2020年9月30日 星期三

Will the Pandemic Socially Stunt My Kid?

How masks and distancing may affect emotional development.

Will the Pandemic Socially Stunt My Kid?

Nan Lee

Sometime in July, we met up at a local playground with friends whose children are the same age as our 7- and 4-year-olds. Everyone was masked, and it was basically the first time we had socialized with people we weren’t related to since March. For the first 20 minutes of the play date, the children completely ignored each other. They’d make brief eye contact and then go careening off to different parts of the park.

As I watched the children appear to flee from social connection, I broke into a light sweat: Had they forgotten how to relate to other kids while under quarantine?

When we asked NYT Parenting readers for their most pressing concerns, some version of the above was the most frequently asked question: How will masks, social distancing and lack of interaction with other children affect their kid’s social and emotional development? For example, reader Ariel Wittenberg, mom to a 7-month-old in Arlington, Va., wrote, “The thing that keeps me up at night is what it means that my daughter essentially has no idea other babies exist. Is she going to have problems socializing in the future?”

The short answer is: The majority of neurotypical kids will be able to socialize just fine, even if we’re still wearing masks in a year. A lot of socialization happens implicitly through interactions with caregivers, said Erika Hernandez a postdoctoral scholar of social development at Penn State. Just having conversations with your kids, asking them about their feelings and setting boundaries (no, you can’t hit Dad) gets you most of the way to the socialization they need.

And even if there are some social setbacks in the next year or two, Dr. Hernandez said, “development is a lifelong process. There’s not a skill or domain in which children can’t get better or work at.” It’s also worth noting that there’s a “huge cultural variability” in what’s considered “normal” socializing for children, said Lisa A. Serbin, Ph.D., a professor of psychology at Concordia University in Montreal. “There are many cultures where small children rarely see anyone but their cousins and siblings, who they know very well. They turn out just fine once they get to school. They have social skills,” said Dr. Serbin.

ADVERTISEMENT

With the caveat that this particular pandemic is unique, and we won’t definitively know how it affects anyone of any age for years to come, I asked four experts in child psychology and social development for their thoughts about the minimum level of interaction kids need, organized by age range.

Ages 0-2: "If you have a baby during this pandemic, you’re good for 18 to 24 months,” as long as you have at least one knowledgeable and attentive adult on hand, said Sally Beville Hunter, Ph.D., a clinical assistant professor of child and family studies at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. That’s because infants are mostly playing by themselves with toys, or having face-to-face interactions with adults, and they only have a limited emotional repertoire that Dr. Hunter called the “Inside Out” feelings — after the Pixar movie that depicts joy, fear, anger, disgust and sadness inside a child’s head. They don’t care about other children’s emotions.

“Children who are that age can’t meet each other’s social needs. They only can tell people when they need something,” Dr. Hunter said. Before 18 months, children haven’t started the developmental task psychologists call “theory of mind,” which is the understanding that other people have thoughts different from their own thoughts. Enjoy your tiny narcissists!

Ages 2-5: What children are getting from socializing with other kids in the preschool years is moral reasoning, said Dr. Hunter. “They need to learn what is fair and what is right, and they learn that from being with other children,” she said. They can learn that from siblings; if your kid is an only child, though, it’s tougher for them to learn that from parents. That’s because adults tend to allow their children to choose the games they play, whereas when kids are interacting with peers, they will learn that they don’t always get their way.

ADVERTISEMENT

That doesn’t mean your child is doomed if they’re not going to a school or day care right now. “If it’s safe to do so, getting outside and meeting up for a peer group interaction, even just a little bit every week” should be enough, said David J. Bridgett, Ph.D. a professor of psychology at Northern Illinois University. Dr. Bridgett also encouraged parents to find their “inner child” and “do make-believe and pretend-play” with their preschoolers. Pretend-play helps children learn about creativity and problem-solving, he said.

Elementary school: “I’m not worried about them at all,” said Dr. Hunter. While the very youngest elementary students may need the same support preschoolers do, by the time children are 7 or 8, they’re finding ways to get their social needs met, whether that’s through virtual interactions (FaceTiming while playing Roblox, anyone?), or riding bikes together around the neighborhood. My kids have taken to playing hide-and-seek in our building’s courtyard with other children from the surrounding apartments.

A note on masks: I asked every expert I spoke to whether they were worried that being around masked children and adults would make reading social cues more difficult for this generation of children. No one was concerned about it, and in fact, both Hernandez and Bridgett thought children may develop other skills more as a result of mask wearing — they may become better verbal communicators and learn to look people in the eyes more as they’re speaking.

When to worry: Everyone — kids included — has ups and downs during the pandemic. “What you’re looking for is a pattern of downs,” said Dr. Hunter. If it’s lasting for a week, and it’s because of distress from our new versions of school, she said she’d suggest a mental-health day off for the child, which she probably would not have recommended pre-Covid. But if your child’s grades are suffering, and their being upset is lasting weeks or months, it’s time to talk to your pediatrician.

ADVERTISEMENT

By the way, about 15 minutes into that first play date in July, the kids stopped ignoring each other and started chasing each other on their scooters. Turns out they just needed a little while to warm up and leave their worries at the chain-link fence.

P.S. Follow us on Instagram @NYTParenting. If this was forwarded to you, sign up for the NYT Parenting newsletter here.

Tiny Victories

Parenting can be a grind. Let’s celebrate the tiny victories.

I’d been feeling guilty about all the time I let my 2-year-old play on her tablet during the stay-at-home order. I didn’t even want her to have a tablet in the first place, but she has lots of educational games on there, so I had to let it go. She’s now in the toddler class at day care, and her teacher told me that she knows all of her shapes! Her teacher is so impressed. Tablet for the win!!! — Sharnell Johnson, Hanover, Pa.

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9月29日 星期二

Will there be a Biden boom?

Why he’s probably better for the economy.
Andrew Harnik/Associated Press
Author Headshot

By Paul Krugman

Opinion Columnist

At the beginning of this year, Wall Street was almost sure that Donald Trump would be re-elected. A Citigroup poll of fund managers found 70 percent believing that Trump would win. As late as April major investors still expected a Trump victory.

At this point, however, the upper hand is on the other foot. As the bumper stickers don’t quite say, stuff happens, and Trump could still pull this off — or simply try to steal the election, say by blocking the counting of mail-in ballots, a possibility that keeps many of us up at night. But Joe Biden is in a far stronger position than Hillary Clinton was at this point; two new polls from Pennsylvania, the most likely tipping point state, both gave Biden a nine point lead, suggesting that a repeat of 2016 — in which Trump lost the popular vote, which he will almost surely do again, but squeaked through to an Electoral College victory with narrow leads in rust belt states — is becoming unlikely.

What changed? The pandemic, obviously. But also, this year it’s pretty clear that it’s not the economy, stupid.

Expectations for a Trump victory were based mainly on the belief that voters would give him credit for job growth during the first three years of his administration. Since then, however, two things have happened. First, the economy has faded as an issue, overshadowed by the pandemic and, to some extent, by Black Lives Matter and the administration’s mailed-fist response. Second, Trump’s advantage on the economy also seems to have faded.

ADVERTISEMENT

Thus, a recent Washington Post poll found voters almost equally divided on the question of whether Trump or Biden can better handle the economy. A New York Times poll didn’t ask that question, but did ask voters whether Trump is responsible for the coronavirus recession; 53 percent said that he was indeed mainly or somewhat responsible.

But did Trump ever deserve to be considered better on the economy? As many people have pointed out, economic growth during his first three years basically represented a continuation of a trend that began under Barack Obama. Consider this chart showing job growth since 2010. If you didn’t know that there was an election in 2016, you wouldn’t have any reason to think anything changed.

More broadly, a look back suggests that the widespread perception that Republicans are better for the economy has no basis in reality. If anything, it’s the opposite. Here’s the growth rate of real GDP per capita under the last six presidents:

Do Dems do it better?Bureau of Economic Analysis

Basically, the economy did as well under Clinton as it did under Reagan and no better under Trump, even pre-pandemic, than it did under Obama, while both Bushes presided over some serious bad times.

ADVERTISEMENT

What about looking forward? Recently Moody’s Analytics, a nonpartisan consulting firm, created a bit of a stir with an assessment of the likely macroeconomic effects of the election. It argued that Biden would do substantially better — that if there’s a Democratic sweep, by the end of 2024 real GDP would be 4.5 percent higher and there would be 7.4 million more jobs than if Trump holds on.

What drives these conclusions is Moody’s belief — which I share — that the big problem we’ll face after the coronavirus recedes will be persistent weakness in investment. Trump’s 2017 tax cut was supposed to fuel a business investment boom, but didn’t. Biden, by contrast, is proposing large-scale public investment, which would take up the slack, while Trump’s repeated declarations of “infrastructure week” have become a running joke. And public investment is what we need.

So this election won’t be about the economy. But even if it were, Trump shouldn’t have the advantage.

Quick Hits

Presidents and the U.S. economy.

Why do many people think Republicans do better? Blame the hack gap.

The case for deficit-financed public investment.

The failed promises of Trump’s tax cut.

ADVERTISEMENT

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

Either way you loseYouTube

How did I not know that this song had a line about “the candidates’ debate?”

IN THE TIMES

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/