occurring disorders, including learning problems, anxiety, depression, and others. The diagnosis has morphed over the last few decades, and the number of children falling under its umbrella has increased. The report issued last week by AAP also noted the expanded age range for ADHD, listed as formerly 6-12 years of age, and now described as 4-18 years of age. Up to 8% of children, according to the report, have ADHD.

I do not doubt that many children and adolescents have genuine neuro-developmental problems that are revealed in the types of behaviors described above. I also know that the types of  behaviors associated with ADHD are often seen with children with other problems, as noted by the Center for Disease Control. 

I have so many questions and concerns. Neurological development, particularly prenatally and during childhood, is sensitive to many external factors, including drugs and other substances ingested by the mother while pregnant and, before and after birth, many toxins in the environment. Toxins in the environment include chemicals in the air, water, and soil, and chemicals in foods. Neurological development is also sensitive to social and family environment factors. For example, exposures to trauma or violence can result in significant change in brain functioning and/or behavior. And we don't yet know what the long-term effects of being "plugged-in" to long periods of screen time on computers and televisions at a very young age might have on brain development. Research in all of these areas is ongoing.

I also have questions about other issues related to behavior and development. How do chronic chaos and disorganization in a child's life affect her? How might standardized testing from a young age and, more important, educational environments that emphasize the importance of standardized test scores over developmentally appropriate educational practices affect a child? What benefits might there be in giving a child time to dream and imagine, in granting lots of lazy "swinging on the gate" time? There are some studies that indicate that inattentive children show improved attention following unstructured time outdoors in nature. What does that mean?

Some of my best and most vivid memories from my parenting years are of those times when I stepped back and just let Michael and Julie "be" - alone or with friends. One winter, after a scary ER visit, Julie turned our dining room into a pediatrician's office, complete with a doctor's kit, "patients," computers and files, a telephone, and note-pads. She played in there for hours, sometimes alone and sometimes with her brother or friends. I remember going down into our basement one October to find the den transformed by Michael and his neighborhood friends into a Haunted House, complete with spider webs and beheaded dolls hanging from the ceiling. There were long late nights in the summer with kids from 3-13 years of age running around among the yards playing King of the Mountain. There were also times when the kids watched a lot of TV and played video games, but these were balanced out by playing outdoors or by sitting and listening to stories. What do you recall from your years of parenting your children? From your own childhood?

Talking about this is more than nostalgia. I do recognize that many children do not have the good fortune that other kids have - the space, the safe neighborhood or home, the supervision, the willingness of parents to tolerate messes. I am very grateful for what we were able to give our children. But beyond nostalgia - developmental research is clear that play and imagination are very important experiences for all children. These experiences help children be ready and willing to learn in more structured environments, foster confidence and increase self-awareness, and teach valuable socialization skills. They help children learn to pay attention, take turns, and sit still when needed.

I would not want to deny any child or family effective treatment - behavioral, family, or medication - if it is truly needed, if the child's well-being in terms of learning, friendships, and family relationships is significantly impaired by challenging behaviors. At the same time, I want to urge all of us - psychologists, physicians, sociologists, clergy, parents, grandparents, teachers and other educators, nurses - everyone - to begin to look upstream for causes and for possible lapses in our collective judgment or practices that may have contributed to unhealthy environments and/or unrealistic expectations for our children. 

These are complex issues - there are no easy answers. But, at the very least, asking questions and searching for answers is necessary. This is our responsibility - to our children and grandchildren seven generations out, and to our society.

P.S. As I was writing this, Julie sent me the picture below...

According to his parents, Rev. Glenn and Marsha Grayson - and to news reports - Jeron Grayson was a star athlete, a wonderful son and brother, a loyal friend, an excited college student, an inspiring community member, and an aspiring activist. On October 17, 2010, Jeron was tragically and randomly killed, while home from Hampton College, by a young man with a gun.

Rev. Glenn and Marsha have lived and worked for years in Pittsburgh - and have been particularly devoted to improving the lives of young people in their Hill District community. They have founded the Center that CARES  in their neighborhood. The Center that CARES provides tutoring, mentoring, advising, and travel experiences that support and broaden the lives of young people from kindergarten through young adulthood.

How did this extraordinary couple respond to their devastating loss? In typical fashion, they have recently launched a public campaign that urges young people to stay away from guns. The campaign is called "G" Stands for Never Touch a Gun - named after Jeron who was fondly called G. Look for billboards across Pittsburgh with pictures of Jeron. And take some time to view the WQED documentary about Jeron and his parents' work.

Sustainable health and well-being often involves conservation and protection of the natural world - and it also very much involves conservation and protection of the social environment. A healthy community provides safety for its residents, love and education of its young people, and caring among neighbors in hard times, in addition to food and shelter. It provides these supports in ways that can be sustained over the long term, across generations. Marsha, an attorney and a student in Chatham's MS in Counseling Psychology program, and Rev. Glenn, pastor of the Wesley Center AME Zion Church in the Hill District, make significant contributions to the sustainable health and well-being of their neighborhood, Pittsburgh, and beyond. 

The work of Marsha and Rev. Glenn is very important - and it is work that each of us can do in our own way, in our own corner of the world. Think about how you might add to the sustainable health and well-being of your community. Look around for other individuals or groups that you might connect with to do great things. And let us know what you do.

I have had some reactions to the "angry mother letter" that I posted last week - if you haven't read it, a brief scan of it now will help you understand what follows. Basically, the letter is from mother earth to her human children, in which she chastises her children for their destruction of their home.

Some people reacted with - I am a mother; I so get that level of frustration. Others said - Seriously? Will this anger really help? 

I have done some reading and thinking since I posted the letter, and I can empathize with both positions. I am a mother of two amazing children - in spite of their amazing-ness, there have been times when I have felt beyond frustrated with their behaviors and choices, and when I probably did not speak to them in a particularly loving way. And yet - I am the mother of two amazing children - and when I have expressed my frustration to them in a less than loving way, it has almost always gone badly. It has seldom resulted in the desired response - "Oh, yes, mother dear! I goofed! I am so sorry and I will never do it again." The more typical result of an attempt to parent via anger, shame, and guilt has been that the focus shifts from what the child could possibly learn and do differently to dealing with the icky crap that comes with angry outbursts.

I have learned over the years that parenting or teaching by anger, humiliation, shame, or guilt does not work - and that doing so poisons the relationship that is so essential for growth to happen. So I can totally see that the letter from an angry mother earth might result in shut-down by its readers - a closing down to the important seed of truth and wisdom that is buried deep within the diatribe. The result of reading the letter may not be the desired - Wow! I never thought of this! I am going to clean up my act right away and compost, recycle, be thoughtful about consumption, and write my representatives! It may more likely be anger in return, denial, and distance - certainly not thinking it through and considering changes.

Research may shed some light on this. Studies that investigate the effects of having someone complete a carbon footprint assessment (which provides feedback about how "green" the person is in daily living) yield interesting results. Briefly, for participants who already identify themselves as being sensitive to environmental issues, knowing the carbon footprint may reinforce already existing good habits or lead to additional positive changes. For participants who do not identify themselves as environmentalists, the outcome may be the opposite - no positive change and perhaps even a decrease in environmental concern (for further reading, see Vess and Arndt, 2008, and Brook, 2011, under Resources). Why might this be so? It is no doubt complicated - and yet, it may also be as simple as thinking about how any of us feel when we learn that we are not doing something we should be doing, or that we are screwing up - even if this isn't done in an angry way.

We are human - which means that, sometimes, our response to such feedback is resistance and defensiveness - which certainly does not help our cause.

One area of research that might be adapted for the purposes of understanding all of this is the area related to stages of change and motivation. Have you ever tried to make a significant behavioral change in daily living - to lose weight, to stop smoking, to drink less alcohol? Most of us who make these attempts go through steps of increasing readiness prior to actually making and maintaining the change - I will talk more about this later. 

What is important about this line of study is that there is greater success in change when we can meet people where they are in their readiness to change - when we can accept that they are not yet ready to act differently, but that they are at least contemplating doing so. When we can accept them at that pre-change stage, then we can help them take baby steps toward an actual behavioral change. We do this from a place of openness, support, curiosity, and acceptance - not from anger and judgment. I wonder what this might mean in terms of talking with people about environmental issues? What do you think?

There are so many very cool and important things I want to share with you. Each morning I come upon both empowering and distressing news related to the environment and sustainability - I am trying to be patient but there is so much I want to say.

Did you know that Congress is trying to limit the authority of the EPA to regulate air quality, industrial emissions, and other aspects of environmental health? Some call it an effort to cut costs - the EPA budget may be cut, as well as the scope of its authority, in this trying budget season. Others believe that it is an effort to maintain relationships with big corporations who are often responsible for the industrial pollution and who are also, by the way, big contributors to political campaigns. Arrrrgh. This is SO short-sighted. For one, the work of the EPA since its inception has resulted in cleaner air and water, and consequently a reduction in pollution-related illnesses and deaths. For two, the EPA, through its regulatory power, plays an important role in stalling - stopping - reversing the damage to the environment that, if not mitigated, seriously threatens the long-term health and well-being of the natural world, including humans.

The EPA is currently seeking support, in particular, from women, with the belief that women are more likely to be or to feel responsible for family health. I don't know if women are more or less likely to bear the bulk of this responsibility - but I do know that I would do anything to protect Michael and Julie and their loved ones. 

Under Resources, there is a link on the left where you can find the names and contact numbers of elected officials. Let's use our voices.