Discussion: on ABC's Nightline

Did anyone else see Harvard professor and orienteer, Dr Michael Commons on ABC's "Nightline" tonight (Friday). Can someone verify that his point was approximately- letting babies cry to much leads to adult personalities like Hitler and Saddam Hussein? I may not have this perfect, but I am not making it up, nor have I had anything to drink.

Here's the article...

The Quest for Rest: Should Babies Co-Sleep or Cry It Out?
Controvery Over How Parents Can Win the Bedtime Battle Continues

...

Harvard researchers Michael Commons and Patrice Miller say that when children are left to cry for long intervals, their little brains are flooded with a harmful hormone called cortisol.

"There's nothing wrong with having them cry it out if you want to risk brain damage," Commons says.

They say that over time, cortisol increases the risk of severe attachment disorders ? and worse.

"Hitler was a borderline personality. And so was Saddam Hussein," says Commons . "It didn't take a whole lot of Saddam Husseins and Hitlers to make our lives miserable."

Miller wouldn't go quite that far. "Well, but I don't think that you want parents to believe that they're rearing little Adolf Hitlers," she says. "That's still a relatively rare event."

"But you're putting yourself at risk for that," Commons says.

Commons bases much of his theory on Romanian orphans and lab animals, creating much scientific controversy. But his suggested remedy has been used for thousands of years in most of the world: the family bed. In America, the practice was long seen as dangerous or indulgent, but renowned pediatrician T. Barry Brazelton says he is noticing a shift in mind-set.

...

Harvard professor and orienteer, Dr Michael Commons

Oh, brother...
(Is there an emoticon that shows me rolling my eyes?)

8-|

lol

Thank you bbrooke, that was it, word for word.

It would be interesting to see the transcripts of the interviews with Hitler's and Saddam's parents or siblings that verify they were left to cry for long periods. Since this is a Harvard study these transcripts must exist. Surely these names were not put forth just to be sensational and get on TV.

Oh, I'm sure it was all just done with Rasch Analysis.

All this reminds me of why I no longer have NEOC as a primary club....

I'm surprised that there was no follow-up story showing how the Bush family practice of sucking a brandy soaked pacifier qualifies a baby to eventually lead the free world.
But Peter, isn't Harvard in Cambridge? As in Cambridge Sports Union (CSU)?

Take it easy, people.

Well, there are other alternatives. Baby-O was sleeping through the night at 5 weeks. There's a reason people have been swaddling kids for thousands of years: it works.

(I have no idea what this has to do with orienteering).

Peter, It's not fair to reject NEOC because of the idiosyncratic views of one of its members. There are much better reasons not to want NEOC as your primary club.

Gr.

I'm still a member of NEOC, been one happily for 32 years, and I ran in several relays with various Saegers and others over the years. I was a member of CSU back in the 70s (for XC skiing), then joined it for orienteering a few years ago after getting recruited, and the idea of a club that wanted to have very competitive teams at the relays was very appealing, plus the CSU kids were a good bunch. NEOC wasn't focused much on the competitive side, seemed to be stressing recreational O', which is fine but I was looking for something else. No regrets, and some good memories with CSU, including a great trip to Jukola not too long ago. Also some great memories with NEOC, but they are mostly from 20-30 years ago....

And I am also a member of WCOC, because they are just a really fun group.

2007 US Relay results: NEOC- a 1st, 2nd & a 5th
..................................CSU- a 2nd, 6th,and a 9th
Hmmmmm, we're still doing OK.

Oh yeah, We let Sam & Hilly cry a bit.

Nice job rockin' the 12pt category, Jeff.

NEOC is still very competitive at US relays, thanks to the Saegers, the Parsons, and a few others. My biggest complaints are the outdated maps, the lack of new map development, and an event schedule that is looking increasingly like Orienteering North Dakota. To some extent this is just a lack of member initiative; but more guidance and support from above would also help.

Cortisol is not a harmful hormone. We all have it. It is harmful to have elevated levels of it over long periods of time as it has been shown to effect the memory centre of the brain - actually shrinking it! Also, if your levels are high for long periods of time you can have lowered levels which is not healthy either.
Funny -- after working in a lab at McMaster University for 3 years helping with studies about cortisol , I never thought I would read about it on attackpoint!

Is there any chemical which is known to expand the memory centre of the brain?

p.s. -- There are a lot of fun clubs around N.E. I belong to three, but spend most of my O-time with a fourth!

guinness

As Nina Woods points out, cortisol is bad for the brain. This is worse for infants. It effect the Amygdala, Wikipedia says ... In complex vertebrates, including humans, the amygdalae perform primary roles in the formation and storage of memories associated with emotional events. Research indicates that, during fear conditioning, sensory stimuli reach the basolateral complexes of the amygdalae, particularly the lateral nuclei, where they form associations with memories of the stimuli. The association between stimuli and the aversive events they predict may be mediated by long-term potentiation, a lingering potential for affected synapses to react more readily.[3]

Such emotional regulation is important in attachment. Some people with attachment difficulties go on to have attachment disorders. Some of those develop personality disorders. They have trouble with relationships and also with empathy. Two of the most famous people with borderline personality were Hitler and Hussain. That was why they were mentioned. Remember the data is retrospective.

One of the problem in doing research in this area is there is no possibility of doing randomized controls because of the moral issues. One would get sued if one let babies cried and it did not turn out well.

We were interviewed for 40 minutes. They chose 2 minutes. So they like the over the top comments.

The evidence comes from cross-cultural studies. Cultures that minimize crying have babies who are more securely attached. Patti has a paper in press on this issue for anyone who want to read the scholarly version. Of the 59 comments to the Nightline story, there were only 1 negative one that mentioned us.

As you all most know, to get on Televsion, you have to be colorful. That is why there is so little on Orienteering. Hope to see you at the sprints at Lawrence Woods, Pine Hill, Sunday, February 24.

With all due respect, has the doctor established a causal relationship between the documented sociopathology of the 2 named individuals, and attachment disorders or personality disorders?

I, for one, can think of several other possible causes of the observed sociopathology.

JMHO of course, but I feel one should do actual science on the actual individuals involved before making "over the top" comments "to get on Television".

My claim is not that they lacked attachment parenting. My claim is that they had attachment disorders. This has been established from a psychohistory perspective. Of course there were no clinical interviews. But there were extensive histories of each. Again, these are retrospective claims. Causality requires prospective studies. But let us say one put an infant into the cry it out group and the child later had serious problems. Would you like to be defendant in a malpractice case? Do you think an IRB (institutional review board) would approve the research?

Think about whether you think a person would care about a group that put on an orienteering meet if the following happened.

They were at a meet in the West Point area. They were total novices. They were in a recreational meet. They went out on a nice day. But they got lost and it started to get cold and rain. No one went out to look for them. They were left to try to get back themselves -- maybe like crying it out. Does this promote attachment?

"Guiness" - YES! Definitely mind expanding. Although, strictly speaking, it's not a single chemical.

"Television" - From personal experience, there are two problems with information from the media: 1) Nearly all of the reporting is biased in a way to sell advertising. 2) If the info is correct, it's probably out of context.

"Cortisol" - Whether Hitler and Hussain turned out the way they did because they were left to cry is impossible to prove and thus, not so important. The point, I think, is: if extended crying by infants causes excessive levels of cortisol in the brain, then leaving a baby to cry for extended periods is not a good route choice.

Q: Is cortisol produced whenever the baby cries for an extended period or is it associated with a specific emotion (e.g. unhappy vs. anger vs. pain)?

All this reminds me of why I no longer have NEOC as a primary club....

All this reminds me of why I don't own a television....

JJ's above may be a suitable end for this now thread-bare subject but...

...the wife taught me to disdain TV back in the '80's - it was the seemingly nonstop advertising that broke the straw.... Now, in motels at A meets on late Sat eve or Sunday morn, I hit the remote & reaffirm how bad TV is for the 'general public'...as well as for myself/ourselves who can presumably resist its message. What's distressing is how the dang things get bigger & bigger... & what's this about throwing away the entire current situation for the upcoming TV situation of even clearer/starker vision being more seductive, more 'must have'...:)
Mother Earth groans at the size of our trash heap.

Extentended crying produces excessive cortisol.

See Patrice Marie Miller and my paper.

http://www.naturalchild.org/research/emotional_lea...

It is in press.

Is that the paper, or an abstract? (It doesn't specify.)