Psych 200 Week 8 Personal thoughts

After reading several articles, listening to podcasts, I preface this blog by the fact that I have been in what is considered to be “mid-life” for 13 years now.  Be that as it may, I can agree with some things. As for other statements of “fact”, or “research” I am not part of those statistics.

With regards to the article by Andrew Solomon, I cannot get behind a lot of what Senior discuses in her book, All Joy and No Fun.  Either Solomon did a poor review, or I do not see Seniors’ point as being true. She states in her book that “for the child’s sake and the child’s alone. Parents no longer raise children for the family’s sake or that of the broader world.” For me, that has not been my own personal experience. That is not what I have done, or continue to do. Additionally I do not always see this to be true. I feel the article just bounced around and didn’t pick up my interest for the story. I was disappointed.

The midlife myths were decent information. I could relate to some of the information, but for me life has not been the “norm” according to this article. Gallagher states “the data show that middle age is the very best time in life,” according to Ronald Kessler sociologist, and MIDMAC (University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research) fellow. He goes on to say “When looking at the total U.S. population, the best year is 50. You don’t have to deal with the aches and pains of old age or the anxieties of youth: Is anyone going to love me? Will I ever get my career off the ground? He continues to state why research says that this is the best time in one’s life. I suppose for some this is true. I find it difficult to believe that this research speaks for most.

I can see where this information would be more positive for persons as opposed to the “Myths” discussed in the article. It is good to note that the overwhelming majority of people, surveys show, accomplish the task of coming to terms with the realities of middle age through a long, gentle process-not an acute, painful crisis (Midlife Myths article).  I agree that many positives come from being mid-life.

Some positives are mastering experiences, going back to school, choosing what a person wants to do as opposed to “having to” do, and enjoying time doing what “you” want to do.  If I had the time, or dollars, it would be interesting to dig a bit deeper into the concepts and ideas of midlife. I like the term Erikson gives us “generativity”. I like to think that for me personally I value the idea, and would like to be remembered as being someone who truly cares about every generation.

Psychology 200 - Week 7 Reflective Blog

Psychology 200 – Week 7 Reflective Blog

I found several topics of interest in this week’s studies. The article by Walter Kirn and his review of the research and studies by Judith Wallerstein were of interest. She was very emphatic about persons staying together.

Interestingly enough, I am from the Marin County area, and the idea back in the 1960’s-1970’s was very different than the Topeka, Kansas, where Wallerstein was from. I liked how the article addressed the fact that children were not dealing well with divorce. Also that bouncing back, as some claimed, was really not what was happening. What happened then with the “Divorce Movement”, be happy, and  please yourself, the kids were not bouncing back as was the idea being tossed around at the time. The mass exodus from marriages was creating children who couldn’t sleep, aggressive toddlers, and there was no research about any of it.

Since I was one of those “child statistics” it saddens me that there were experts actually supporting this movement. Even the experts stating emphatically those children, referring to ones from divorced homes, bounce back actually throttles me. What transpired through that era had a dramatic and devastating long lasting effect on that generation of children. The idea in itself was a very selfish way to look at parenting in my opinion.

Personally I was devastated a number of times as my Mother moved in and out of relationships. It was as if they were hers to dispose of. Maybe this is why I tried to hold on to both of mine, even to the point of unhealthy horrific consequences. I can say to be a child of divorce is horrible. I also know that to be in an abusive relationship is horrible. 

It would be nice if somehow as a culture we could put more value and teaching on relationships in general. It seems that cross culturally the U.S. is one country who totally misses the bus on this subject. If we could begin at an early age to teach in our communities via school, media programming or even model mentors it would be to our advantage as a culture. It seems too many times we have missed the mark, and in our path have left countless people with identity loss issues, mental illness and a host of other mental in capacities.

Unfortunate it is indeed, that our “advanced society” seems to have lost the art of what does it really mean to have a healthy fulfilling long lasting relationship. There are those relationships out there, which really work well, and that warms my heart to the core. It seems so right though that we should be leading the charge in this difficult facet of our generation. Wouldn’t it be nice, if somehow we could just get the whole idea of understanding ourselves, and others more spot on than ever before?

Psych 200 Week 6 - Personal reflections

For this week’s reflective post I am turning my attention towards the teenage brain its identity and decision processes. I found several ideas of interest which are worth addressing. As I read through” Inside the Teen Brain” I reflected on our text for the week as well. Specifically I was comparing the text of our 9.1 piece, and the search for identity, Erikson’s theory. From his 1968 research to more current 1999 article the research seems consistent. First I am going to look at our text then I will move to our article of the week.

Erickson believed that adolescents face a crisis between identity and role confusion. He believed if they are confused about their identity they can never experience identity in any human relationship. To achieve identity they use hypothetical reasoning skills from the formal-operational stage. Through other research by Nurmi, Poole, & Kalakoskim 1996 they are also experimenting with their advanced cognitive selves. Through this process they can experiment with the various aspects of career choice for example. Additionally it is thought that teens will fantasize about their future to see if it’s a good fit for them. This role searching according to Marcia’s four identity statuses is the diffusion state.  Erikson also believed that adolescents face a crisis between identity and role confusion. The summation is that it is an important phase for teenagers to manage effectively.

I was able to fit this together with the research of Dr. Jay Giedd who states “Adolescence is a time of tumultuous change in the brain” (Psychiatrist at National Institute of Mental Health in Bethesda Md.). “Teenagers are choosing what their brains are going to be good at learning right-from wrong, responsibility or impulsivity, thinking or video games”. This got me thinking about the correlation between Erikson’s theory and more current data.

In both texts I could see the relationship between the studies. For the most part we can say that the brain is not fully developed probably until early adult hood. This being the case we can safely know that teenagers will and do make poor choices. The up side of this is that they are not entirely at fault. Indeed there are physiological forces at work determining when and how an adolescent’s brain is in the home stretch of maturation. These studies highly indicate that a brain more mature than teenagers, such as a parent or guardian, would be well served to be involved in a teenager’s decision making process.

This is true due to the fact that the frontal cortex is not yet matured. The article states that this part of a teen’s brain is basically asleep at the wheel. It also goes on to state that the limbic system where raw emotions such as anger are generated is entering a stage of development and going into hyper drive. Could this be why we see teen violence? I think so. I believe this because of the research. If a teen cannot decipher correctly images of facial emotions, why would we, or should we believe they are capable of making larger more significant choices. This is certainly an aspect of adolescent development to keep in mind as we maintain, and create safe environments for our teens. This information is well put together and makes sense. My opinions of past posts continue to be confirmed as we move deeper into the maturing human brain.