LOGO : Site title

NurtureShock: New Thinking About Children

by Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman

Twelve Books

Hardcover $29.99

According to the new book NurtureShock, everything you know about parenting is wrong.

Of course, every other book in the rather overcrowded Childcare section of your local bookstore makes similar claims, but in this case, the authors might have a point. Po Bronson, best known for his self-help best-seller What Should I Do With My Life? and co-author Ashley Merryman, a lawyer and former advisor to the Clinton administration, have no medical qualifications, but they do seem to have done their research; the bibliographical notes and references section takes up well over a hundred pages. Expanded from an award-winning 2007 New York Magazine article, NurtureShock is a fascinating look at how a complex confluence of cultural and neurochemical factors dictates a child's educational and behavioural success.

Their key assertion, and the impetus behind the bold marketing claim, is that many of the commonly held beliefs and methods upon which we currently rely to raise our children have largely been based on outdated and incomplete research, or in some cases, no research at all. Bronson and Merryman went looking for specific parenting knowledge and methodology that have been thoroughly analyzed and tested, not only in psychological and sociological terms, but in that of neurology, as well. What they found is that a child's brain architecture has many unique requirements and is in a constant state of flux until adulthood, and as a result, educational and behavioural models must be reassessed in order to take advantage of a child's constantly changing pool of brain chemicals.

Bronson and Merryman pay a great deal of attention to a child's prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain that regulates the so-called “Executive Function,” or self-control. This includes the ability to concentrate on an idea or an action, and more importantly, to continue working on a solution when presented with a difficult task or failed attempt. It is essential to consistently stimulate this part of the brain throughout a child's nuerological development to maximize long-term results in learning, personality and behaviour. The bulk of NurtureShock illustrates various ways in which parents can apply this theory to their children.

Losing an hour of sleep contributes more to childhood obesity than watching an hour of TV.

For example, children must get enough quality sleep every night for proper neurological development. During “slow wave sleep,” specific genes in the brain activate in order to build new neuropathways to store the day's freshly acquired memories and knowledge. Tired brains have difficulty extracting glucose properly, which directly affects the functioning of the prefrontal cortex, as well as triggering the release of the fat manufacturing hormone coritsol. Fatigue also disrupts the human growth hormone, which is essential to the breakdown of fat. The authors point out that losing an hour of sleep daily directly contributes more to childhood obesity than watching an hour of TV after school.

Parents and teachers would also do well to foster a learning atmosphere that incorporates multi-disciplinary thinking. Bronson and Merryman use the example of an educational model called Tools of the Mind, which eschews the traditional school-day structure in favour of an all-day polyglot manner of learning that encourages sustained role play and student-derived activites. Students learn symbolic as well as concrete thought, not to mention deductive reasoning, but the most important aspect of the Tools teaching model is the mastery of self-discipline and impulse control. The ability to remain focussed on a specific task or goal is seen as the most important factor for long-term learning and achievement.

An interesting sidenote concerning the Tools of the Mind teaching model relates to one American school district that funded a Tools trial through a programme that specifically targets habitually underachieving schools. The trial was an overwhelming success, dramatically raising those children's grades to such a level that the school was ironically disqualified from receiving the funding necessary to continue with Tools method.

NurtureShock also calls into question a number of other commonly held beliefs about childhood behaviour, some of which are bound to cause a bit of controversy. At times some of these provocative claims seem to go against common sense, but Bronson and Merryman do a good job explaining their opinions through demonstrative research.

For example, educational television is bad! We all know that Barney is as close to a remote control lobotomy as we're likely to get, but research indicates that shows in the Baby Einstein vein have almost no effect on a child's learning and that most so-called educational TV does little to educate kids except in how to misbehave. Since these shows can't depict any physical violence, many instead focus on verbal and social offences, ostensibly to promote the correct behaviour at the end of the episode. Young viewers, however, are statistically far more likely to pick up on the easily imitatable lying, bullying and name-calling than the lesson tacked on right before the closing credits.

Praising your child's success is harmful! It may be second nature to squeal “Great job!” whenever Junior does just about anything, but a child who is too often praised learns to stop trying. Buoyed by a slightly inflated ego, a child may find it difficult to deal with a challenging obstacle and the failure necessary to learn something new. It is far more beneficial to praise a child's efforts than the results, as well as their willingness to keep trying at a difficult tasks.

Lying is normal! Teen rebellion is good! Evidently, a little anti-social behaviour is not only okay, but necessary to your child's welfare. An important developmental point in a child's life is when they learn that everyone sometimes lies, including Mom and Dad. If Junior is going to be a successful member of our society, he has to recognize when someone else is fibbing, and he usually figures this out by trying it himself. Likewise, testing boundaries as a teen is a natural stage in the evolution of one's identity, as long as obvious personal safety issues are kept in mind. Let Junior experiment with hair dye, but not hard drugs.

Bullying and aggression is often rewarded! This doesn't refer to a burly kid in a striped shirt pushing the Little Rascals around, but rather the much more subtle verbal interactions that shape a child's social standing. Childhood is depicted as a dance of aggression and passivity, where like classic Social Darwinism, stronger, more forceful personalities are dominant, commanding a mix of fear and respect. Many of these dominating children develop a complex set of social skills that work to their advantage as adults. I was a little skeptical of this claim at first, but it would certainly explain how some people rise to the top of the corporate and political ladders.

Spanking is an effective deterrent for bad behaviour! This is certainly a controversial stance, but the authors make the case that a child who grows up with the understanding that a spanking is a very real possible outcome for bad behaviour is more likely to be well-behaved and that the contemporary cultural taboo on spanking has resulted in children with no concept of the consequences of their actions. It must be noted that Bronson and Merryman are not advocating beating children or psychologically terrorizing them with threats of physical abuse, they are merely referring to the old-fashioned spank on the rump. Speaking solely from personal experience, I learned the deterrent value of spanking at a very young age, thanks to my mother, and her trusty wooden kitchen spoon.

Bronson and Merryman do a good job of defending their claims with interesting case studies and thorough research, but at times they seem to be saying that as parents we're all just slaves to the chaotic juices in our children's brains and it's a miracle that any of us make it out of diapers. The Rube Goldbergian manner in which a mind-boggling number of minute, independent, chemical and social factors contribute to a baby understanding a single word from her mother for the first-time is pretty overwhelming and makes me question how much influence any of us really have on our children's development. Everything that we do or say as parents has to compete with so many other cultural and biological forces that I almost wonder if it would be a better idea to just throw in the towel and let wolves raise our kids. I suppose what NurtureShock is trying to tell us isn't that everything we know about parenting is wrong, but that there's just so much more that we need to learn.