The more I read about indigenous child-rearing practices (many of which are widespread across disparate cultures the globe, suggesting they date back very far indeed), the more convinced I am that what makes the PDA threat response so disabling is a combination of our underlying sensitive autonomic nervous system PLUS living in a high demand/low autonomy culture very far from the social norms and proverbial Village in which humans evolved.
In the accounts I’m reading, the kinds of anxiety, depression, burnout, meltdowns, and power-struggles common in American families are just not there. Of course neurodiversity and disability are present, but the levels of distress we have here are not. This suggests there is a massive cultural factor in what is disabling us as PDAers living in the WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrial, Rich, Democratic) world.
If you haven’t read my last post, click here for more this evolutionary perspective on PDA.
Then enjoy these juicy, long quotes from three thought-provoking books by white American women challenging the cultural norms of their WEIRD culture.
In The Continuum Concept: In Search of Happiness Lost (1975), Jean Liedloff writes about her time with the Yequana of the Amazon...
"The notion of ownership of other persons is absent among the Yequana…Deciding what another person should do, no matter what their age, is outside the Yequana vocabulary of behaviors. There is great interest in what everyone does, but no impulse to influence – let alone coerce – anyone… The Yequana do not feel that a child's inferior physical strength and dependence upon them imply that they should treat him or her with less respect than an adult. No orders are given a child that run counter to that child’s own inclinations as to how to play, how much to eat, when to sleep, and so on. But where their help is required the child is expected to comply instantly. Commands like “Bring me some water!”… are given with the same assumption of innate sociality, in the firm knowledge that a child wants to be of service and to join in the work of their people. No one watches to see whether the child obeys – there is no doubt of their will to cooperate. As the social animal they are, the child does as they are expected without hesitation & to the very best of their ability. It works incredibly well." (pp.90)
Natural logic forbids belief in the evolution of a species with the characteristic of driving its parents to distraction by the millions. A look at other millions of parents in [indigenous cultures] – who have not had the “privilege” of being taught to stop understanding and trusting their children – reveals families living in peace, and with an eager and useful addition to the family labor force in every child over the age of four. (pp.xvi)
The attitude of [a Yequana] mother of a baby is relaxed...She does not stop her cooking or other work unless her full attention is required. She does not throw her arms open to the little seeker for reassurance, but in her calm, busy way, allows the baby the freedom of her person, or an armed supported ride on her hip if she is moving about. She does not initiate the contacts or contribute to them except in a passive way. It is the baby who seeks her out and shows her by the baby's behavior what the baby wants. The mother complies fully and willingly with the baby's desires, but does not add anything more. The baby is the active, she the passive agent in all their dealings...(pp.80)
In Hunt, Gather, Parent: What Ancient Cultures Can Teach Us About the Lost Art of Raising Happy, Helpful Little Humans, Michaeleen Doucleff, PhD, visits the Maya, Inuit, & Hadzabe peoples with her three-year-old daughter. She writes...
In many hunter gatherer cultures, parents build a relationship with young children that is markedly different than the one we foster here in the U.S. – it's one that's built on cooperation instead of conflict, trust instead of fear, and personalized needs instead of standardized development milestones… (p. 10)
Many common practices in the West – which we believe are essential or critical for raising children – aren't present in any other cultures around the world – or have begun to emerge only in recent times… For example, is praise the best way to motivate children? Is it the parents’ job to constantly stimulate and entertain children? Are words the ideal way to communicate with young kids? Are verbal instructions truly the best way to teach children? Many of these western ideas actually make parenting harder, and they frequently go against the natural instincts of children. (pp. 24)
Much of the parenting advice out there today isn't based on scientific or medical studies, or even on traditional knowledge passed down from grandmas to moms for centuries. Instead, a big chunk of it comes from centuries old pamphlets – often written by male doctors – intended for foundling hospitals, where nurses cared for dozens, even hundreds, of abandoned babies, all at once. With these pamphlets, doctors were essentially trying to industrialize infant care. But their publications found another hungry audience: exhausted moms and dads. Ultimately, these pamphlets morphed into the advice books we have today [that include ideas like infant feeding schedules, sleep training, & rewards]. (Pp.34)
While interviewing parents for this book, I hear one piece of advice the most. I hear it from moms, dads, grandmas, and grandpas, but I also hear it over and over again from psychologists and anthropologists who study hunter gatherer communities all over the globe. The big idea? Never force a child to do something. In many hunter gatherer cultures parents rarely scold or punish a child. They rarely insist that a child comply with their request or behave in a certain way. They believe that trying to control a child prevents their development and simply stresses the parent-child relationship. This idea is so prevalent among hunter gatherer cultures worldwide that there's little doubt it's an ancient way of treating children.… Forcing children causes three problems: First, it undermines their intrinsic motivation – that is, it erodes a child's natural drive to voluntarily do a task. Second, it can damage your relationship with your child. When you force a child to do something, you run the risk of starting fights and creating anger on both sides. You can build walls. Third, you remove the opportunity for the child to learn and make decisions on their own. (pp.159)
*** I want to add a Fourth reason to Doucleff’s list: Forcing a child to do something, especially a child with a highly sensitive threat response, easily traumatizes them and can cause long term damage to their psychological & physical health over time.
During the short time I spend with the Hadzabe [of Tanzania]... I see the gift economy in their relationship with their children. The parents don’t aim to transform the children into some ideal, as fast as possible, through control and domination. Rather, they focus on giving to each other. The parent continually gives the child gifts of love, companionship, and food, and in return, the parent expects a “bundle of responsibilities.” We coexist together, with minimal interference and mutual respect; and through reciprocity, we love and connect. In my clumsy Western way, I created a motto for this relatiobnship style: You go about your business and I’ll go about mine, and we’ll always look for ways to help each other as much as possible. This way of treating – and thinking about children isn’t unique to the Hadzabe. You can find a similar style across many, many hunter-gatherer communities & other indigenous cultures... This way [of relating] fits children’s needs – mentally and physically – like a hand fits a perfectly tailored glove.” (pp.238-239)
In The Gardener & The Carpenter: What the New Science of Child Development Tells Us About the Relationship Between Parents & Children, Alison Gopnik writes...
Parents are not designed to shape their children's lives. Instead, parents and other caregivers are designed to provide the next generation with a protected space in which they can produce new ways of thinking and acting that, for better or worse, are entirely unlike any that we would have anticipated beforehand. This is the picture that comes from evolutionary biology, and it is also the picture that comes from empirical studies of child development, like the ones we do in my lab.
This doesn't mean that parents and other caring adults have no influence on children. On the contrary, that influence is deep and necessary…. But parenting [as in the micromanaging of children’s lives that has risen in West] hasn't improved the lives of children and parents, and in some ways it's arguably made them worse. For middle class parents, trying to shape their children into worthy adults becomes the source of endless anxiety and guilt coupled with frustration. And for their children, parenting leads to an oppressive cloud of hovering expectations. pp.23-24
Comentários