+HAVE FUN WITH THIS SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL BRAIN BUILDING EXERCISE!

++++++++++++++++++

Let me introduce something fun now!  This exercise is about how we order, organize, regulate our nervous system-brain, our body, our emotions, our SELF in direct face-to-face communication with others of our social species.

Here is some basic (useful) information from Dr. Daniel J. Siegel’s book about brain-mind building as he talks about the growth of our early right and left brain connections.  As you read the paragraph below, and connect it to the information in Dr. Allan N. Schore’s mother-infant brain building of the earliest foundation of our social human brain, realize that the exercise of our brain regions, circuits, pathways and neurons in our social-emotional right limbic brain never ceases throughout our lifespan.

++

Siegel writes:

From the beginning of life, the brain has an asymmetry in its circuitry, which leads to the specialization of functions on each side of the brain.  The ways in which the mind creates representations of experience is shaped by this lateralization of function.  The capacities to sense another person’s emotions, to understand others’ minds, and even to express one’s own emotions via facial expressions and tone of voice are all mediated predominately by the right side of the brain.  In certain insecure attachment patterns, communication between parent and child may lack these aspects of emotions and mental experience.  In contrast, secure attachments seem to involve the sharing of a wide range of representational processes from both sides of the brain.  In essence, such balanced interpersonal communication allows the activity of mind to sense and respond to the activity of another.  Such sharing of activity can be seen as the sharing of states of mind….” (Page 7) from Dr. Daniel J. Siegel’s book, The Developing Mind: How Relationships and the Brain Interact to Shape Who We Are (The Guilford Press, 1999))

++

The more we were deprived in our own infant-childhood of deprivation-trauma, the less we experienced the kinds of safe and secure social-human attachment experiences that allowed these brain patterns to grow and develop in our brain – during the formative stages when they were most needed and necessary.

Except in very rare situations of complete infant-child isolation (and my experience did contain 95% isolation except within the school environment), most people (which DOES include me or I would not be able to talk!) have at least a rudimentary social-brain in existence.

We are long past the earliest stages where our neurons where assigned their place in our brain regions and given their job to do.  We are long past the earliest stages where the superhighways of connection between our social-emotional brain and the regions it is intimately connected to were carved into place through our earliest mother-caregiver interactions.  BUT, we continue as human beings to exercise these brain functions as long as we breath.

For those of us who suffered Trauma Altered Development through severe malevolent treatment, we especially need to understand – intellectually and consciously – the vital information contained within Shore’s article because we need to do TODAY as much as we possibly can in our interactions with people what Schore is describing in order to strengthen and improve the functioning of our emotional-social brain.

Remember, what I am suggesting here is meant to be enjoyable.  We can best benefit from these kinds of exercises if we approach them from a playful stance within ourselves.  This process, even from the beginning when our brain was built, always best happens in safe, secure and play-filled mother-infant activities.  That is no less true – ever.

Social-brain, emotional, right brain exercise happens in close communication through signals exchanged through ALL OF OUR SENSES directly with another person.  It can be really hard to find an adult who will do this with us, yet it is MOSTLY this kind of interaction with a trained, skilled and caring therapist that is effecting the most beneficial healing for us.  Because most of us don’t have access to a therapist who can help us with this, we need to learn how to do it ourselves.

Most importantly, do not feel any pressure to do this RIGHT.  Certainly no brain-building infant ever has that thought!  It is even best to simply watch other people from a distance in the beginning as they interact in signaling communication with one another.  Of course, as Schore points out, the facial signals are being transmitted – received – and responded to so FAST that we cannot consciously detect them.  But we can try to!

I cannot read other people’s ‘social’ or ‘emotional cues’ correctly.  This contributes to my sense of depersonalization and derealization (not to mention dissociations).  I am always an outsider – really – when it comes to human interactions because of the Trauma Altered Development I experienced from birth.  This does not ever mean that I can’t continue to learn more about what being a member of a social species is all about!  Every single positive human interaction we have improves the social-emotional regulatory region of our right brain.

So – – – –

Try this once you have completed some serious, focused outside watching of other people as they communicate with one another (and if you have family or ‘party’ holiday gatherings you have a perfect crowd for the watching!).  Having paid attention of the nature and quality of their interactive signaling, through body movement, facial expression, gestures, tone of voice, pitch, patterns of pauses, etc. you will already have an idea about how what I am going to suggest next might feel TO YOU.

I call this ‘in situ‘, or ‘in place’ communication.  You can do this with anyone you feel safe and secure with, even a child who is old enough to engage in conversation.

Sit comfortably FACING ONE ANOTHER with your knees about a foot apart.  Relax.  Feel yourself inside your own body.  Breath.  Notice the physical sensations of your feet on the floor (don’t cross your legs or ankles), your bottom on the chair, your back, etc.  These are feelings (tied to emotions) recognizable by your right brain.

Concentrate on letting anxiety leave this PLACE.  I know this is hard for some of us to ever accomplish, but the point of this exercise is to connect the sensation of NO ANXIETY with feeling calm in social interaction that is safe and secure.  ‘Ordinary’ safe and securely attached (from birth) people get to NOT feel anxiety nearly all of the time!  Survivors don’t really even know what this feels like.

So here you are with your chosen partner.  Look at one another’s faces and begin to speak.  You can talk about ANYTHING!  Remember, at least two-thirds of all human speech is about other people – or gossip.  So, gossip if you like.

Tell a story about something that happened during your day – and your partner’s day.  Nothing deep or heavy here.  Just communicate, and as you do begin to THINK ABOUT how you two are transmitting, receiving and sending back communication signals.  Because we are working to exercise the earliest forming regions of the social-emotional brain, it is important to particularly notice the face – expression conveyed through muscles, eyes, and position of the head.

Notice PARTICULARLY how both of you both make eye contact and break it!  The actions that accomplish this are social-emotional regulatory actions.  The fun thing to begin to see is that we all do this!  We have always done it!

If a person moves their eyes away from another person’s eyes, either also turning the head or not, you can tell which region of their brain they are INWARDLY sending their energy to.  When a person looks to the left and/or turns their head to the left they are ORGANIZING and ordering the information into their RIGHT BRAIN.

If we move our eyes to the right and/or the head, we are ORGANIZING and ordering information into the left region of our brain.  This information we are dealing with is very complicated and involves both the external information we are receiving from the other person and our own INTERNAL information that we get at the same time.

Even without consciously noticing that it is happening, a person in face-to-face direct dyadic (two person) communication might eventually shift their ENTIRE BODY in one direction or the other.  If they do this, pay attention to the direction they are shifting toward and realize it is the OPPOSITE side of their brain that is being organized and ordered.  (These patterns might be a bit different depending on which hand, right or left, a person is dominant with – though the basic underlying structures are the same, the information itself can be processed differently depending on which is our dominant side.)

++++

Once this exercise feels comfortable, and as you have noticed how you feel during the entire process, you can experiment with more emotionally laden conversation and watch what happens next!  Because part of our intention is to strengthen particularly the right social-emotional regions of the brain, every time you notice a shift toward the RIGHT in eyes, head or body, intentionally compensate with a shift in the OPPOSITE direction toward the LEFT so that you reinforce, through this action, activity that is ordering and organizing the right brain regions.

Every time one or both of the people engaged in this kind of direct fact-to-face conversation make this kind of BREAK away from one another, this is a rupture that will be or not be repaired by a return to facing one another and continuing to communicate – after each takes the time that they need to process the information inside of their own brain.  These interactions continually build themselves within the pathways of our brain into patterns of pauses that help regulate us back to CALM so that we can return for more stimulation – again!

These rupture and repair pauses and returns to activity happen all the way down to our Autonomic Nervous System (ANS) level where our – you got it!!  Where our parasympathetic STOP (‘pair a brakes’) arm of our ANS balances itself with our sympathetic GO ANS arm!

There you have it – neuroscience exercise to help build better and better internal emotional regulation into your body-brain through safe and secure social interactions!!

Have fun!  And please continue to read and study Dr. Allan N. Schore’s baby social-emotional brain building article!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Please feel free to comment directly at the end of this post or on

+++++++

Your Page – Readers’ Responses

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+DEGREES-OF-WELL-BEING IS ABOUT SOCIAL HEALTH, NOT “MENTAL” OR “BEHAVIORAL”

++++

At the same time that I do not personally like the use of the words either ‘mental’ or ‘behavioral’ health in regard to the well-being of humans, I cannot fight the world on this point, but I sure can examine what is meant by the words themselves.  The human ‘mind’ is a nebulous, invisible, intangible nonexistent physical entity.  It is not a THING we can detect through our ordinary senses.  We are always forced to follow some magical ‘this is subjective but we’ll all pretend it isn’t” course in our thinking about the concept of MIND.

Dr. Daniel J. Siegel’s work and writings talk about how humans both develop a mind and the ability to have what he calls ‘Mind Sight’.   Siegel serves as the Executive Director of the Mindsight Institute, an educational organization that focuses on how the development of insight, compassion and empathy in individuals, families and communities can be enhanced by examining the interface of human relationships and basic biological processes.  His work accurately describes how the mind does not exist separately from the physiological body that comes to manifest it.

If we are going to continue to use the term ‘mental health’ it must be done within the context that Siegel presents.  ‘Behavioral health’ must also be firmly anchored into an accurate understanding that behavior, just like ‘mind’, stems from physiological processes within a person’s body and is completely open for subjective interpretation.

By using either one of these terms on a grand scale, either ‘mental health’ or ‘behavioral health’,  we are pretending that we are talking about a THING.  A thing is an object.  Humans are not objects.  We are living beings who exist in relationship with our environment, within our own body and to everyone and everything around us.  To try to define our well-being in the world in terms of our mind or our behavior as if they are separate THINGS that have nothing to do with our physiological body is STUPID!

++++

We CAN talk about human well-being at every stage of our existence from conception until death.  Before I would trust any individual national, state, regional, local or individual opinion on any topic of human health, I would want to know what our global ‘best of the best’ have to say about it.

The World Health Organization’s website has a page devoted to Mental Health, where they say:

Mental health is not just the absence of mental disorder. It is defined as a state of well-being in which every individual realizes his or her own potential, can cope with the normal stresses of life, can work productively and fruitfully, and is able to make a contribution to her or his community.”

The World Health Organization defines some specifics about “the early signs of mental disorders”:

A mental or behavioural disorder is characterized by a disturbance in thinking, mood, or behaviour, which is out of keeping with cultural beliefs and norms. In most cases the symptoms are associated with distress and interference with personal functions.

Mental disorders produce symptoms that sufferers or those close to them notice. These may include:

  • physical symptoms (e.g. aches and sleep disturbance)
  • emotional symptoms (e.g. feeling sad, scared, or anxious)
  • cognitive symptoms (e.g. difficulty thinking clearly, abnormal beliefs, memory disturbance)
  • behavioural symptoms (e.g. behaving in an aggressive manner, inability to perform routine daily functions, excessive use of substances)
  • perceptual symptoms (e.g. seeing or hearing things that others cannot)

++++

Well, I am getting nowhere here, so I am going back to look at the origins of the word ‘mind’ itself.  Interestingly, I have to continue to search for the actual date this word came into our modern English language.  My hard-copy dictionary gives the date as being before the 12th century.:

Main Entry: 1mind

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English, from Old English gemynd; akin to Old High German gimunt memory, Latin ment-, mens mind, monEre to remind, warn, Greek menos spirit, mnasthai, mimnEskesthai to remember

1 : RECOLLECTION, MEMORY <keep that in mind> <time out of mind>
2 a : the element or complex of elements in an individual that feels, perceives, thinks, wills, and especially reasons b : the conscious mental events and capabilities in an organism c : the organized conscious and unconscious adaptive mental activity of an organism
3 : INTENTION, DESIRE <I changed my mind>
4 : the normal or healthy condition of the mental faculties
5 : OPINION, VIEW
6 : DISPOSITION, MOOD
7 a : a person or group embodying mental qualities <the public mind> b : intellectual ability
8 capitalized, Christian Science : GOD 1b
9 : a conscious substratum or factor in the universe
10 : ATTENTION <pay him no mind>

++++

Very interesting origins!  I looked up the word “mental” and found:

Main Entry: 1men·tal

Function: adjective

Etymology: Middle English, from Late Latin mentalis, from Latin ment-, mens mind — more at mind

Date: 15th century

1 a : of or relating to the mind; specifically : of or relating to the total emotional and intellectual response of an individual to external reality <mental health> b : of or relating to intellectual as contrasted with emotional activity c : of, relating to, or being intellectual as contrasted with overt physical activity d : occurring or experienced in the mind : inner <mental anguish> e : relating to the mind, its activity, or its products as an object of study : ideological f : relating to spirit or idea as opposed to matter
2 a (1) : of, relating to, or affected by a psychiatric disorder <a mental patient> (2) : mentally disordered : mad, crazy b : intended for the care or treatment of persons affected by psychiatric disorders <mental hospitals>
3 : of or relating to telepathic or mind-reading powers

Ah!  Here again, as with the word ‘symptom’ (see post on topic here) , we have a Renaissance-origin word:  ‘Mental’ as an adjective.

++++

It becomes immediately clear to me as soon as I try to discover the roots of human thinking behind a term like ‘mental health’ that we are evidently not willing to talk about what we are really talking about!

When the invisible unreal entity of MIND is considered independently from the human body that both HAS a mind and experiences life WITH this mind, what we are really talking about – as we can see from our consideration of the meaning of ‘mind’ and ‘mental’ in relationship to their origins —  is HOW A PERSON’S  SPIRIT REMEMBERS ITSELF in the world.

(If the treatment a developing infant receives from its mother is unsafe and insecure, that treatment is a warning to the infant that adjustments need to be made in order to survive within a malevolent world.  A mother’s treatment of her offspring ‘reminds’ it of the conditions of the environment.  All human ‘remembering’ (including how our DNA manifests itself) happens from conception within this framework.  Because we are a social species, all our ‘remembering’ happens through the body-brain we developed primarily before the age of one.)

No matter what the Renaissance thinkers intended as they began to talk about ‘mind’ and ‘mental’ the reality is that no consideration of mind is actually remotely scientific!  Just by making up a meaning and attaching it to a made-up word DOES NOT MAKE SOMETHING into a real, tangible THING.

++++

Are we really talking about something no less tangible than what one of my favorite words describes?

Main Entry: al·che·my

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English alkamie, alquemie, from Middle French or Medieval Latin; Middle French alkimie, from Medieval Latin alchymia, from Arabic al-kīmiyā’, from al the + kīmiyā’ alchemy, from Late Greek chēmeia

Date: 14th century

1 : a medieval chemical science and speculative philosophy aiming to achieve the transmutation of the base metals into gold, the discovery of a universal cure for disease, and the discovery of a means of indefinitely prolonging life
2 : a power or process of transforming something common into something special
3 : an inexplicable or mysterious transmuting

al·chem·i·cal \-mi-kəl\ also al·chem·ic \al-ˈke-mik\ adjective

al·chem·i·cal·ly \-mi-k(ə-)lē\ adverb

There it is:  “an inexplicable or mysterious transmuting.”  We have transmuted the invisible process of how and who a human being is in the world into a tangible THING, giving the words ‘mind’ and ‘mental’ meaning AS IF we are talking about something REAL and tangible rather than something UNREAL and intangible.

++++

What happens if I turn my considerations toward ‘behavioral health’ instead of ‘mental health’?  Hummmmm – this search also is leading me toward the obvious – yet another Renaissance word:

Main Entry: be·have

Function: verb

Inflected Form(s): be·haved; be·hav·ing

Etymology: Middle English behaven, from be- + haven to have, hold

Date: 15th century

transitive verb 1 : to manage the actions of (oneself) in a particular way
2 : to conduct (oneself) in a proper mannerintransitive verb 1 : to act, function, or react in a particular way
2 : to conduct oneself properly

++++

If I make a gigantic leap and connect “to conduct oneself properly” in relationship to ‘behavioral health’ back through ‘mind’ as being a ‘remembering of the spirit’, and return full circle to the beginning of the post, I find in the World Health Organization’s discussion about the ‘symptoms’ of ‘mental illness’ and ‘mental disorders’ that they clearly present this qualifying statement:

A mental or behavioural disorder is characterized by a disturbance in thinking, mood, or behaviour, which is out of keeping with cultural beliefs and norms”

In other words, it is impossible to even begin to think even about ‘disorder’ itself, in relation to either a so-called ‘mental’ or a ‘behavioral’ one without first defining what any particular culture’s ‘beliefs and norms’ are.

Any consideration of ‘disorder’ has to be done within a consideration of the established social-cultural patterns of what’s considered to be ‘order’.  Disorder is itself another Renaissance word:

Main Entry: 1dis·or·der

Function: transitive verb

Date: 15th century

1 : to disturb the order of
2 : to disturb the regular or normal functions of

++

Even if I try to place the IDEA of disorder within the larger context of what ORDER might mean, I find myself looking at an English word that is connected not in our history of Renaissance-period thinking, but to our Medieval-period, or Middle Age Millennium of thinking:

Main Entry: 1or·der

Function: verb

Inflected Form(s): or·dered; or·der·ing \ˈȯr-d(ə-)riŋ\

Etymology: Middle English, from ordre, noun

Date: 13th century

transitive verb 1 : to put in order : arrange
2 a : to give an order to : command b : destine, ordain <so ordered by the gods> c : to command to go or come to a specified place <ordered back to the base> d : to give an order for <order a meal>intransitive verb 1 : to bring about order : regulate
2 a : to issue orders : command b : to give or place an order

OR AS A NOUN:

Main Entry: 2order

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French ordre, from Medieval Latin & Latin; Medieval Latin ordin-, ordo ecclesiastical order, from Latin, arrangement, group, class; akin to Latin ordiri to lay the warp, begin

Date: 14th century

1 a : a group of people united in a formal way: as (1) : a fraternal society <the Masonic Order> (2) : a community under a religious rule; especially : one requiring members to take solemn vows b : a badge or medal of such a society; also : a military decoration
2 a : any of the several grades of the Christian ministry b plural : the office of a person in the Christian ministry c plural : ordination
3 a : a rank, class, or special group in a community or society b : a class of persons or things grouped according to quality, value, or natural characteristics: as (1) : a category of taxonomic classification ranking above the family and below the class (2) : the broadest category in soil classification

++

As a weaver, I find “akin to Latin ordiri to lay the warp, begin” fascinating!  That is exactly what a mother does for her infant — she lays the warp as her infant begins its life as a social being, and with that warp a person’s life is created.

++++

We cannot consider ‘mental’ or ‘behavioral’ ‘disorders’ outside of the context that gave birth not only to the words themselves, but to the cultural ideas and concepts that contain them.

It is clear to me that all of these words originated within a Christian mindset and cultural world view.  We continue to use these words AS IF (think alchemy again) we could transmute the concepts, values, beliefs, understandings and religious underpinnings beneath and behind them into something magically SCIENTIFIC.

Main Entry: sci·ence

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin scientia, from scient-, sciens having knowledge, from present participle of scire to know; perhaps akin to Sanskrit chyati he cuts off, Latin scindere to split — more at shed

Date: 14th century

1 : the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding
2 a : a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study <the science of theology> b : something (as a sport or technique) that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge <have it down to a science>
3 a : knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method b : such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena : natural science
4 : a system or method reconciling practical ends with scientific laws <cooking is both a science and an art>

++

“Scientific’ is supposedly “the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding.”  We are all familiar in our culture with the other end of the ‘nonscientific’ spectrum, and the conflict that often arises between them:

Main Entry: re·li·gion

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Anglo-French religiun, Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back — more at rely

Date: 13th century

1 a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

++++

Yet if we are honest with ourselves as a species, this entire discussion and any consideration of what the terms ‘mental health’ and ‘behavioral health’, as well as ‘mental disorder’ and ‘behavioral disorder’ is really describing is how comfortably –or not — an individual fits into the social system of which they are a member.

At the point that so-called ‘science’ wanted to begin to establish itself separately from ‘religion’ words began to be used in our language that were supposed to take ‘how spirit remembers itself’ and transmute them magically into something else – something tangible, literal, measurable and real.

++++

As we accept these terms and use them to describe ourselves and/or others, we are continuing only to consider human beings in the context of the social environment they live within.  We are not REALLY concerning ourselves with the actual conditions of well-being or lack of well-being that a person experiences from within their own skin.  We are a social species, so it is not at all surprising that the formulas we use in our thinking about how we fit into the larger social context are all reducible down to social relationships.

And, again, it is the earliest mothering caregiver interactions we experience during our infant brain developmental stages that entirely build the foundation of our social brain that will regulate our interactions within our own self and within our social environment for the rest of our lives.  These experiences ‘order’ our brain.  It is at this level that we have to look for what happens to us the rest of our lives.

It is at this very real level of interaction between our social environment (our mothering experiences) and our growing and forming social brain’s foundation that we can NOW understand the science of social interaction.  It has nothing to do with ‘religion’ as we usually understand it as lying at the foundation of our culture, our social order, or the words, concepts and terms we use to consider our ‘invisible’ ideas.

The Latin conception of ‘religio’ as tying and binding together is, in its largest sense, what mothering an infant adequately is all about.  Social interaction is the way humans, as members of a social species, find themselves in the world from the building of our early-forming social-brain on up.  Neurons tie themselves together and form circuits, pathways, patterns in our early-forming brain that are SUPPOSED to link us harmoniously to our own SELF and to other selves in the world around us – beginning with our mothering early caregiver.  How our brain is ‘ordered’ and organized happens through social attachment.

++++

Looking at the roots of our word ‘social’ I find it related in its origins to ‘man, companion, ally’ (and also, interestingly, as it relates to ‘sue’).  We are a social species, and therefore the issue of companionship – companionship with our mother, companionship with our developing self, and companionship with other members of our species – forms the foundation of who we are through the social brain we built.

Our word ‘companion’ is fundamentally connected in its origins to FOOD, and for all the words I have considered today, it is only in this simple word – food – that I find an origin in our language that goes back before the 12th century.

FOOD

Etymology: Middle English fode, from Old English fōda; akin to Old High German fuotar food, fodder, Latin panis bread, pascere to feed

++

NOW THIS IS TAKING US BACK TO WHAT MATTERS.  THIS WORD TAKES US BACK TO OUR HUMAN ROOTS.  THIS WORD IS ABOUT OUR ORIGINS.  With our mothers, beginning our human journey, we transition into the social ordering of our very foundational social brain through all the kinds and qualities of FEEDING that our earliest caregiver, our mother, gives to us.

This is the natural order of making a human being.  This is where our attachments in the world begin.  This is where all our feel-good physiological processes originate.

++++

If you are still reading this post, and have followed along this far, you will appreciate what a search through words in our language now gives us.  Mothering is about something both so simple and so profound that it lies at the basis of our species.  Mothers can either provide the best possible nourishment for her offspring or she cannot.

Main Entry: nour·ish

Pronunciation: \ˈnər-ish, ˈnə-rish\

Etymology: Middle English nurishen, from Anglo-French nuriss-, stem of nurrir, norrir, from Latin nutrire to suckle, nourish; akin to Greek nan to flow, noteros damp, Sanskrit snauti it drips

Date: 14th century

1 : nurture, rear
2 : to promote the growth of
3 a : to furnish or sustain with nutriment : feed b : maintain, support

nour·ish·er noun

++

All of my thoughts, in fact all of anyone’s thoughts, always return in their origins to the mother who brought us into the world and who was then responsible for forming the foundations of our earliest social-emotional brain.  We find in one single word the essence of all that matters in our beginnings.

Main Entry: 1suck

Function: verb

Etymology: Middle English suken, from Old English sūcan; akin to Old High German sūgan to suck, Latin sugere

Date: before 12th century

transitive verb 1 a : to draw (as liquid) into the mouth through a suction force produced by movements of the lips and tongue <sucked milk from his mother’s breast> b : to draw something from or consume by such movements c : to apply the mouth to in order to or as if to suck out a liquid
2 a : to draw by or as if by suction b : to take in and consume by or as if by suction

We draw the world into ourselves in our beginnings through our interactions with our earliest caregiver, our earliest representation of humanity in our world – our mother.  We take in and consume what she provides for us and build a brain out of it, build a nervous system, an immune system, and entire body that has at its basis of operation in the world the signals her treatment of us communicates to us about the condition of the world:  Is it a safe and secure benevolent world or is it an unsafe, insecure malevolent one?

The resiliency factors available in our own DNA memory or our species allow us to adapt to and adjust within the quality of the world our mother presents to us from our conception.  How our developing body-brain is ordered is dependent upon the interactions we have with ALL of our earliest caregivers, but most centrally upon the interactions with the mother that suckles us – by feeding us information about the condition of the world that we adapt ourselves to in our earliest development.

++++

We have reached the heart of the matter.  We cannot separate either our mind or our behavior from the body we live within, this same body that was guided in its development by the suckling we received from our mothering caregiver that built us.

What we are actually talking about is our degree of SOCIAL HEALTH.  This is, in my opinion, the most accurate term we can use to talk about how we are in the world as members of a social species.

The problem with adopting Social Health as an accurate term related to our degrees of well-being is that it simply does not allow us to continue using stigma against one another.  Social Health and well-being is about ALL OF US.  It is about our entire body, not only individually, but about the health of the culture we live within and on the largest scale, of the entire quality of health for every single one of the members of our species on our planet.

Main Entry: stig·ma

Function: noun

Inflected Form(s): plural stig·ma·ta

\stig-ˈmä-tə, ˈstig-mə-tə\ or stig·mas

Etymology: Latin stigmat-, stigma mark, brand, from Greek, from stizein to tattoo — more at stick

Date: circa 1593

1 a archaic : a scar left by a hot iron : brand b : a mark of shame or discredit : stain <bore the stigma of cowardice> c : an identifying mark or characteristic; specifically : a specific diagnostic sign of a disease
2 a stigmata plural : bodily marks or pains resembling the wounds of the crucified Jesus and sometimes accompanying religious ecstasy

Once we are given a ‘diagnosis’, we are then the recipient of a ‘brand’ or a ‘mark’ that sticks to us and separates us from ‘the others’.

Main Entry: 1stickFunction: noun

Etymology: Middle English stik, from Old English sticca; akin to Old Norse stik stick, Old English stician to stick

Date: before 12th century

1 : a woody piece or part of a tree or shrub: as a : a usually dry or dead severed shoot, twig, or slender branch b : a cut or broken branch or piece of wood gathered for fuel or construction material
2 a : a long slender piece of wood or metal: as (1) : a club or staff used as a weapon (2) : walking stick b : an implement used for striking or propelling an object in a game c : something used to force compliance d : a baton symbolizing an office or dignity; also : a person entitled to bear such a baton

We are cast aside, as if we are cut off as a branch would be broken from the main tree of human life.  We are both ‘stuck’ with the stigma and ‘struck’ by it because stigmas hurt people.

Social Health is an inclusive rather than an exclusive term.  Using it would stop stigmatization dead in its tracks.  Everyone would then be included; nobody would be marked, cast off, stigmatized, judged, condemned or punished as being different from anybody else.  Everyone has some degree of social health.

++++

Oh, but in the U.S.A. we are such big fans of uniqueness and individuality.  Social Health smacks of ‘socialism’ and unwanted oppression over the rights of the individual!  We want to be ‘free’ to be ‘different’ from everyone else.  We do not want to accept that after all, we are human beings just like everyone else is.

When we are ‘free’ to be ‘unique individuals’ and ‘different’ from everyone else, we can feel superior or inferior, better-than or less-than other people.  We can keep our stigmas, our prejudices, our arrogance and our ignorance.  We do not want to admit or accept that these aspects to our ‘social ordering’ within our culture are fooling no one but ourselves.

We continue to keep our illusions intact, and believe in ‘manifest destiny’ and ‘the right of imminent domain’.  After all, in America anyone and everyone can ‘pull themselves up by their bootstraps’ if they only want to.  After all, we are all born ‘all men are equal before the law’.

Never mind that laws are not enforced equally.  Never mind that infant-children can be neglected, battered, abused and maltreated within our national boundaries, forcing these victim-survivors to grow a completely evolutionarily altered body and brain that will change how they are in the world for the rest of their lives.  What is happening to The Great Society?

++++

Our primary concern is with health – every kind of health related to the conditions of being human.  Because we are a species of social beings, all of our health concerns boil down to social ones.  The adjective we use to talk about how we are as social beings in the world, in relationship with our own self and with one another needs to be accurate.  Social Health uses the right adjective.

Main Entry: health

Function: noun

Usage: often attributive

Etymology: Middle English helthe, from Old English ̄lth, from hāl

Date: before 12th century

1 a : the condition of being sound in body, mind, or spirit; especially : freedom from physical disease or pain b : the general condition of the body <in poor health> <enjoys good health>
2 a : flourishing condition : well-being b : general condition or state <poor economic health>

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Please feel free to comment directly at the end of this post or on

+++++++

Your Page – Readers’ Responses

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+WHAT WE MOST NEED TO KNOW: HOW MOTHERING BUILDS THE INFANT BRAIN

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

There is a link here to the most important article you will ever read — complicated at the same time it describes what matters most to us as human beings.

When you click on the title of the article I am presenting here today, which is an active link that will lead you first through a series of language translations of the abstract, simply scroll down to the full article which is written in English.

It is my opinion that the information contained in this article, written by Dr. Allan N. Schore, is the most valuable we will ever read in our lifetime.  Or, I can say, the most important we will TRY to read.

Every single word I have written on my blog up until this moment is really ONLY in introduction to the information contained in this 60-page article.  I will work with this information later to try to present it in a more digestible, understandable format, but this is the ORIGIN of all of my thinking.

I discovered Shore’s neuroscientific description of the building of an infant’s brain through emotional interactions it has with its mothering earliest caregiver well before I discovered the work of Dr. Martin Teicher and his Harvard research group.  I carefully picked my way through the dense, complicated and vital information contained in Schore’s books.  The essence of all Schore’s discoveries about this critical period of infant brain development is condensed into this article I am presenting the link to today.

++++

Whether we have EVER thought about it up until this moment or not, when any of us ever interact with a newborn and very young infant, or as we watch a mother interacting with her newborn and very young infant, we are watching GENESIS IN ACTION.  We are watching neuroscience building a human brain – in real time, in the moment, during every single flash of a tiny millisecond interaction after another – human interactional experiences with the infant is actively BUILDING its brain.

I could say the following with every breath I ever take for the rest of my life and it would not be enough:  When an infant has a safe and secure attachment to its earliest mothering caregiver ALL these brain building interactions happen completely naturally – and adequately.  There is then no particular reason to  have to think in terms of neuroscience except that it is fascinating to understand mothers and infants together through this critically important lens of information.

HOWEVER!!!  If an infant was born to a mother whose own earliest mothering caregiver interactions were NOT safe and secure, she did not receive the kind of face-to-face brain building experiences that would have allowed her to build a BEST emotionally regulated social brain herself.  Her interactions with her infant will not follow the BEST patterns needed for her infant to build its own best brain — except under special conditions (read on).

++++

My daughter asked me the other day after reading my Sunday post why she doesn’t have a dysregulated brain if I have one as her mother because my own mother had one and therefore built a dysregulated brain into little infant me.

We are getting down to the most important nitty-gritty information about the truth regarding intergenerational transmission of parental unresolved trauma – through abuse, neglect and maltreatment of offspring — with her question.  She did NOT ask me why I did not abuse her the way my mother abused me.  She knows enough now to understand that the most important intergenerational issue is WHAT KIND OF BRAIN PATTERNING DOES A MOTHER TRANSMIT TO HER INFANT.

The simplest way I can answer her question is that (1) I have a different genetic composition than my mother did; (2) I suffered different patterns of deprivations-traumas than my mother did; (3) the timing during our later infant-child developmental stages that our deprivations-traumas happened to us were different; (4) these deprivations-traumas affected the genetic-change mechanisms within my mother and myself differently.

At the same time I know that both my mother and I had DISSOCIATION built into our earliest forming trauma-changed infant brain.  HOW the dissociational patterns operated were different because of the four points I just made.   What is critically important to understand is that I was able to form an entire oriented and organized dissociated ME, as a mother, that did not stand in the way of or change in any way the inborn ability my own children had to build safe and secure attachments.

My mother’s brain had formed an entirely different set of patterns related to her ‘self’ than mine did.  I could organize and orient ‘a mothering self’ that put my children at the center of my life.  My mother could not do this.

I was able, within my dissociated safe and secure mothering dissociated universe to let my children form a safe and secure attachment to me – which meant most importantly not that I literally never abused my own children – but that I was able to interact with them from birth in safe and secure attachment interactions that let THEM build a BEST brain from the start.

Of course it matters that I did not abuse them.  But what my 33-year-old daughter who is now carrying her firstborn child is, herself in her own life, MOST benefiting from is that she has a SAFELY AND SECURELY built excellent brain – that was formed from its very foundation on the BEST kinds of face-to-face mothering caregiver interactions Schore is describing in this article.

++++

The foundational experiences that humans have as members of a social species happen through the way their earliest mothering caregiver experiences shaped their brain’s development.  Our ability to experience and regulate our emotions, our ability to read and appropriately respond to social cues, what motivates and rewards us, what gives us meaning in our lives, what tells our body how to respond and what to respond to, what coordinates all our memory storage, processing and recall for the rest of our lives happens according to HOW our earliest mothering caregiver experiences formed our brains.

If our mother was able to ALLOW a safe and secure attachment with us, even if she herself did not get a BEST brain in her own early unsafe and insecure attachment environment, our mother was probably able to avoid building into us a replica of her own dysregulated brain.  This alternative to the feared inevitable passing on of intergenerational unresolved trauma happens through what the experts call an ‘earned secure attachment’ and what I call a ‘borrowed secure attachment’.

If development from conception to birth has not been interfered with, and certainly even at times when some prior-to-birth disruptions did occur, humans are born with the ability to form safe and secure attachments, and are designed to build the best brain possible.  That best brain, however, cannot be built without signals of communication between the mother and her infant that the world is a safe and secure place to be in.  It is the nature and quality of these earliest mother-infant signals that determine what kind of a foundational brain we build — either trauma-based or not.

++++

I have not in my own lifetime of 58 years ever been able to change the core foundation of the trauma-built brain I received because of my mother’s far less than best treatment of me from birth.  Every experience I have had (as happens for all of us) is directed by and processed through this earliest brain we built.  As I return to my work with my mother’s 50+ year old letters, I can see the thread of her distorted relationship with herself in the world in her writing.

I now understand that her earliest brain was formed through deprivations-traumas, and that her experiences along her continued development certainly through age five sent her course of development down a road different than mine went as a young child.  A consideration of these differences is not my concern today, because the most important place we can focus our attention is on what goes right or goes so very wrong at the very beginning of our earliest brain stage development as a brain’s foundation is built.

It is at these most important earliest brain developmental stages that the following information Schore presents matters the most.  PLEASE try to read this article.  Skip what doesn’t make sense if you must, but you WILL have some (what I call) BINGO! experiences as you read.  This information can change  how you think about yourself in the world, whether you experienced Trauma Altered Development or not.  It can change how you understand every other person you know in your life, including your infant-childhood caregivers.

Skip down immediately by scrolling to his page 22 and you will get the picture, literally, as Schore presents his visual about the nature of mother-infant emotional communication signaling.  Now you can go back and begin to read the text!  Genesis of the human brain.  Neuroscience in action.  Once we truly GET this information, especially those of us who were abused, maltreated, traumatized and CHANGED through early maltreatment, light will begin to shine on the most important facts about our being in the world.  GOOD LUCK in your reading!!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

CLICK ON THIS TITLE TO REACH THIS FULL ARTICLE:

EFFECTS OF A SECURE ATTACHMENT

RELATIONSHIP ON RIGHT BRAIN DEVELOPMENT,

AFFECT REGULATION, AND

INFANT MENTAL HEALTH

ALLAN N. SCHORE

Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences

University of California at Los Angeles School of Medicine

INFANT MENTAL HEALTH JOURNAL, Vol. 22(1–2), 7–66 (2001)

2001 Michigan Association for Infant Mental Health

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Please feel free to comment directly at the end of this post or on

+++++++

Your Page – Readers’ Responses

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+PRIMARY A-B-Cs — ATTACHMENT-BRAIN-CAREGIVER

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

To begin to understand my mother, how she treated me, and how her treatment of me changed me, I need to understand the most primary A-B-Cs – The patterns of Attachment our forming Brain had with our earliest Caregiver formed the foundation of our brain from which our self-in-the-world originates.

++++

Babies are born with the basic ‘floor plan’ of their brain already laid out.  All the regions of every human’s brain are in the same place, just as our other organs and limbs are.  A baby is also born with billions more neurons, or brain nerve cells, than will actually be needed in the brain building stages that follow birth.

Genetics in interaction with the uterine experience have already influenced early brain development before birth.  If the infant has not suffered damage-changes within its mother, at birth it has more than enough neurons for what comes next.  I think about my son, who is soon to be 25.  He was a Lego maniac from the first time he picked up one of those bright plastic little pieces at the age of three.  He eventually ended up with a foot locker packed with thousands and thousands of individual pieces (which his mother is requiring him to keep forever).

If he was even now in a Lego playing mood, he would find enough variety and type of piece to create just about anything his imagination could design.  Tear them apart, make something entirely different.  Whatever pieces he might not use in one design can be kept in reserve, recombined, used later, or never used at all.  But he has the choice of keeping them all, and keep them he does.

An infant’s brain growth and development does not work in quite this same way.  Humans are born with far more than enough neurons, and most of them are not specified in the beginning as to what region of the brain they will go to or what kind of neuron they will turn into according to what job they will eventually perform.  This is because brain building is a flexible process.  While it is intended that some of the overly abundant neurons will die, the plan is that as many of them as possible find their way into use as a best possible brain is built.

The kind of interactions and the nature of experiences an infant has within the world it was born into direct the process of body-brain building so that the resulting brain will be adapted in the best way possible for the conditions of the world the infant was born into.  This adaptive brain building process is in full motion as soon as an infant is born.

As I have said, humans are designed to receive, understand and respond to signals from within the environment in the form of communications.  A growing human brain detects signals and builds itself in partnership with the environment itself, an environment that is presented to the infant through the kinds of interactions it has with its earliest mothering caregiver.

++++

Most of us probably think of a brain as a wrinkled, soft, squishy organ that we would not want to hold in our hands.  Because it is probably the most important organ we have, Siegel’s following description of it might give us a better idea about what we are talking about:

“The brain has an estimated one hundred billion neurons, which are collectively over two million miles long.  Each neuron has an average of then thousand connections that directly link itself to other neurons.  Thus there are thought to be about one million billion of these connections, making it “the most complex structure, natural or artificial, on earth.” [he gives a reference here to Green et al, 1998, page 427]  A neuron sends an electrical impulse down its long axons; this releases a neurotransmitter at the space at the end, called a “synapse,” which then excites or inhibits the downstream neuron.  A synapse is the connection that functionally links neurons to one another.  Because of the spider-web-like interconnections, activation of one neuron can influence an average of ten thousand neurons at the receiving ends!  The number of possible “on-off” patterns of neuronal firing is immense, estimated as a staggering ten times ten one million times (ten to the millionth power).”  (page 13 in the writings of Dr. Daniel J. Siegel in his book The Developing Mind: How Relationships and the Brain Interact to Shape Who We Are (The Guilford Press, 1999))

++++

The firing patterns in a mother’s brain specifically activate similar firing patterns in her infant’s brain as all the adaptive neurons within it are ‘learning’ what to do in relationship to being alive in a body in the world.  As an infant grows, and its newly forming brain gets up and running, the infant will be able to both receive the signals its caregiver is sending accurately, but will also get better and better at sending its own signals back to her.

A safe and securely attached infant will have its own signals received accurately by its mother and as she sends them back to the infant through am accurate mirroring process, the infant begins to clarify and BECOME ITS OWN SELF in the world.  This signaling happens with patterns and rhythms that are instructing the infant’s neurons where to go, what job to do, how to link them together into circuits and networks during this process that is designed to create brain.

An infant is born with a brain blueprint, but it is the experiences it has with its early mothering caregiver that make brain building happen according to emotional information the mother gives to her infant during the critical development stages her infant’s brain goes through.  Brain building happens in predictable stages.  Just as a Jacuzzi cannot be placed in a sky scraper’s pent house before all the steel structural components have been put into place, a baby’s brain cannot ‘think’ in the way we think about thinking from the start of its life.  A brain has to be built that an infant-child can do its thinking with.

The way an infant receives signals from its mother happen through its basic senses in the same way we receive signals from our environment during our entire lifetime.  It might be hard to believe, but at birth an infant already knows its mother.  It knows the feel of her, the rhythms of her, the sound of her and is tuned to her smell and her touch from the moment it is born.  If a newborn is removed at birth from its mother it will experience grief detectable in the physiological responses its body will demonstrate.  Foster and adoptive parents can be trained to recognize the ‘symptoms’ of a newborn’s grieving stages as it passes through and completes them.

++++

Beginning even before birth communication signaling between and infant and its mother is already taking place.  It is through the increasingly more complex abilities an infant comes to have, through the brain development it experiences in interaction with the mother, that the brain takes its genetic potential complete with the mechanisms that tell the genes what to do, combines it with information coming into the infant from its environment, and grows all the basic brain regions and the operational connections through them.

This early brain growth happens as mother-infant communication signaling involves emotion.  It is through emotional interactions in this dyad, this connection between the two – mother and infant – through smell, touch, rhythm (prosody or the music of speech complete with pitch, loudness and tone), and most importantly through facial expressions that human brains are extremely well prepared to receive, recognize and respond back to.  Nature has specifically designed women-mothers to participate appropriately in these early required emotional interactions with infants.

Siegel writes (in the above mentioned book):

The primary ingredient of secure attachment experiences is the pattern of emotional communication between child and caregiver….The way the mind establishes meaning – the way it places value or significance on experience – is closely linked to social interactions.  This connection between meaning and interpersonal experience occurs because these two processes appear to be mediated via the same neural circuits responsible for initiating emotional processes.”  (page 6)

The foundation of an infant’s initial brain region growth and development happens through emotional communication with its mothering caregiver.  Done ‘best’ in secure attachment environments, a ‘best world possible’ emotionally regulated brain is built in, by and for a benevolent world.  In turn, a dysregulated, jumbled, mis-qued disorganized, disoriented pattern of instability, lack of predictability, without safe and secure emotional attachment experiences builds a very different infant brain that is adapted to a malevolent world.

All the early infant brain building that goes on is directed by the nature of its early emotional caregiver experiences.  The adaptive, growing brain slides its neurons around, tells them where to go, what to do, how to connect to one anther, where to build pathways, roads and superhighways in response to these early emotional interactions.  It is the critically important emotional-social area of the brain that grows first through these caregiver experiences.  It is this area of the brain, once built, that will primarily orchestrate how a person is in the world for their lifetime.  Remembering the importance of Siegel’s words from yesterday’s post about this area of the brain, I repeat them here:

The centrally located “limbic system” … plays a central role in coordinating the activity of higher and lower brain structures.  The limbic regions are thought to mediate emotion, motivation, and goal-directed behavior.  Limbic structures permit the integration of a wide range of basic mental processes, such as the appraisal of meaning, the processing of social experience (called “social cognition”), and the regulation of emotion.  This region also houses the medial temporal lobe (toward the middle, just to the sides of the temples), including the hippocampus, which is thought to play a central role in consciously accessible forms of memory.

The brain as a whole functions as an interconnected and integrating system of subsystems.  Although each element contributes to the functioning of the whole, regions such as the limbic system, with extensive input and output pathways linking widely distributed areas in the brain, may be primarily responsible for integrating brain activity.

When we look to understand how the mind develops, we need to examine how the brain comes to regulate its own processes.  Such self-regulation appears to be carried out in large part by these limbic regions.”  (pages 10-11 – bolding is mine)

++++

If an infant’s earliest mothering-caregiver interactions happen through safe and secure attachment experiences, this area of the brain will organize, integrate and regulate emotion, social interaction, meaning and activity for a ‘best’ world.  In unsafe and insecure environments, this area of the brain will grow itself a different way.

The nature of these early experiences create patterns in the brain that appear as representations of experience, and these ‘mental models’ expand through associations and connections – or through patterns of dissociations and disconnections — to affect how a person is in the world.  Our emotional regulatory abilities, our mental processes, our states of mind, our ability to transition between states of mind, the way we remember ourselves in the world, are all connected in their roots to how our infant emotional brain was formed at the time of our beginning.

Sigel:

“…different mental processes are organized within a state of mind.  These states allow disparate [fundamentally different] activities of the brain to become cohesive at a given moment in time.”  (page 7)

Through our earliest mothering-caregiver emotional experiences, as this area of our infant brain is forming, the trajectory our self-in-the-world will take is determined and set into motion.  Understanding how early infant attachment experiences build our brain gives us an accurate way to look at our self and others in the world as we come to understand the fundamental and profound affect these early experiences have on forming the regions, patterns, circuits and operation of our core brain areas.

In cases such as my mother’s, I can begin to understand that who she was on the adult end of her development cannot be disconnected from how she was formed to operate in the world from her beginnings.  Her brain, as does all of ours, formed itself in response to the kinds of mothering-caregiver interactions she had and did not have.  Obviously, her brain did not form in the ‘best way possible’ for the ‘best world possible’.  Her brain formed in adjustment to deprivation-trauma.

My mother’s case is an extreme one.  Yet, again, we are talking about degrees of deprivation-trauma and degrees of ability to adapt to it.  Once we begin to understand the power safe and secure early attachment has to form a ‘best brain’ we can also begin to understand how degrees of insecure, unsafe attachment experiences change the growing infant brain’s foundation into ‘something else’.

My mother’s brain was not built by safe and secure attachment in a benevolent world.  My mother became a ‘something else’.  No doubt about it.  I know this because I am her daughter.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Please feel free to comment directly at the end of this post or on

+++++++

Your Page – Readers’ Responses

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+THIS HONEST TRUTH: ME, MY 6-YEAR-OLD SELF AND MY MOTHER’S 1958 LETTERS

++++++++++++++++++++++

It takes courage for me to publish here this link (below) because I do not have any answers when it comes to my own ongoing, internal, personal experience with my childhood traumas with my mother.  I have returned to the task of transcribing my mother’s 1958 letters, a job that I left behind several months back.

My efforts TODAY to deal with further discovery in my mother’s letters of her beliefs about me as a six-year-old disintegrated me even further than they did last night when I first re-encountered her writing.  The internal process going on for me as contained here and in this link make me feel like I am dying, my guts torn out and strewn on the ground as Hitchcock’s birds fly at me to peck my eyes out.

I guess I could say, “This post may trigger” — it certainly triggered me:

*Age 6 – Jan. 1958 First Grade in Mother’s Letters

++++++++++++++++++++++

background information:

Diagnosis of Trauma and Abuse-Related Dissociative Symptom Disorders in Children and Adolescents

++++

This is what I wrote when I found that the first words of the first 1958 letter of my mother’s that I picked up to work on transcribing last night was about me:

I feel icky and contaminated as I start back to work on my mother’s letters, a job I abandoned awhile back because I was SICK of the memory of my mother.  These are the 1958 letters from the year I was 6, in first grade, the first year we were in Alaska.  By August 31, 1958 I turned seven and started second grade that fall.

My mother – with her twisted, tweaked, twilight borderline distorted view of the world – the one I grew up thinking was normal because I had no frame of reference to the contrary.

As soon as I begin work again with my mother’s letters I can feel conflict between knowing the truth NOW that I didn’t know for the first 30 years of my life, and my feelings of what, fear?  That I ‘should’ respect my mother, and “Who am I to make up all these bad things about her and slander her good name?”  Bad Linda.  Bad, Bad Linda.

Horse pucky.

These feelings are difficult to identify and to face head on because I have spent most of my life avoiding them.  It’s like getting caught in a time warp, reading that my father in January of 1958 just went out the door to start the car to warm it up and is coming back into the house in a minute to get the note my mother is writing so it can be mailed to my grandmother.  All dead, all of them dead now.  How, really, can a person criticize a dead person’s life?

What values of my own do I confront here?  They certainly aren’t around to care what I say about anything.  Is all that I have here before me in these tattered and tanning envelopes really nothing but the passing of time – soon to be 52 years of it with this particular batch of mother’s letters.

Yet it does matter.  These people’s lives formed mine, and I in turn formed my children’s lives.  We all just march on down the road of our lives leaving one little tiny, miniature less than an ant sized footprint along the pathway after the other.

Yet I know I am not far away from my own deep sadness as I transcribe my mother’s letters:  I wanted my parents to love me and they did not.  I want to reach my hands back through the passage of all this time gone by, grab them each by the shoulders as the big person I am now.  I want to shake them, looking them each straight in the eye.  My face would follow theirs closely if they tried to look away from me when I ask them, “Why?  Why could you not love me?  I am your CHILD!  Why did you HURT me?”

I never really was my parents’ child.  I was their hated stranger.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Please feel free to comment directly at the end of this post or on

+++++++

Your Page – Readers’ Responses

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+TO BE OR NOT TO BE A TRAUMA-CHANGED HUMAN — THE QUALITY OF MOTHERING HOLDS THE ABSOLUTE KEY

+++++

Early mothering-infant caregiver interactions build a human body-brain-mind-self from the foundation on up.  We cannot change the way Nature remembers to make a human being.  If Nature’s laws are broken, a surviving infant-child-adult will suffer the consequences from having to change its early physiological development in adjustment to deprivation-trauma for the rest of its life.

+++++++++++

I am again returning to the writings of Dr. Daniel J. Siegel in his book The Developing Mind: How Relationships and the Brain Interact to Shape Who We Are (The Guilford Press, 1999).

Siegel writes:

What are the mechanisms by which human relationships shape brain structure and function?  How is it possible for interpersonal experience – the interactions between two people – to affect something so inherently different as the activity of neurons?”  (page 9)

I have already laid out in my thinking that human infant-children have basic needs that are met through having their Universal Human Rights met as described in the December 12, 1989 United Nations General Assembly document from the Convention on the Rights of the Child.  Yesterday’s post describes my belief that mothers are ultimately responsible for the well-being of the children they bring into the world.  Just as mothers are biologically designed to carry and birth offspring, they are also biologically designed to provide all that is necessary for an infant to continue to develop in the best way possible most critically through the first year of an infant’s life.

If a mother cannot or chooses not to provide for the necessary memory-making processes her infant requires for its best development, another WOMAN can certainly provide these experiences to an infant under the age of one.  What an infant needs, as I will begin to clarify today, is MOTHERING.  I am not using the word ‘mothering’ interchangeably with ‘nurturing’, which is certainly something anyone can provide.  Mothering is based on the biological memory contained within our specie’s DNA that forms the structure of human-being-making.

An infant’s body, including its nervous system-brain, grows best under adequate care provided by its mother.  Next in line for an infant’s best care are other women who also have the ability to adequately meet the developmental needs of the infant.  As I will describe here, those needs are very specific.  The wonder of making a human from ‘scratch’ is that under ordinary circumstances, women have always known from the origins of our species how to meet the needs of infants.  It does not take a rocket scientist to tell us how to mother.  I believe if we have not experienced infant-child deprivation and trauma-related changes in our own development ourselves as women that we are automatically born with everything we need to raise our offspring right – and by right I mean in the best way possible.

Siblings and other children have, I believe, always been important in the early care of infant-children.  They can certainly be adequate for the job on some levels if they have also been built from conception in the best way possible.  But children cannot take over the job because it is an appropriately regulated brain within the mother than interacts with the developing brain of her infant that paves the way for all future development of her offspring.  It is the ‘interpersonal experiences’ an infant has with its mother (or other mothering female) that shape its early forming (foundational) body-brain.

Love between an infant and its father is no less important than mother-infant love.  Fathers are also important to the well-being of an infant’s development, but nature has designed their contribution (other than the obvious first one) to be in the role of provider and protector of the mother and the infant so that the earliest needs of growing humans can be met by women.  Men tend to excite and overstimulate infants.  They are not biologically designed for the early job of establishing all the nerve-growth factors that create a balanced, healthy brain and nervous system in a tiny person.

Fathers are naturally meant to participate actively with their offspring AFTER the first year of life at the time that an infant has grown a body-nervous system-brain (at about a year of age) that allows it to venture away from its mother further and further into the exciting, stimulating bigger world.  Before that time it is the primary safe and secure attachment an infant has with its mothering caregiver that builds the foundation for all growth and development that will follow.

++++

Over the millennia of human evolution mothering has always been a basic, critically important process that happened naturally.  Mothers were adequately mothered in their own development so that nothing interfered with their memory of how to mother, and they were naturally able to go on to have offspring of their own that they, in turn, adequately mothered.

I do not believe that women evolved to share the earliest infant interactional experiences with men.  Women evolved to share these experiences with other women.  Living in cultures that today isolate women from one another is contributing to the difficulties women are facing in being the best mothers they were naturally designed to be.  In today’s world it has become too easy for women to forget what mothering young infant-children is supposed to be like.  I think it is a pitiful symptom of the decline in the value our species has always placed on the mother-infant-child relationship that makes us now have to turn to neuroscience to tell us about the specifics of building a human being that we have always naturally known how to do.

Even though women are biologically prepared to mother, even those fundamental memories can be tampered with, changed and removed through interactions a human mother has with all those around her as her own DNA memories are telling her how to prepare herself for life in the world she is born into.  The more disconnected mothering becomes from its biological roots, the more complicated our return to mothering naturally becomes.

++++

It does no good whatsoever to sit around, whine and wring our hands when any problem appears that needs to be resolved.  If it takes an understanding of brain development to convince women that the mothering of their infant-child is the most important job they will ever do, then so be it.  If it takes an education in the importance of safe and secure attachment experiences before an infant is one year old to build a ‘best’ human body-brain, we better get to work.

If we were not adequately mothered ourselves, these regions that Siegel is describing (below) have already been altered during their early growth periods of our own infant-childhood in direct response to the deprivations-traumas we experienced during our own development.  Pay particular attention to the information Siegel is presenting on the limbic system.  This system is the main area of the brain being built by mother-infant interactional experiences from birth until age one – and is directed in its development by the degree of safe and secure attachment an infant has with its earliest, primary caregiver.

Siegel writes:

The brain is a complex system of interconnected parts.  The “lower structures” include those circuits of brainstem deep within the skull that mediate basic elements of energy flow, such as states of arousal and alertness and the physiological state of the body (temperature, respiration, heart rate).  At the top of the brainstem is the thalamus, an area that serves as a gateway for incoming sensory information and has extensive connections to other regions of the brain, including the neocortex, just above it.” (page 10)

Pausing for a moment, I will note here that human infants are not developed enough when they are born to be able to regulate or modulate much about themselves at all.  Their body can regulate respiration and heart rate, but they are not yet developed enough to even control their bodily temperature.  An infant is born with more fat cells on its back side to keep it warm, which works fine because adults naturally remember that holding a baby close to one’s body keeps its front side warmest!  Adult caregivers, especially the mothering ones, provide all the interactional experiences necessary to ‘train’ a baby during its development so that it can increasingly regulate everything about itself in the world.  This happens through natural processes – we hope.

Siegel continues, and we have to remember that he is describing brain areas and functions that develop within an infant-child during a succession of growth and developmental windows over time (note:  He wrote the following as one paragraph that I am breaking apart for ease of reading):

The “higher structures,” such as the neocortex at the top of the brain, mediate “more complex” information-processing functions such as perception, thinking, and reasoning.  These areas are considered to be the most evolutionarily “advanced” in humans and mediate the complex perceptual and abstract representations that constitute our associational thought processes.”

[My note:  These regions are formed later in an infant-child’s developmental journey.  The neocortex is not fully developed in humans until between the ages of 25-30.  However, as Dr. Martin Teicher notes, traumatized and abused children’s neocortex actually “atrophies early” and never finishes its course of development properly.  For these survivors, the best growth and development of their neocortex has been robbed from them during their Trauma Altered Development that also affected the development of all the other regions – and the nervous system and immune system – of the survivor during all their preceding critical developmental stages.]

The centrally located “limbic system” – including the regions called the orbitofrontal cortex, anterior cingulate, and amygdala – plays a central role in coordinating the activity of higher and lower brain structures.  The limbic regions are thought to mediate emotion, motivation, and goal-directed behavior.  Limbic structures permit the integration of a wide range of basic mental processes, such as the appraisal of meaning, the processing of social experience (called “social cognition”), and the regulation of emotion.  This region also houses the medial temporal lobe (toward the middle, just to the sides of the temples), including the hippocampus, which is thought to play a central role in consciously accessible forms of memory.

The brain as a whole functions as an interconnected and integrating system of subsystems.  Although each element contributes to the functioning of the whole, regions such as the limbic system, with extensive input and output pathways linking widely distributed areas in the brain, may be primarily responsible for integrating brain activity.

When we look to understand how the mind develops, we need to examine how the brain comes to regulate its own processes.  Such self-regulation appears to be carried out in large part by these limbic regions.”  (pages 10-11 – bolding is mine)

++++

If I cut the fluff, I can simply say that a screwed up, dysregulated mother will ‘download’ her screwed up, dysregulated limbic brain directly into her infant’s growing brain – especially the earliest forming limbic structures —  from birth to age one.  It is within the attachment, caregiving interactions a mother has with her infant that the infant’s brain is formed.  These interactions FORM the infant brain through the ongoing interactional experiences that an infant has with its mother.

Evolution has determined that this is the way growing a body-brain happens.  No infant is ever given the choice to say, “Gee whiz!  There’s something wrong with my mother!  She has an awfully dysregulated brain and she is forcing me to grow one, too!  Help!  Somebody get me a different mother NOW!”

Nope.  Doesn’t happen this way unless someone external to the mother-infant relationship is smart enough to helpfully intervene (and this usually means consciously informed in today’s world) because they know that a dysregulated-brained mother is creating a replica of her own brain as she builds the brain of her infant.

++++

Siegel continues, and this information is critically important.  Any of us who have ‘anxiety’ related disturbances in our body suffered changes in our Hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis (HPA axis responsible for regulating the stress response), as it was formed in us through combinations of early deprivation-trauma to these developing regions:

The limbic and lower regions of the brain also house the hypothalamus and the pituitary, which are responsible for physiological homeostasis [Linda note:  or feedback control.  Our earliest attachment experiences build into our body a memory of how to BE in relationship to our center point of balanced equilibrium.  This point is set at CALM in the best safe and secure attachment environment, and is set somewhere else if we experience deprivation-trauma during this early developmental stage.], or bodily equilibrium, established by way of neuroendocrine activity (neuronal firing and hormonal release).  Stress is often responded to by the “hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical (HPA) axis, and this system can be adversely affected by trauma.  This neuroendocrine axis, along with the autonomic nervous system (regulating such things as heart rate and respiration) and the neuroimmune system (regulating the body’s immunological defense system) are ways in which the function of the brain and body are intricately intertwined.”  (page 11)

[My note:  Autonomic Nervous System – ANS: Remember sympathetic GO arm and parasympathetic STOP arm “pair a brakes” as I have written about it earlier in relation to the age one onset of the physiological experience of shame.  I also believe, and I have tracked my thoughts through research, that it is the developing immune system itself that orchestrates through signals to the growing infant whether or not the world is a safe, secure benevolent place to be living in or not.  If the immune system, whose job it is to protect and defend us down to our most basic molecular level,  identifies deprivation-trauma, it signals the entire cascade of Trauma Altered Development to occur.]

++++

I will close today’s post by adding the following description Siegel presents about brain development as it applies most importantly to an infant’s early body-brain development before the age of one:

The activation of neural pathways directly influences the way connections are made within the brain.  Though experience shapes the activity of the brain and the strength of neuronal connections throughout life, experience early in life may be especially crucial in organizing the way the basic structures of the brain develop.  For example, traumatic experiences at the beginning of life may have more profound effects on the “deeper” structures of the brain, which are responsible for basic regulatory capacities and enable the mind to respond later to stress.  Thus we see that abused children have elevated baseline and reactive stress hormone levels.”  (page 13 – bolding is mine)

Researchers seem forced to use the term “may be” in their writings to avoid some kind of potential peer sanction against their own thinking.  There is nothing “may be” about how early experience IS “especially crucial in organizing the way the basic structures of the brain develop.”  What I hope to convey today is how profound and permanent adaptations to deprivation-trauma are in terms of infant body-brain-nervous system-immune system development.

Early attachment interactional experiences that an infant has with its primary mothering caregiver tells all the mechanisms that govern its early development HOW to build themselves in preparation for either a benevolent, safe and secure world or for an unsafe, insecure and malevolent one.  Once all these critical regulatory structural systems have been built – with or without the need for changes – they will operate on an implicit memory unconscious level, guiding a person’s future interactions from within the core of their body, for the rest of their lives.

If infant mothering is inadequate so that deprivations and trauma are allowed to occur during first-year critical growth stages, Trauma Altered Development is GOING to occur.  There is no possible way it can’t.  And there is no possible way to consider Trauma Altered Development without considering the quality of mothering an infant receives because it is those interactions an infant has with its mothering caregiver that either tell an infant’s DNA to respond to trauma or not to.

If deprivation-trauma does exist in an infant-child’s interactions with its mothering caregiver, this ONLY happens because the same kind of deprivation-trauma was built into the infant’s mother at the start of her life.  This is the way dysregulated trauma-based patterns of ‘being in the world’ topple on down through the generations.  It is in this way, and through these processes that the malevolent conditions of the world are signaled through direct mother-infant communications so that Trauma Altered Development –built right into the forming infant body-brain — can change a growing human into one that can survive in a malevolent world both in the present as well as in the future.

Trauma and the memory of the experience of trauma causes physiological developmental changes because they both build the traumatized infant’s body at the same time they build themselves into it.  This is not like knitting a sweater where an identified mistake can be fixed by unraveling the sweater back to the mistake and correcting it, so a person can start over again and do things right.

Trauma-related adaptive physiological changes that happen within a developing human infant cannot be corrected later.  Any future efforts made to give such a survivor a ‘better life’ have to happen WITH and WITHIN the body-brain that was altered in the first place.  Humans do not REALLY get a second chance to mother an infant right, and we need to drop the illusion that we do.

We have no power to change the way Nature remembers how to make a human being.  The way we form, through mothering-infant social-attachment interactions happens according to Nature’s laws.  If those laws are broken through unsafe, insecure, malevolent early experiences, the developing body-brain of the infant will build all that information into its most basic, fundamental trauma-changed structures.  Survivors of infant-child abuse and maltreatment are left to live with and within a trauma-altered body-brain for the rest of their lives.  I kid you not.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

PLEASE NOTE:  Do not take anything I say as a reason to alter any ongoing treatment, therapy or medication you are receiving.  Consult with your provider if you find something in my writing that brings questions to your mind regarding your health and well-being.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Please feel free to comment directly at the end of this post or on

+++++++

Your Page – Readers’ Responses

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+GIVE US THE FACTS SO WE CAN BUILD OUR BETTER LIVES – NOW!

++++++++++++++++++++

We had to negotiate our development through treacherous waters from the time we were born.  We deserve to learn how to negotiate our way through the calmer ones now.

Yes, the changes that happened to us through our Trauma Altered Development in our malevolent infant-childhoods can continue to cascade into bigger and bigger problems in our adulthoods, but I believe a big part of OUR problem is that we find no one around us that truly understands what these changes really mean in our lives, how they affect us in real-time, or how we can begin to live a life of increased well-being AS the changed people we are.

We have to change the track of our thinking about our situation from beginning to end so we can find solutions that truly and helpfully apply to US.  It is within our power as survivors, with the help of accurate research that applies specifically to us, to do so.

From Teicher’s article:

In our hypothesis, postnatal neglect or other maltreatment serves to elicit a cascade of stress responses that organizes the brain to develop along a specific pathway selected to facilitate reproductive success and survival in a world of deprivation and strife.  This pathway, however, is costly as it is associated with an increased risk of developing serious medical and psychiatric disorders and is unnecessary and maladaptive in a more benign environment.”

Article posted yesterday is here:  *SYMTPOMS: 120909 Scan of Teicher’s Research – Trauma Altered Development Paper

++++++++++++++++++++

In further consideration of the word ‘symptom’ it was important for me to realize that the word itself is only talking about ‘happenings’ within the body.  The subjective report we give to ourselves and others about what it is like to be in-with a body is a report of how we experience what happens to us.

Main Entry: hap·pen

Function: intransitive verb

Inflected Form(s): hap·pened; hap·pen·ing \ˈhap-niŋ, ˈha-pə-\

Etymology: Middle English, from hap

Date: 14th century

1 : to occur by chance —often used with it <it so happens I’m going your way>
2 : to come into being or occur as an event, process, or result <mistakes will happen>
3 : to do, encounter, or attain something by or as if by chance <I happen to know the answer>
4 a : to meet or discover something by chance <happened upon a system that worked — Richard Corbin> b : to come or go casually : make a chance appearance <he might happen by at any time>
5 : to come especially by way of injury or harm

I could possibly accept that what happened to me during my extremely abusive infant-childhood of trauma happened to me by chance, but in reference to the work of Dr. Martin Teicher’s research group (as contained in the above link), how my little body changed in its development in interaction with this trauma did NOT happen to me by chance.

Teicher’s work clearly anticipates what I believe future research will show, that how a human infant-child changes in its development within a malevolent early world does not happen to it by chance.  The changes that we experience are evolutionarily connected to the history of resiliency factors possible within our species that allowed us to ‘go on being’ within world environments that were far from good, benign or benevolent ones.

++++

When I began my own research in my attempt to understand how what happened to me as my mother abused me caused things to happen within me in my early development as a consequence, I first encountered neuroscientific writings that described what seemed to be area of damage after area of damage in my brain-body-mind-self.  The picture that began to appear and form itself about these happenings became bleaker and grimmer the more I studied.  It wasn’t until I discovered the work of Teicher’s research group that I finally found hope.  When I found this research it was as if a brilliant light suddenly turned on that allowed me to begin to understand the entire big picture in an entirely different way.

The article at the above link was published in 2003, and does not directly discuss epigenetic changes because that research is just beginning to clarify how early trauma during infant-child development changes how our genes express themselves.  Epigenetics is a new and rich field of study.  It is also a critical one that will eventually allow us to understand that nature has clear and direct mandates and intentions about how to survive in a malevolent world that epigenetic processes signal to our little body on its most basic molecular, genetic level.  This new information will further inform our understandings about what happens during early trauma that allows a growing body to adapt within malevolent environments through epigenetic forces.

++++

I believe that researchers who continue to pursue serious considerations of what happens during Trauma Altered Development will find that all these changes happen according to preestablished patterns of possibility within a human infant-child.  These changes represent our species’ range of possible resiliency factors.  I believe researchers will eventually discover how each and every one of the changes we experience are directly connected to the operation of our immune system.

Our immune system, operating down to our most basic cellular level, is involved with all our defense, protection and healing processes.  These process are anything but random.  The end goal of immune system actions is always about keeping us alive – either within the best or within the worst environments we happen to be living in.

I believe there are underlying patterns through which Trauma Altered Development happens during infant-childhood.  They are not willy-nilly.  They are not random.  The processes that occur can be detected, and the wisdom of an adapted, altered, and trauma-adjusted body will eventually not only be understood in terms of natural physiological wisdom, but will also be able to be predicted.

I also unfortunately do not believe that it is in the best interests of our current medical model to channel the kind of support into Trauma Altered Development that we need in our adult lifetime to make the best use possible of the information that this arena of research could provide to us about what happened to us because of early trauma and maltreatment, how that trauma changed us, and what we can best do about it today in our lives.  We are left down here at the grassroots level to explore our own reality.

While we might not have the power to alter current directions in research, we do have the power to rethink our own experience of being alive in one of these trauma changed bodies.  ANYTHING that we might report to our self as a ‘symptom’ can be re-thought in terms of its connection to the resiliency factors that allowed us to survive.

Research concerns itself with what is common among people on the larger level.  We each live in our body in a very personal way.  What is happening to us in our body and in our life HAPPENS because of what was done to us and how those happenings caused our changes to happen!  Teicher’s article refers to “a cascade of neurobiological events” that happens because “early severe stress and maltreatment” produced them.

I think again about Galileo’s brilliant work with the physics of motion.  Something that falls increases in speed the further if falls.  Cascades, like water cascading over Niagara Falls, involve this kind of action in motion.  Once our body in infant-childhood began to make adjustments to trauma, the following changes increased proportionately.  The early the traumas happened, the worse they were, the longer they happened, the more complex and pervasive the cascade of changes became.

While I certainly did not, obviously, have the worst childhood imaginable, it was certainly down there near the bottom.   My own infant-childhood was certainly among those that would INCLUDE Trauma Altered Development rather than exclude it.  If I had been able to find anything like adequate ‘helpful’ information within current medical model thinking as it might have applied to what truly happened to me, I certainly would not have been motivated to begin my own search for information specific to my circumstance.

Thankfully I am living in an era where the developmental-changes information is beginning to appear, and is appearing where I can get to it – of course ONLY because of the internet.  I will certainly not placidly accept current mainstream medical model thinking about how my so-called ‘symptoms’ fit into any current ‘mental illness’ model because I understand that these models are missing at least 98% of the facts about how what happened to me changed my development and how those changes created me to be a different evolutionarily altered person today.

++++

Have you ever watched birds in springtime searching the world for bits of material they can carry away in their beaks to build a safe and secure nest for their offspring?  The body we all have to live in is the equivalent of our nest.  We can use every single tiny bit of helpful information we can find to improve the quality of our body-nest.

Current medical model thinking about our survivor ‘symptoms’ treats only the ‘symptoms’ because very few people are factually identifying what bird the feathers of our symptoms actually originated from.  As long as we continue to apply misguided misinformation about how what happened to us in our malevolent childhood affects what happens to us today, we are following along on an old pathway that does not really apply to us.

I have a memory as I write today.  Years ago on a warm northern Minnesota spring day I drove out alone into the woods along an abandoned narrow logging trail until I reached a spot where the beavers had built a dam that so flooded the road I could not pass by it.  At the same time I knew I could not clear the road from water enough that I could drive through on this particular day, I considered the future.

I spent the entire day playing in the water.  I removed the sticks and logs of that dam one by one so the water could rush in full force across the road thinking that perhaps if enough water could pass through that the dropping water level would free the road for my next spring’s travel.  Of course that wasn’t logically possible.  Whatever I did to thwart the beaver’s plans for the area on this day would immediately be remedied by them as soon as I turned my car around and left.

It would have taken a huge crowd of people working from the beginning of this stream to the end of it to remove the dams each step of the way in order for that water to return to the course of its natural, unblocked flow.  But why fight the beavers?  Why not just let beavers do what beavers tend to do and simply find another way to pass through the woods?

After all, there’s no way to reason with beavers any more than it is possible to reason with medical model thinkers who have no real intention of altering the way they do business.  That the dams they create do nothing for us but block us from our true means of healing is not their problem.  We are free as survivors to find out the truth of how what happened to us changed us and to find our own alternative way through the woods. 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

PLEASE NOTE:  Do not take anything I say as a reason to alter any ongoing treatment, therapy or medication you are receiving.  Consult with your provider if you find something in my writing that brings questions to your mind regarding your health and well-being.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Please feel free to comment directly at the end of this post or on

+++++++

Your Page – Readers’ Responses

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+’SYMP-TOM’ – ‘WITH-BODY’: WE ARE CHANGED PEOPLE, NOT ‘SICK’ ONES

++++++++++++++++

When I write about Trauma Altered Development (TAD) for survivors of extreme, severe infant-child maltreatment in a malevolent environment, I am not making this up.  We must empower ourselves by knowing the truth.

I have spent the better part of the past 48 hours thinking about the word ‘symptom’ in an effort to understand how those of us who suffered from enough early trauma to have TAD must evidently ‘display’ enough similar ‘symptoms’ to end up fitting ‘mental illness’ profiles that match ‘diagnostic categories’.

I KNOW there is something wrong with this picture!!

Yesterday I did a basic Google search for this two word combination, ‘mental symptom’ and received seven million, two hundred and thirty responses.

Today I did a basic Google search for ‘trauma altered development’ and received six million nine hundred and sixty responses.

I believe I am trying to think my way through a very big problem with very little intellectual light to guide me.

++++

The word ‘symp-tom’ came into modern English in its present form from Greek in 1541.  The prefix part of the word ‘sym’ means ‘with, together with’ and the suffix part of the word ‘tom’ relates to ‘body’ (as in ‘ana-tom-y’).  I know nothing about the Greek language, so I am left simply trying to put together what I think when I consider the English word ‘symptom’ with what it really might mean (see bottom of this post).

++++

I spent my entire afternoon yesterday searching online for a connection between ‘symptom’ and concepts of medicine.  My search took me backwards in time 5000 years as I looked for the largest ‘tree trunk’ of thinking about medicine in ancient cultures the world over from which any modern day thinking on ‘symptoms’ might have originated.  The thoughts and links I collected yesterday are contained together at *SYMPTOMS: 120809 working notes, and represent what I call ‘interactive thinking’.  These notes are not – yet – even placed into a linear timeline because I am still thinking!  It is clear that the Greeks did not ‘invent medicine’!

The word ‘symptom’ seems to refer to the subjective experience of describing how it is to be within and with one’s body.  It says nothing about what anyone does with that information.  If we use the symptoms that a person reports to place them into any ‘diagnostic category’, physically or ‘mentally’, this happens entirely based on outsider thinking about what ‘bird’ the ‘feather’ of the symptom might be connected to in its origins.

If 100 separate groups of people were to examine the same ‘fallen feather’ (symptom) in an effort to determine what kind of bird it originated from, if they do not all have enough of the right kind of information, they will not all come to the same conclusion.

When those of us who experienced severe trauma and maltreatment during our critical infant-child growth and developmental stages attempt to describe our subjective experience of what it is like to live in and with our body that was forced to adapt through our Trauma Altered Development, what is taken as our ‘symptoms’ leave us only with the option of being stigmatized, labeled, and assigned to a ‘mental illness’ diagnostic category (usually more than one).

It would be a massive understatement to say that at a minimum at least 50% of so-called ‘mentally ill’ or ‘behaviorally disturbed’ people suffered from Trauma Altered Development.  If that minimum of 50% of us were to be simply removed from any consideration of these diagnosis, where would that leave the field of ‘mental’ and ‘behavioral’ so-called ‘health’ professionals?  To put it nicely, they would be left in a quandary of professional disarray.

Our current medical model would rather all survivors rather than the ‘experts’ be left in a quandary and in disarray.  I started my online interactive thinking yesterday by considering what those who held power during his time, as implemented through the Inquisition, did to Galileo in the 1630s.  His radical-thinking book about the position and movement of the earth in relation to the sun was banned by the Catholic Church for over 200 years!  How well does that kind of power-over-information process continue to operate today for anyone who truly challenges contemporary thought regarding the misinformation applied toward anyone who is considered ‘mentally ill’ in our society?

++++

The work of today’s developmental neuroscientists is giving us enough new information about the consequences of severe early infant-child maltreatment through Trauma Altered Development to challenge current medical model ‘mental health’ thinking in an equally challenging way that Galileo’s findings challenged the whole conception of the arrangement of the cosmos held by the Church nearly 400 years ago.

Although the work of Dr. Martin Teicher and his Harvard research group is based on an accumulation of research done by many, many people, it is to Teicher’s publication that I point my writing today.  This single article changed my entire life when I found it because it changed how I ‘am with my body’ as a Trauma Altered Development infant-child abuse survivor.

I hope the scanned pages of this article presented here today for readers’ general education comes through on your computer clear enough to read.  I realize the style and content of the writing will probably be difficult and unfamiliar, but read as much of it as you can.  Google search brain regions and terms that are foreign to you.

The information presented in this article, when taken seriously and understood, has the power to completely change the way we consider TAD ‘symptom’ consideration because this information is about the REAL ‘bird’ the ‘feathers’ of our symptoms came from.

The current medical model of ‘mental health’ can no longer be considered to be the center of our conceptual universe regarding ‘symptoms’.  Human resiliency factors that allow a human infant-child to adapt its body-brain-mind-self to malevolent traumatic conditions during critical growth and development must take its place.  It is time to move out of the Dark Ages-Middle Ages in our thinking.

We do not have ‘mental illness’ symptoms.  We are Trauma Altered Development people:

*SYMTPOMS: 120909 Scan of Teicher’s Research – Trauma Altered Development Paper

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

‘Sym’ or ‘syn’ as a prefix:

Main Entry: syn-

Variant(s): or sym-

Function: prefix

Etymology: New Latin, from Greek, from syn with, together with

1 : with : along with : together <synclinal> <sympetalous>
2 : at the same time <synesthesia>

++

Main Entry: symptom

Function: noun

Etymology: Late Latin symptomat-, symptoma, from Greek symptōmat-, symptōma happening, attribute, symptom, from sympiptein to happen, from syn- + piptein to fall — more at feather

Date: 1541

1 a : subjective evidence of disease or physical disturbance; broadly : something that indicates the presence of bodily disorder b : an evident reaction by a plant to a pathogen
2 a : something that indicates the existence of something else <symptoms of an inner turmoil> b : a slight indication : trace

synonyms see sign

++

symptom

1. A characteristic sign or indication of the existence of something else.
2. A sign or an indication of disorder or disease, especially when experienced by an individual as a change from normal function, sensation, or appearance.
3. Etymology: from about 1541, earlier sinthoma (1398), from Medieval Latin (c.700-c.1500) sinthoma, “symptom of a disease”; from Late Latin (c.300-c.700) symptoma, from Greek symptoma (genitive symptomatos), “a happening, an accident, a disease”; from the stem of sympiptein, “to befall”; from syn-, “together” + piptein, “to fall”. Spelling was altered in English by Middle French (c.1400-c.1600) and Late Latin forms.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Please feel free to comment directly at the end of this post or on

+++++++

Your Page – Readers’ Responses

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+THOUGHTS ON THE TRIGGER POINT OF SHAME

++++

I have the advantage of trying to work my way through trauma related information using my own experience as a basis for what I know, rather than being locked into any established patterns of thinking about either trauma or the so-called ‘mental illnesses’ that are directly connected to Trauma Altered Development (TAD).   I am writing a ‘forensic autobiography’.  That means I write from the perspective of being a ‘confessional’ rather than from being a ‘professional’.  I am free to think any way I want to about the topic of trauma as it concerns me and others like me.

I try to understand what the developmental, attachment, and neuroscience experts say about the topic of TAD, but I am certain that if I line up my conclusions on the topic against these expert findings we will not always match point by point.

I want to talk today – again – about how trauma influences our core development as infant-child abuse survivors.  If our earliest caregiver interactions were not safe and secure, our development was altered from the start.

The experience of shame, as I have written before, is a very real physiological Autonomic Nervous System response to explorations within our early environment that caused us to experience conflict – rupture either with or without repair – with our early caregivers.  If there was no serious rupture (we were in agreement with our caregivers about our self in our environment), or there were ruptures that were met with repair through the appropriate actions of our early caregivers, the “GO” and “STOP” balance within our growing Autonomic Nervous System (sympathetic arm = GO, parasympathetic arm = STOP (pair a brakes)) developed optimally and well in a balanced, ‘ordinary’ way.

These ‘shame’ interactions are always based on the experiences prior to the age of one either in a benevolent or malevolent early caregiver environment that has already by this age built our growing brain, nervous system, body and earliest experience of self in a particular direction.  If these interactions were benevolent, a different body-brain-growing mind and self is forming than would be one that is forming under malevolent conditions.

We have to begin to REALLY understand how profoundly our experiences within our earliest caregiver environment affect us – permanently.  Once we are one year old, our development has already been profoundly directed by the kinds of experiences we have had with our caregivers, primarily with our mother.  It is on this earliest foundation that all other experiences will be processed within our little growing body.

By the time we grow a body-brain that is physically developed enough to be able to experience SHAME at one year of age, the course of our development has already been determined – either within and for a safe, secure, trauma-free benevolent world, or for the opposite.

++++

I mention this today in following my post of yesterday where I described my opinion of our nation as not being completely pro the human rights of children.  The ability to optimally experience shame in a growing body already by the age of one, I believe, is directly tied to how we experience any later event that involves conflict, consciousness, conscience and choice.

I believe the earliest caregiver interactions we have, mostly benevolent or malevolent, color the development of our personality.  Experts still suspect that personality is primarily influenced by our genetics.  However, developmental, attachment and neuroscientists are rapidly uncovering the facts about how our earliest experiences actually tell our genes what to do.  Given these new and extremely important findings, we can no longer ever assume that anyone’s personality follows the same developmental pathways if everyone is not raised with the same Universal Human Rights guaranteed.  Any violation of basic human needs for development, as conveyed through our understandings about basic human rights, causes Trauma Altered Development (TAD) to occur.

Our national personality is built upon the personalities of all the individuals that are a part of the whole.  Because we are a democracy, the most obvious personality we show to the world becomes the personality of the majority of our members.  Each of our own individual personalities, in turn, were built upon a combination of our personal genetics as they manifested themselves within either a primarily safe and secure early environment or within a traumatic one.

If early attachment is not safe and secure, some degree of trauma is present because fundamental universal human rights were not guaranteed.  We are talking humans here.  Humans have basic PHYSIOLOGICAL needs for our optimal development that create us – in an interaction between our genes and the quality of our early environment – to end up being a certain way in the world.

++++

America prides itself on being a nation of individualists, choosing to consider that within the perhaps one percent of our genes that make us different from one another there is enough individual potential for differences that it outweighs the 99% of our genes that we share in common as members of our social human species.  I suspect, however, that it is only when early developmental needs are met through the application of human universal rights that the development of the foundational 99% of our shared genetic material can manifest itself optimally that the remaining 1% that provides us the buffet of individual differences can grow, develop and shine among us.

If basic human needs are not met in a safe and secure early environment primarily free of trauma (without ruptures for which there are not adequate and appropriate repair) as described within the recognition of basic human rights, the 99% of us has to take a course through Trauma Altered Development that means we have been forced to adjust to the trauma in a way that limits our ability to be far more of our unique, different self as adults.

Early traumatic, unsafe, insecure and malevolent environments seem to me to narrow the ‘channel’ through which we can pass through our early body-brain-mind-self developmental stages – and still survive.  One by one, I can think about everyone I have ever met who suffered from a malevolent early childhood and begin to see how the patterns among them-us-me become more alike in fundamental ways than they are different.

If I simply look at the so-called ‘personality disorders’ that researchers are now finding are nearly ALWAYS tied in their origins to early infant-child abuse and trauma, the end result makes these people enough alike that they can be grouped into ‘functioning categories’ according to the ‘symptoms’ that they demonstrate in their continued lives.

If I look just at three particular people, I see how Histrionic Personality Disorder, Narcissistic Personality Disorder, and Borderline Personality Disorder lie on a continuum of personality alteration that created these people to be different than I believe they would have been had their Child Rights been guaranteed so that they would have been able to grow up without Trauma Altered Development.

The very best scenario for human growth and development occurs because of development that happens without the mediating and CHANGING affects of trauma.  Only when Children’s Rights are guaranteed within safe and secure environments can a body-brain-mind-self grow up to be free – and by that I mean, free to be MOST flexible and creative throughout their lives in their actions and responses to every life experience (change) that they encounter.

Trauma Altered Development means that we have been forced to sacrifice aspects of our own autonomous development.  We are forced to be more alike than different because SURVIVAL itself has specific requirements that need to be met.  If we are exposed to overwhelming danger, threat and trauma during our early development, our specie’s resiliency factors from within our bodies will be forced into activation.  If the threat to our infant-child well-being endangers our body-brain-mind-self on the most basic levels, the Trauma Altered Development we experience will simply turn us primarily into SURVIVORS    rather into the most unique, flexible, creative original beings that we had the capacity to become.

To the degree that trauma changes a developing infant-child so that they can survive, to that degree will conscious choice and aware decision making be removed from them – unless and until these survivors can learn what the physiological trauma-changes were, how they affect us, and how we can now FORCE ourselves to become increasingly more conscious in our lives.

Non-trauma-altered people who were not forced to physiologically adapt to early traumas naturally end up with a fuller buffet of consciousness – including the ability to empathize, use a broadly built Theory of Mind to understand themselves in relationship to others in the world, and filter their experience through an aware conscience.  They simply have more choices about how to be in the world.

Of course, these non-trauma developed people can choose to be total jerks if they want to be.  Yet we know that a staggeringly high percentage of our nation’s criminal population suffered from Trauma Altered Development in malevolent childhoods.  Compared to people with Trauma Altered Development, the range of potential choices for non-trauma altered people appears to be almost infinite.

The feedback-feedforward information gathering and response loops within the body-brain-mind-self of a non-traumatized infant-child compared to a traumatized one form differently.  When I think about optimal development using the image of the infinity sign, non-trauma development creates an ever expanding, fully operational flow of life force along that “8” pathway.

The more an individual is forced to apply survival-based physiological changes during their infant-child development in the midst of trauma, the smaller the “8” pathway becomes.  In cases such as my mother’s was, the “8” simply broke so that she was left with the repetitive patterns of “0” only, living her life without the ability to allow incoming information to come in without it having to be processed entirely through the filer of the damage she suffered in her development through trauma.  My mother was not allowed to become the fully unique, thriving, creative, flexible person she COULD have become had she not been forced to physiologically adapt in order to survive during her developmental stages as an infant-child.

++++

The physiological crisis point within our human body-brain-mind-self as we interact with others of our species is at the SHAME point.  No matter how we choose to recognize this point, no matter what word we choose to apply to this very real physiological point in the operation of our Autonomic Nervous System (ANS), it is at this SHAME point that we are notified that there has been a rupture in need of repair between ourselves and others around us.  The SHAME point is where the “GO” and the “STOP” within our body-brain-mind-self happens.  It is at this point that negotiation can happen successfully – or not.

It seems entirely possible to me that this SHAME point is where the two circles of the “8” infinity sign meet one another.  In cases such as my mother’s, it is at this point that she broke and was left with “0”, unable to negotiate herself as a being in relationship not only to others, but also in relationship to her own self.  She lost the ability to consciously identify herself in a complex world of shifting realities.

My mother operated from the extremely limited survival-based point of automatic pilot only.  She could not flexibly and creatively, openly or consciously consider options to solving conflicts because everything about her centered on NOT feeling shame because she could not tolerate it.  When an infant-child’s environment is so unstable, when their basic human needs-rights are not met, when survival becomes the ONLY option, it means that the patterns of rupture without either repair or HOPE of repair have so signaled the developing little person of danger in a malevolent world that all but the most very basic, primitive options have been allowed.

++++

The problem with overwhelming trauma is that it disturbs the rupture-repair pattern of checks and balances that allows life to continue going on in anything like a normal or ordinary way.  The problem with overwhelming trauma during our infant-child developmental stages is that we are forced to find a way to survive at the same time we have the most limited resources we will have in our lifetime.  Our only option was, in effect, to steal from our own inner bank of resources in order to survive.  This causes the problem to be built right into our developing body-brain-mind-self because we are then depleted from the inside out.

The point of surviving trauma is to eliminate its effects on us.  If we have no power to eliminate its effects (think here, little tiny person) then the next best thing we can do is eliminate our awareness of the experience of being in a state of ongoing trauma that we cannot escape from.  We have no option except to escape on the inside.

Recovery from trauma post-infant-childhood means that we ‘return’ to a normal or near normal state which happens when the rupture that trauma created becomes repaired.  There must be adequate resources available to allow repair to take place so that life can “GO” on, one way or the other.  In the case of Trauma Altered Development during infant-childhood, the resources had to be found within the child itself because they were not available from the outside.

I do not believe it will be much longer before we understand completely that nearly all of what we call ‘dysfunctional behavior’ including ‘mental illness’ is a result of overwhelming trauma during infant-childhood developmental stages that causes survivors to steal from their own inner storehouse of resources at a time when having to do so – in order to stay alive – robs them of the capacity to later experience a full, healthy, flexibly adaptive, creative best-developed-self.

It is for this reason, if for no other, that a guarantee of Child Rights becomes such a critically important factor.  When a child has its fundamental human rights provided, it will not be forced to use up its own internal resources in order to survive.  Those resources HAVE TO COME from the outside of the child.  That is what human childhood is – a developmental period of growing and expanding ability to sustain oneself in the world.  In order for an infant-child to develop optimally, its needs must be attended to and met during these stages of dependency.  If those needs are not met from the outside, Trauma Altered Development will occur, or the infant-child will die.

It is the responsibility of all adults to ensure that all of a child’s rights are guaranteed and protected.  Nature has designed humans so that appropriate and adequate adult caregiving of infants and children is our specie’s primary, number one resiliency factor.  We must lift the yoke of stigma off of the survivors of infant-child neglect, abuse and trauma and place it instead on all the adults in the society surrounding our little ones that allowed this malevolent treatment and trauma to happen to them in the first place.

It is on this level that I place responsibility and accountability on our nation when I say “SHAME on you!”  Either we intend to STOP neglecting our responsibility to our nation’s children or we don’t.  Either we intend to repair the rupture in the fabric of our society that allows the basic rights of children to be violated, or we do not.

If we choose to GO on letting traumas happen to our little ones that is within our society’s power to STOP, then we must realize that the Trauma Altered Development that will happen to these maltreated and traumatized infant-children will change them on their most primary, physiological level — as they are forced to take from inside of themselves what they need in order to survive — because the adults in their world were not there to help them.  Having to do so will change the degree of well-being for these survivors for the rest of their lives.

When the trigger point of shame is touched, it is time to examine conscience and to choose a course of action.  This is true for individuals and for the societies they are a part of.  In cases such as my mother’s, these abilities were removed from her through trauma that caused her Trauma Altered Development.  Is this same kind of pattern also contained within our nation?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Please feel free to comment directly at the end of this post or on

+++++++

Your Page – Readers’ Responses

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

+AMERICANS MUST NOT BELIEVE THAT CHILDREN ARE HUMAN BEINGS — THUS, NO HUMAN RIGHTS

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Any violation of an infant-child’s rights constitutes abuse in my book.  Our nation can march itself, fly itself, bomb itself, invade itself all around this globe proclaiming to be the great protector of human rights, while within the boundaries of our own nation we refuse to even accept that children are human beings.  If we DID accept this fact, that children are not possessions and are, indeed human, then we would have to recognize EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEIR UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS.  SHAME ON US!  SHAME!  SHAME!  SHAME!

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

First, let me say this:  It is an honor to have Pat reading and posting on my blog.  I was concerned that her post today would be lost in the comment tailing pile from the mine of information accumulating on Stop the Storm.  So I copied it over here!!

COMMENT MADE TO +ALIGNING OUR NATION WITH UNITED NATIONS CHILD RIGHTS IS AGAINST OUR OWN LAWS

BY:  Pat Gordon-Smith
on December 6, 2009 at 6:11 AM

There’s an excellent accessible version of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child at http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/en/docs/Know_Your_Rights_poster.pdf

It’s a poster intended to inform children of their rights and, as such, is great for anyone. The language it uses is important, too. It shows the extent to which the world of children’s rights has moved on since the Universal Declaration on Children’s Rights. Then, the version written for children has them as passive dependants. In this version children are active agents, following the spirit of the CRC itself.

Here is the text from the poster. The numbered points correspond to the articles in the convention:

1)  Everyone under the age of 18 has ALL of these rights. You have the right to…
2)  Be treated fairly no matter who you are, where you are from, what language you speak, what you believe or where you live.
3)  Have adults always do what is best for you.
4)  Have all of these rights protected by your government.
5)  Be given support and advice from your parents and family.
6)  Life.
7)  Have a name and a nationality.
8 )  An official identity.
9)  Not be separated from your parent(s), unless it is for your own good.
10)  Be reunited with your parent(s) if they have to move to another country.
11) Not be taken out of your country illegally.
12)  Have your own opinion, which is listened to and taken seriously.
13)  Find out information and express what you think through speaking, writing and art, unless this denies other people their rights.
14)  Think and believe whatever you want to and practice any religion, with guidance from your parent(s).
15)  Be with friends and join or set up clubs, unless this denies other people their rights.
16)  Have your privacy and family respected.
17)  Get reliable information from newspapers, books, radio, television and the Internet, as long as it is not harmful to you.
18)  Be brought up by your parents, if possible.
19)  Be protected from being hurt or badly treated in any way.
20)  Special protection and help if you can’t live with your parents.
21)  The best care possible if you are adopted or in foster care.
22)  Special protection and help if you are a refugee.
23)  Access to education and any support you may need if you have a disability.
24)  The best health and medical care possible, and information to help you stay healthy.
25)  Have your living situation checked regularly if you are looked after away from your family.
26)  Help from the government if you are poor or in need.
27)  A basic standard of living: food, clothing and a safe place to live.
28)  An education.
29)  An education that develops your personality and abilities, and encourages you to respect other people, cultures and the environment.
30)  Enjoy your own culture, religion and language, even if these are not the same as most people in your country.
31)  Rest, play and relax.
32)  Be protected from work that harms your health or education.
33)  Be protected from dangerous drugs and their trade.
34)  Be protected from sexual abuse.
35)  Not be kidnapped or sold.
36)  Be protected from being taken advantage of or exploited in any way.
37)  Not to be punished in a cruel or hurtful way.
38)  Protection and care in times of war. If you are under 15 you should never be forced to join an army.
39)  Special help if you have been hurt, neglected or badly treated.
40)  Be helped and treated fairly if you are accused of breaking the law.
41)  Be protected by national or international laws which provide better rights than the ones in this list.
42) ALL children and adults should know and learn about these rights.

I’ve just written a blog entry about this on my blog, ‘Children’s rights and other things’ (http://patsky.blogspot.com) that includes some further explanation of certain articles.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Please refer to the December 12, 1989 United Nations General Assembly document from the Convention on the Rights of the Child from which this above 42-Article List of the Rights of the Child have been condensed for ease of understanding and clarity for our globe’s children and youth.

++++

I remember years ago when I saw a plaque hanging on the wall of someone’s home I was visiting that simply read, “Clarity Begins At Home.”  Today I found this same phrase incorporated into the thinking represented on the website for ERIC – Education Resources Information CenterED201555 – Clarity Begins at Home:  An Analysis of Key Ideas of Invitational Education.

ERIC is America’s Education Resources Information Center – an online digital library of education research and information. ERIC is sponsored by the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) of the U.S. Department of Education. ERIC provides ready access to education literature to support the use of educational research and information to improve practice in learning, teaching, educational decision-making, and research.

++++

My search today for ‘United Nations Child Rights’ yielded 257 documents in the ERIC database that represent global action and thought on the topic.

When I added United States of America into the search, 3 documents appeared.  Only one 1991 document “is a curriculum that serves as an introduction to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Designed for the upper elementary and middle grades 5-10.”

I took out ‘America’ and received information on 32 documents, all of which are not specifically about our nation.

Our nation will never begin to bring a discussion of child rights into mainstream educational classrooms as long as we continue to allow corporeal punishment to exist within our schools.  Physical assault, violence and ‘hitting’ by public school staff is still legal in 22 of our 50 states:

Where the states stand on corporal punishment:

Alabama–Legal
Alaska–Illegal
Arizona–Legal
Arkansas–Legal
California–Illegal
Colorado–Legal
Connecticut–Illegal
Delaware–Illegal
District of Columbia–Illegal
Florida–Legal
Georgia–Legal
Hawaii–Illegal
Idaho–Legal
Illinois–Illegal
Indiana–Legal
Iowa–Illegal
Kansas–Legal
Kentucky–Legal
Louisiana–Legal
Maine–Illegal
Maryland–Illegal
Massachusetts–Illegal
Michigan–Illegal
Minnesota–Illegal
Mississippi–Legal
Missouri–Legal
Montana–Illegal
Nebraska–Illegal
Nevada–Illegal
New Hampshire–Illegal
New Jersey–Illegal
New Mexico–Legal
New York–Illegal
North Carolina–Legal
North Dakota–Illegal
Ohio–Legal
Oklahoma–Legal
Oregon–Illegal
Pennsylvania–Illegal
Rhode Island–Illegal
South Carolina–Legal
South Dakota–Illegal
Tennessee–Legal
Texas–Legal
Utah–Illegal
Vermont–Illegal
Virginia–Illegal
Washington–Illegal
West Virginia–Illegal
Wisconsin–Illegal
Wyoming–Legal

We Must Stop Corporal Punishment Now!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The focus of my blog is on the intergenerational transmission of unresolved trauma that happens because the Rights of Children are not protected.  Our problem is much larger than corporeal punishment in our schools.  I understand that the sinking Titanic of Dark Age thinking within the current medical model field of mental health services and research remains connected to our public consideration of Child Rights on all levels within our nation, including in our laws, in our homes, and in our public educational system.

The following is included in the Preamble to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child:

Recalling that, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the United Nations has proclaimed that childhood is entitled to special care and assistance,

Convinced that the family, as the fundamental group of society and the natural environment for the growth and well-being of all its members and particularly children, should be afforded the necessary protection and assistance so that it can fully assume its responsibilities within the community,

Recognizing that the child, for the full and harmonious development of his or her personality, should grow up in a family environment, in an atmosphere of happiness, love and understanding,

Considering that the child should be fully prepared to live an individual life in society, and brought up in the spirit of the ideals proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations, and in particular in the spirit of peace, dignity, tolerance, freedom, equality and solidarity…

In the spirit of the aims of this blog, I am particularly concerned that children within our nation experience every possible assistance toward “the full and harmonious development of his or her personality” which can only happen through safe and secure attachment experiences that an infant-child has provided for it “in an atmosphere of happiness, love and understanding” that happens ONLY when Child Rights are recognized, allowed and protected.

We are not clear as a nation or as individuals about what Child Rights are.  CRIN’s Factsheet on Children’s Rights clearly describes the ONLY way to look at the Universal Rights of Children.  The USA is a nation of materialists.  We must still believe that children are possessions, and therefore believe that children are not HUMAN, they are OBJECTS to be arbitrarily treated in any way we want to – within the boundaries of our laws, which are obviously themselves seriously lacking in regard to the Universal HUMAN Rights of Children.

Is our nation acceptably divided about whether or not children are human beings or not?  I think that is the issue here.  If we believe in the Dark Age thinking that children are possessions and are therefore objects rather than human beings, anything we might assign to them in terms of a ‘right’ or not can remain arbitrary.  I have no illusions about this point, personally.

When my mother and my grandmother engaged in a rage-filled argument over little not quite two-year-old me, it was because they believed I was an object possession, not that I was a human child.

When my mother violently shoved my three-year-old head repeatedly into the toilet bowl and beat me mercilessly, I was not being treated as a human being with rights.  I was being treated more aggressively than if I was a baby’s dirty diaper.

When I was battered and terrorized and forced to spend the night sitting perched on a stool alone in the dark because I got the white cuffs of my parka dirty, I was treated as having LESS VALUE and less rights than the coat did!

When I was made to ride long hours in the car curled in a fetal position on the floor of the back seat ‘like a dog’ when I was seven, I was treated as having less value and rights than a badly abused dog!

When I was 13 and knocked down by my mother over and over again into a giant mud puddle until I crawled around and said over and over again, “I am a pig, I am a pig,” which I refused to do, I was being treated with less value and as having no more rights than would a badly abused livestock animal.

++++

I realize that I am taking a controversial stand, but believe me, the suffering of the 18 years of my infant-childhood — and the resulting suffering during my entire adult life as a consequence of the violation of my Rights as a Child – backs me up when I say to everyone in our nation:  You either stand on the side of knowing absolutely that children are human beings with Universal Human Rights that must be guaranteed and protected, or you do not and believe instead that children are not human and are objects that are possessions with no HUMAN rights at all.

It is this latter position held by the majority of our citizens that prevents every one of our 50 states, and therefore prevents our entire nation, the United States of America, from ratifying the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and from guaranteeing these rights be protected for every American child.

I am sorry, but I cannot find any ‘gray area of the Law’ here.  “Clarity Begins At Home.”  Our ignorance belongs to us.  As long as we deny our beliefs that children are objects, possessions and livestock, we will remain a nation of child abusers on our most fundamental level, because we do not REALLY believe that children are human beings at all, and therefore have no Universal Human Rights to be either guaranteed or protected.

How else can I understand how I could go to public 8th grade PE class wearing one of those little blue gym suits with the entire back of my body covered solid with bruises of every imaginable color and shape all the way down to my heels — black, blue, green, purple, yellow, brown — from the base of my neck, across both of my shoulders and arms, down my back, over my buttocks, down my thighs, my calves — all perfectly visible to those around me on the gymnasium floor and/or in the community girls’ showers?  Nobody blinked an eye or EVER said a WORD!

That was in 1964.  How much progress have we REALLY made since then in recognizing and protecting the Universal Human Rights of our nation’s children?  Where are our laws that tell our children and the world we mean exactly what we say?

++++++++++++++++++++++++

Please feel free to comment directly at the end of this post or on

+++++++

Your Page – Readers’ Responses

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++