2020年8月12日 星期三

Why Your Brain Short-Circuits When a Kid Cries

Their wailing has evolved to be maximally distracting

Why Your Brain Short-Circuits when a Kid Cries

Sol Cotti

A few weeks ago, I was deeply immersed in an article I was editing when I heard a high-pitched wail from downstairs. The acoustics of my parents’ house are so porous that even when my children have meltdowns from a distance away, they sound like they are happening in my face. So I could hear that my 4-year-old was sobbing because she decided she could not tolerate the sound of the washing machine, a noise that had never, ever bothered her before. Three other sentient adults — my parents, and my husband — attended to my daughter’s hulking out.

Intellectually, I understood that my daughter had the support she needed from multiple loving caretakers. And yet I felt my heart start to race, my blood pressure spike, and some part of my lizard brain was telling me to go comfort my child. I resisted the impulse as I heard the others wipe away my little girl’s tears, but it took me another half an hour to get my concentration back, and it made me wonder: Was this visceral response typical for parents, or was it unique to me?

I looked into the research and it turns out adult humans do have a physical response when they hear young ones crying, and they don’t have to be a parent to have this reaction. Although most of the studies examined reactions to baby and toddler cries, not preschooler meltdowns, the research showed that crying inspires a range of physiological responses in adults, including increased heart rate, small changes in blood pressure and a shift in galvanic skin responses.

ADVERTISEMENT

Christine Parsons, Ph.D., a psychologist and associate professor at Aarhaus University in Denmark who has studied physiological responses to infant cries, said the brain starts to respond to crying almost instantaneously. It happens “very quickly, quicker than 100 milliseconds,” she said, and it’s not a response that’s in one’s conscious mind. That immediate response also sets off a “cascade” of other neurological responses. She noted that infant cries have evolved over time to be maximally annoying, “to capture our attention more than other things in the environment.”

That makes sense, because babies need adult attention to get their basic needs met, and ultimately to survive. Even though my children are ages 7 and 4, the part of my brain that’s aroused in 100 milliseconds wants to protect them. “That’s still your reproductive success,” that’s on the line, said James Rilling, Ph.D., a professor and chair of the department of anthropology at Emory University, in Atlanta.

However, as Dr. Parsons pointed out, adults who are not yet parents also have similar responses to babies crying, unlike some other animals. “Rodents have to have given birth before they care about pups. Humans don’t have such a selective response,” she said.

While I appreciate this explanation, it doesn’t necessarily help me as I’m facing several more months of working from home as my children are educated alongside me. And it doesn’t help the scores of parents struggling to do their work without any additional caretakers at home with them. I need to figure out some way to tune out at least some percentage of the irrational meltdowns when I’m not on my child-care shifts, so that I can remain employed and preserve what is left of my tattered sanity.

ADVERTISEMENT

If I react to every whine and whimper, that’s not going to be good for anyone in our household. “When you activate these emotional empathy systems excessively, that can cause something we call ‘empathic over-arousal,’” Dr. Rilling said. That’s when you take on your children’s distress to the extent “that you yourself become stressed out and anxious, and that can interfere with your ability to give compassionate and appropriate care.”

So I asked Crystal Clark, M.D., a psychiatrist and associate professor at Northwestern Feinberg School of Medicine, in Chicago, for advice on how to manage the mid-work meltdowns. First, she said, be sure to check in with your kid about how they’re feeling. You know your child best: If their upset is extreme, try to take even just a brief period out of your work day to soothe them. “Assuming you don’t have a million-dollar meeting in the next five minutes, you don’t need to take that long to hold your child,” Dr. Clark said.

Not every tear shed needs your full attention, plus kids also need to learn to self-soothe. So right now the name of the game is “setting boundaries” — with both your children, and your employers, Dr. Clark said. As much as it’s possible, let both your kids and your bosses know what hours you will be available to them, and that you will need some grace and some flexibility. (It’s on employers to understand the extenuating circumstances, though many are not rising to the challenge.) For your kids, having a visual signal that you’re working, like a flag or a sign, may help them learn when it’s OK to interrupt you and when it’s not.

If you feel your body start to react — that ol’ heart racing — try to take a break, Dr. Clark said. You should be in tune with your body and what it needs, whether that’s walking around the block, closing your eyes and deep breathing for a few minutes, or calling a friend. “We all have deadlines, we have all these things that need to get done every day, and we’re forgetting that we have to maintain our own mental health,” she said.

ADVERTISEMENT

As I was about to write this last paragraph, the 4-year-old burst through my bedroom door like the Kool-Aid Man, sobbing because she could not download a game onto her tablet. May I also recommend a pair of good noise-canceling head phones?

P.S. Click here to read all NYT Parenting coverage on coronavirus. Follow us on Instagram @NYTParenting. Join us on Facebook. Find us on Twitter for the latest updates. Read last week’s newsletter, about how to prepare for school this fall, no matter what it looks like for your kids.

Want More Working from Home with Kids?

Tiny Victories

Parenting can be a grind. Let’s celebrate the tiny victories.
My 4-year-old daughter is terrified of being alone at night. As part of our bedtime routine, I hand her a Moana necklace with a dozen fake seashells. Each night she presses each shell and lists the 12 people or things she needs to get through the night. Then she gives the necklace a squeeze before I give her a big squeeze “in real life.” — Elizabeth Goldberg, Edinburg, Texas

If you want a chance to get your Tiny Victory published, find us on Instagram @NYTparenting and use the hashtag #tinyvictories; email us; or enter your Tiny Victory at the bottom of this page. Include your full name and location. Tiny Victories may be edited for clarity and style. Your name, location and comments may be published, but your contact information will not. By submitting to us, you agree that you have read, understand and accept the Reader Submission Terms in relation to all of the content and other information you send to us.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for NYT Parenting from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

歡迎蒞臨:https://ofa588.com/

娛樂推薦:https://www.ofa86.com/

2020年8月11日 星期二

We are entering well-charted territory

When you have an excellent map, but drive into a ditch anyway.
President Trump signs one of four executive orders addressing the economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic.Susan Walsh/Associated Press
Author Headshot

By Paul Krugman

Opinion Columnist

I guess we all have our vices, although maybe not on a Jerry Falwell level. Anyway, one of mine is an aversion to clichés. Back in the day, when I served on a committee evaluating student research proposals, I (jokingly) suggested automatic rejection of any student declaring themselves “passionate” about whatever the topic was. These days I groan whenever someone declares that “we’re in uncharted territory.”

OK, I’m being unfair. In a lot of ways we are indeed in uncharted territory. I’ve never before been this afraid of a stolen election. And even in economics, the coronavirus slump in the first half of 2020 was truly something new under the sun.

But right now, at least as far as economics goes, we are in fact entering very well-charted territory. What seems all too likely to happen to the U.S. economy over the next few months is all too familiar to those of us who studied the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. We actually have a very good road map telling us which policies are likely to be helpful and which will do great damage.

Unfortunately, both Senate Republicans and the Trump White House seem determined to ignore that map.

Until now, 2020 has been a tale of two economies. One sector — call it the C-sector either for coronavirus or contagion, take your pick — suffered terribly. The other — call it K for Keynesian — suffered far less damage. Here’s a picture showing changes in employment in the main sectors that suffered from lockdown, and in everything else:

ADVERTISEMENT

Two pandemic economiesBureau of Labor Statistics

One great worry among economists was that the C-sector crisis would spill over to the economy at large. After all, millions of workers were going without wages, thousands of businesses had no customers. Wouldn’t they be forced to cut spending across the board, creating a generalized depression?

So far, however, we have avoided that fate. But we weren’t lucky; we (or at least Nancy Pelosi and her allies) were smart. By providing generous aid to those temporarily put out of work by the pandemic, they not only alleviated suffering, they sustained spending and protected the broader economy.

ADVERTISEMENT

But now the aid has gone away, with no sign of a workable replacement. What this means is that the U.S. economy as a whole is about to look something like the way it did in 2009-2010, when a housing bust produced a broad-based slump. And we know a lot about policy in that kind of economy!

First, the Federal Reserve can’t save us. In both recent crises the Fed was very aggressive about printing money and buying assets, and in so doing helped limit the damage. But once interest rates are close to zero, the Fed is “pushing on a string” and can’t engineer a recovery.

Second, government spending can save us. Economists surveyed by the University of Chicago overwhelmingly agreed that the Obama stimulus helped reduce unemployment; it’s just too bad that it wasn’t bigger.

Third, in a depressed economy deficits aren’t a problem. Remember all those predictions that government borrowing would lead to soaring inflation and interest rates? It never happened.

ADVERTISEMENT

Finally, austerity policies — slashing government spending over phantom debt fears — are disastrous, greatly deepening the slump.

So we are, as I said, currently in very well-charted territory. We know what is likely to help and what will make things worse.

But you can probably guess the punchline: Donald Trump seems determined to take advice from people who got everything wrong during the last crisis and learned nothing from the experience. We have a very good road map to guide us, but we’re being led by people dead set on driving us into a ditch.

Quick Hits

Austerity was a major drag on recovery during the Obama years.

What happens when you get the economics of depression completely wrong? You receive a Presidential Medal of Freedom.

You also get to give really bad advice for the pandemic economy.

Return of the phony deficit hawks.

Feedback

If you’re enjoying what you’re reading, please consider recommending it to friends. They can sign up here. If you want to share your thoughts on an item in this week’s newsletter or on the newsletter in general, please email me at krugman-newsletter@nytimes.com.

Facing the Music

Maybe the human race is runYouTube

Roger Waters, Holly and Jess of Lucius singing backup. Awesome.

The New Swing Voters

Twenty-somethings in Wisconsin. Suburban women in Arizona. Seniors in Florida. Join Miami Bureau chief Pati Mazzei and reporters Alex Burns, Astead Herndon and Nick Corasaniti as they discuss the voters that may end up deciding the 2020 presidential race with deputy politics editor Rachel Dry. R.S.V.P. for the live event on Wednesday, Aug. 12, at 6 p.m. Eastern.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for Paul Krugman from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

歡迎蒞臨:https://ofa588.com/

娛樂推薦:https://www.ofa86.com/