Sunday, March 14, 2010

The True Story of Leprechauns

Leprechauns. You don’t hear too much about them except now, in the middle of March, when the Chicago River turns green, parades fill the TVs, Shamrock Shakes make their yearly appearance, and moms boil up a dose of corned beef and cabbage. It seems everyone is Irish on St. Patrick’s Day.

But what do we really know about Leprechauns? Are they real or just a figment of some Irish storyteller’s drunken imagination? Where did they come from? What do they do? What are they like? Where (if anywhere) is their famed pot of gold? Do they all have beards? Are there any girl Leprechauns?

Here is the untold story.

Leprechauns are not simply little humans. They are not even human, although they have several human characteristics. As everyone knows, they live in Ireland. But they weren't originally from there. Many generations ago, they lived close to the lands where elves, dwarfs, and hobbits all resided peacefully. All three peoples intermingled. A few generations' worth of intermarriage sprouted the race that we now call leprechauns. They lived on their own, mostly, not craving the company of others. But they did have a clearly defined moral sense. They were committed to helping the poor; sort of a pre-dated Robin Hood clan. They were also highly skilled at deception and craftworks.

Because of their skill and friendliness, a large group of young lippies (as they were known to other folk) were invited by none other than Santa Claus to work at his massive workshop. And so a good portion of the leprechaun tribe emigrated to the North Pole. For generations, the leppies and elves coexisted peacefully in Santa's working crew, with the more technically savvy leppies forging and building what the creative and inspired elves dreamed of. Every year, they piggy-backed on each other’s Christmas spirit with buoyant joy and playfulness.

But alas, there were a few leppies whose actions were a bit too playful. Whether it was their natural tendency toward troublemaking or the harsh cold of the arctic winters, some could not help themselves. No one knows their true names--these were lost in their sacred chronicles that have since been lost--but we do know what they did.

One Christmas season, about three days before Christmas Eve, when the weather was wretchedly frigid, a small detachment of leppies played a practical joke on the Chief elf, Bon-tilith. After all the elves were soundly asleep, the leppies despoiled their co-workers of all of the years' toys that had been stored away. They hid them in their own cave-storage, then laughed late into the night. When they awoke, they crept in to the shop, where the elves were dumbstruck. They couldn't contain their laughter. But when the dumbstruck looks were accompanied by tears, they admitted to Bon-tilith what had happened. He was none too happy.

Just then, a report over the loudspeaker blasted "Here this: a terrible storm has resulted in an avalanche at Doringray Residence Cave. The cave has collapsed." The leppies were without words—a phenomenon quite unusual for them. They had transported the entire load of toys to Doringray! When the wreckage was discovered, every single toy had been destroyed. Santa was devastated; he and his workers simply could not get enough toys made and delivered by Christmas. It was a sad, albeit rare Christmas for the children of Earth that year.

Thankfully, the leppies fessed up. They hid nothing from Santa. However, he was less than his merciful self. In one of the rarest displays of wrath witnessed by his most ancient workers, Santa banished the leprechauns from the North Pole forever. The leppies traveled from North Pole to Greenland, then from Greenland to Iceland. No one wanted to harbor these strange folk; not only had word travelled quickly, but they were a strange-looking breed. Eventually, they made their way to the shores of Ireland.

They took up residence in the Northern parts and wooded sections in the south of the island. For many years, they did very little but show their remorse with tears and drowning in the local stout. But after a while they banded together again and dedicated their lives and their children's lives to righting the wrong they had committed. From that time forward, they decided, they would steal things only for a purpose--to give them to the poor.

And so they devised a scheme. They made up a very clever (albeit ridiculous) story about a rainbow that had a pot of gold at the end of it. They told this story to whoever would listen. Well, to anyone who was rich and would listen. And they promised to escort them to the rainbow, where they could partake of the pot of gold.

But, like any ruse, they needed some gold up front as payment for their services. So they took gold, toys, and other goodies from all unsuspecting fools.

Because of the inherent greed and wild-eyed dreams of the people, they were soon richer than all the world’s kings and princes put together.

Of course, they never quite led anyone to the rainbow or the pot of gold.

So if today you meet a leppie, do not be deceived by his friendly nature or promises. He (or she; yes, there are she-leppies) is only trying to get your goodies. Even though they would go to someone who needs them more than you!

The End

Motivation and Attention

Why can children who are diagnosed with the baloney disorder ADHD pay attention when playing Legos or video games? It’s one of the many conundrums surrounding the diagnosis that eventually convinced me that the diagnosis is invalid; it also led me to believe that the vast majority of children diagnosed with ADHD* are in fact quite normal children.

So let’s start with some indisputable truths. First, children who are diagnosed ADHD can in fact pay excellent attention with some tasks. Parents tell me that their children can focus for long periods of time on constructive activities like building and drawing, but fail to pay attention to reading, writing, or rote tasks like math. Many of these children can be so engrossed in video games that they cannot hear their parents call them, yet they seem completely distracted while doing their homework.
So at least we have the knowledge that these children can sometimes pay attention. Whatever attention mechanisms they possess are not completely disabled.

One of the more ridiculous facets of the ADHD diagnosis is an admission that ADHD “symptoms” go away under certain environmental conditions. A primary example is that ADHD disappears when a child has individual attention. Another condition that cures this "debilitating disease" is engaging stimuli. And yet a third miracle cure is adequate structure and discipline. Amazing how these all correspond with what children actually need…

So the second indisputable truth is that children’s behaviors are changed—often radically—by the environmental conditions they are in. Nurture trumps nature yet again! An additional observation that must be noted is that adults can provide these environmental conditions.

The third indisputable fact is that the variable present or absent is motivation. Motivation is key for all behaviors. Without motivation, all behaviors—except reflexes—would extinguish (go away).

So what does this have to do with ADHD-like symptoms? Some children tend to be naturally (intrinsically) motivated by some tasks, but not others. Some children, of course, are motivated by the visual stimuli in video games and building things, but are not motivated by reading or writing. There is nothing unusual or abnormal about this. It is the parents’ challenge to motivate their child extrinsically (from without) until the child internalizes that motivation.

So Junior does not like to complete his math homework? Fine; there is no rule that Junior has to be naturally motivated to do math. But let’s say he earns a visit from Kobe Bryant if he finishes his homework on time and correctly, and at the same time, he knows that he will have a finger chopped off if he doesn’t do it on time or correctly. All of that motivation coming from two directions—positive and negative—will absolutely result in increased attention and concentration.

Now, I’m not a big believer in chopping off fingers and I’m sure you can’t afford to hire Kobe Bryant to come to your house to motivate Junior. But I’m sure you can think of some things in Junior’s life that are or would be motivating to him if you connected performance to those things.
Think about it. I’ve used this principle with countless school-age children. It works EVERY TIME.

*I refuse to refer to children as “having ADHD”, since I don’t think children can have ADHD any more than they can have cooties.

Wednesday, March 10, 2010

GREAT MOVIES KIDS SHOULD SEE

OK, I’m a huge fan of film—always have been. Whether it be the escapism or my appreciation for spinning a quality story or acting out a drama, I believe that movies can bring a great deal of joy to a child’s life. A good film can also teach lessons that are not as easily taught by parental lecture.

In talking to children, I have found that many of them have not been introduced to the wonderful world of film. Yeah, they’ve seen “Up” and “Little Mermaid” (which are both fine films), but they haven’t witnessed some of the gems of the big screen—movies that children simply must see, in my not-so-humble opinion.

So I’m compiling a list of some of the best movies that are appropriate for children. Generally, my list will include movies that are appropriate for school-age children. That is, they have no egregious violence, salty language, or sexual content. Of course, we all have our own definition of “egregious”, but you will be able to see from the following list.

I welcome all of you to add to the list; I’m sure there will be many movies I have forgotten and some that I have never seen. For the sake of space and obviousness, I won’t include all of the Disney and Pixar movies from the past ten years or so. I think almost all of them are wonderful and appropriate for children. I also haven’t included any of the Japanese anime films, many of which are quite good.

-Never Cry Wolf (A little-known Disney flick from the early 80’s; I think it’s one of the finest pieces of cinema ever created. If you haven’t seen this movie, shame on you...)
-Fairy Tale (I only cry during movies and this one gets me every time)
-Secret of Roan Inish
-The Waterhorse
-The Champ
-Black Beauty (1994 version)
-Willow
-Fantasia (even if you don’t like the idea of macroevolution, it’s amazing artwork and the classical music will pique your child's interest)
-Princess Bride (altogether now: "I am Inigo Montoya, you killed my father...")
-Gulliver’s Travels (the one with Richard Harris)
-The Bear (best acting job ever)
-E.T. (Duh...there are a couple inappropriate lines of dialogue early, but the rest of the movie more than redeems it)
-Sound of Music
-Lucas (one of the sweetest coming-of-age movies; for middle school and older)
-Mary Poppins
-Oliver (the musical)
-Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (Gene Wilder, NOT, Johnny Depp, IS Willy Wonka)
-Incredible Journey (I usually can’t stand animal movies, but both the 1963 and 90’s versions are great)
-Lassie (ditto)
-Wizard of Oz (duh…)
-Star Wars (duh…)
-Ladyhawke (my 5-year-old LOVES this movie; I want a sequel)
-The Secret of Nimh
-Annie (whatever happened to that 7-Up guy?)
-The Land Before Time (if your kid is a dinosaur expert, don’t bother)
-Labyrinth (when I build my own city, it will have a ‘bog of eternal stench’)
-The Dark Crystal
-The Neverending Story (my kids make fun of the music, but it’s still good enough to enjoy)
-Charlotte’s Web: the 70’s cartoon version
-The Secret Garden (my son pooh-poohed this movie, but my girls adored it)
-The Bad News Bears (not for younger kiddies or teetotaling parents)
-The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe (2005 Version)
-Herbie the Lovebug (stupid, silly fun)
-Escape to Witch Mountain (60’s version)
-Man from Snowy River (more for early teens and teens, but any horse-loving kids will like it)
-Lord of the Rings (Yes, I know there is violence, but the story is so important and the films are so good that it is the one movie for which I make a “violence exception”)
-Robin Hood (Disney animal cartoon version)
-Apollo 13 (you’d think it wouldn’t be for children, but it really is THAT good)
-Big
-A Little Princess
-Mrs. Doubtfire (some stuff is inappropriate for children—get your hands ready to cover ears)
-Raiders of the Lost Ark (best adventure movie ever)
-To Kill A Mockingbird (younger children will be bored to tears, but once your child is old enough, this can be one of those eye-opening moments in his/her life)
-Apocalypse Now (OK, I’m kidding…)

OK, have at it!

Reason #215 Not to Use Antidepressants

A study in the March 2 edition of Pediatrics revealed that mothers who use antidepressants called SSRI’s—such as Zoloft, Prozac, Celexa, and Lexapro—put their fetuses at significant risk for all kinds of physical and emotional problems. This study mirrored one found in the October 2009 issue of Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine.

Problems occurring from maternal SSRI use include preterm birth, low Apgar scores, and a higher incidence of admission to an NICU (these are generally bad signs). These are simply the observable signs of damage from SSRI’s. This study did not—and could not—examine the damage that early SSRI exposure did to the child’s serotonin regulation and production. We know that flooding the serotonin system upsets the delicate balance; the brain responds by shutting down production of serotonin, which can permanently damage mood regulation. This often has disastrous implications, like those found in Ecstacy overdose.

The only reasonable conclusion is that women who are pregnant or could possibly get pregnant should not take SSRI’s—or any psychiatric drugs for that matter. All of them cross the placental wall and directly affect the growing fetus’s brain, which is incredibly sensitive to all chemical interference. The fetus's liver simply cannot process toxic chemicals like an adult.

With all of the excellent—superior in terms of efficacy and safety—alternative treatments for depression and anxiety, I highly recommend that women explore other options before turning to psychiatric drugs.

*Although this study did not wrestle with it, there is also a question whether potential fathers who take SSRI’s might unwittingly damage their sperm. We often ignore the reality of the male contribution to the genetic pool and how powerfully their behaviors can positively and negatively affect the growing fetus. It is no stretch to presume that these powerful drugs alter the male contribution to their progeny.

Monday, March 8, 2010

What Not to Wear, Love Mom

One of the most contentious issues confronting parents and their children involves acceptable clothing. How many fights have occurred between the mother who says, “You’re not wearing that out of this house” and the daughter who replies, “Everyone is wearing this!” Children inevitably claim the right to wear whatever they like as a self-expression; parents are often at a loss as to their responsibility and right to put limits and boundaries on clothes.

A few words of sanity…

First, to review: it is the solemn duty of parents to train their children. As I stress in Desperately Seeking Parents, parents must focus their training on four areas:

1. Safety
2. Respect
3. Obedience
4. Work

In the book, I stress that all of the values parents instill in children are subsumed under these four areas.

So how does a mini-skirt or death metal concert t-shirt have to do with any of these four areas? Easy. Your 12-year-old daughter’s safety is compromised if she goes uptown in an outfit that screams, “Look at me! I am a sexual object! I’m as easy as a game of Candy Land!” Parents must assert (and reassert, whenever needed) the reality that her body is not only hers to protect; it is YOURS to protect.

If your family believes in God, you have an even more powerful argument: your daughter’s body is not hers or yours; it is God’s. God has entrusted you to protect and train your daughter. The case for your intervention in that arena is closed.

What about dirty, slovenly attire? It's not a safety issue. What about respect? Is it respectful to wear dirty clothes out of the house? Yes; you can disallow that. What about shirts that convey rebellious or obnoxious messages, such as "I'm with stupid" or "I hate school"? Don't allow these, at all. They champion disrespect. They shouldn't be in your child's closet; get them out. Don't buy them. And finally, concert t-shirts that convey violent messages? Fuggetaboutit. It should be a family rule that no clothes may reflect violent messages. Period.

Then what about an outfit that is not sexually provocative, dirty, or messy and does not communicate any inappropriate messages, but is simply silly or uncoordinated? What about the ensemble of plaid golf pants and hideous polka dot shirt? Here is where parents need to back off with older children (middle school). If it isn't unsafe, disrespectful, breaking any important rules, or preventing the child from performing his or her duties, then let the child wear it. If he wants to dress like a fool, fine. Remember, this is not for your 6-year-old, but for your early adolescent, who needs to begin making individual choices. It is critical that you communicate that there will be some freedoms allowed.

Saturday, February 27, 2010

Toxins And Autism..A Link?

Check out this video on a new study suggesting that early pre-natal exposure to environmental toxins might be a cause of autism and autistic spectrum disorders:

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4057071/study-toxins-linked-to-autism

As most of you recognize, this issue gets a great deal of press and raises immense swells of intense feelings. Some are convinced that vaccines are the primary culprit in the surge of autism diagnoses; others are indignant at this claim and refute the idea that vaccines could have had anything to do with it.

I don't tend to take the middle ground on many issues--just ask my friends and family--but I'm going to take a seat on the fence on this one. I have several hunches and thoughts on the subject that I'd like to share.



1. Correlation does not equal causation, but...

Pay attention to groups who do not have many cases of autism, such as the Amish. They have practically NO cases of autism. They also don't vaccinate their children. Now, does this prove anything? No. There are several factors unique to the Amish population that might have something to do with the difference; for example, perhaps they do have autistic children but don't take their children to doctors to get them diagnosed.

But a correlation like this does not prove a causal link, but it certainly necessitates a reasonable hypothesis. The vaccine-autism link is a reasonable hypothesis.


2. Pay attention to who would lose (bigtime) if it became well-known that vaccines DID cause autism.

Can you imagine the anger? The outcry? It would make the thalidomide disaster pale in comparison. No one would ever trust their pediatrician again. Lawsuits would destroy every one of them and every drug company who produced a vaccine with thimerosal (mercury). I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, but it is important to recognize the HUGE bias that the government, drug companies, and physicians' groups have when it comes to this issue.

Even more so, imagine the parents who chose to have their babies vaccinated despite some of the questions out there. Can you imagine the overwhelming, incapacitating guilt that would spring from believing that that choice created such a debilitating neurological disorder? Staggering...

Parents are understandably biased in this debate, aren't they?


3. Realize that environmental toxins are almost everywhere and in almost everything--not just vaccines.

Almost all psychotropic drugs taken by mothers AND fathers can damage a growing fetus--whose brain is incredibly sensitive and vulnerable. With all of the millions of potential parents out there on psychiatric drugs, this puts a frightening number of babies at risk. There are dozens of household products that, when ingested through the mouth or nasal passages, can cross the placenta and damage a growing baby's brain.

Think about it: doesn't it only make sense that what we eat, inhale, and touch can affect a growing baby's central nervous system? How many parents know how to control for this factor? How many CAN? Doesn't it only make sense that many children are born with compromised brains due to environmental toxins, ingested and transferred to the fetus, completely inadvertently and unwillingly?


4. Finally, any doctor or agency who tells you that the case is closed on environmental toxin-autism link is full of...environmental toxins.

Yes, some judge determined that there was no link between thimerosal and autism. But our supposedly finest federal judges--the United States Supreme Court--also ruled that carbon dioxide is a pollutant, even though this is the very life-sustaining compound that all plants breathe! So judges are not reliable arbiters of scientific inquiry.

The reality is that the scientific case is very much open. No one knows for sure what causes autism and what has caused autism in the past. My hunch is that several (many, in fact) environmental insults are responsible for damaging the brain just enough to create autistic spectrum disorders and several other neurological disorders that we have labeled. In 50 years, perhaps we will have more solid answers. For now, I'm not going to dismiss any of the theories.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

What is Lazy?

One of the most common complaints I see in my practice is academic difficulties. Children struggle to complete homework, study for tests, or comprehend material enough to perform well on tests. My job is to theorize why the child is struggling and offer the parents, child, and sometimes school suggestions on how to make things better.

I rule out learning problems, medical problems, emotional problems, and a host of other barriers to academic success. Sometimes what is left is the only diagnosis that makes sense: Lazy Butt Disorder (LBD).

I joke with parents about laziness, but we then have a serious discussion about what laziness is.

So what is laziness?

First, I’ll tell you what laziness is not. It is not a neurological disease. It is not a disability. It is not a disorder. It is also not a simple choice. I don’t think children choose to be lazy; they don’t wake up one day and decide, “I think I’m going to avoid work at all costs and choose instead to play.”

Laziness is, however, a behavior pattern of individual choices made over time. Most simply, it is a habit of avoiding work (such as responsibilities) while preferring to do something easier and/or more enjoyable. The lazy child knows that he should pick up the toy on the floor, but chooses to ignore it and go play. The lazy student knows that she should edit her paper’s spelling and grammar mistakes, but chooses instead to text her friends.

More specifically, the pattern involves a war of motivation. The lazy child weighs the options: picking up the toy would not be very enjoyable, so I wouldn’t get anything positive out of that; at the same time, going to play would be enjoyable and that would be positive. The choice is easy: ignore the toy and go play. Similarly, the lazy student weighs the options: what would bring more pleasure, editing the paper or texting? All things equal, it’s a no-brainer.

That is where a Parent in Charge must do the hard work of training the child. All things equal, the child will look only into the near future; but parents can make sure that the child is aware that all things are not equal—that his or her choices will have consequences in the short-term and long-term.

If the child has many repetitions where a parent rewards the choice to work rather than avoid work AND the child is prevented from being rewarded for avoiding work, then that child will naturally begin to make different choices. Most children need this extrinsic motivation until it becomes a part of their internal nature; usually this develops during adolescence.

So if you have a “lazy” child, take responsibility for training your child to develop a strong work ethic. You have the power and position to do it!