Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here:
Cookie Policy
Sex and Morality: A Debate Between Competing Neurons
Morality lies not where we think it does.
Published on January 12, 2011
This post is about morality, but not about a particular moral agenda. It’s about how your inner compass works. Whatever your moral code, if you or your loved ones occasionally do things that violate it, read on.
Moral decisions (including sexual ones) do not invoke a specific “moral sense” in the brain. They rely on a brain mechanism that influences all choices: our reward circuitry.
“Scientists at Harvard University have found that humans can make difficult moral decisions using the same brain circuits as those used in more mundane choices related to money and food. These circuits, also found in other animals, put together two critical pieces of information: How good or bad are the things that might happen? What are the odds that they will happen, depending on one’s choice?”
The structures they studied are all components of the brain’s reward circuitry: ventral striatum, insula and vmPFC (pre-frontal cortex).
So, where’s the problem? The problem is that our genes have hidden agendas. Food and resources register as rewarding because they promote survival, but the most powerful rewards are for behaviors favoring more progeny, whatever the risks. Think of Karen Owen’s screw-’em-and-rate-’em behavior, or the escapades of Bill Clinton, Mark Sanford and John Edwards, Larry Craig’s bathroom antics and George Reker’s “rent boy” caper. Consider the fact that HIV cases in gay men under thirty have jumped more than thirty percent since 2001.
These folks have one thing in common: Their inner compasses aren’t functioning in accord with their long-term self-image, because a primitive brain mechanism assesses their risky activities as—believe it or not—genetic opportunities. “Selfish genes” indeed!
How do our genetic programs pull our strings? In this case, by releasing extra dopamine (the “gotta get it” neurochemical) in our reward circuitry. We don’t realize what’s going on because we’re used to relying on input from this circuitry as we make countless other, generally sound, decisions. So, when hit with extra dopamine, we just know we need to act on that impulse, and actively resist unwanted, more sober thoughts. Sneaky, eh? On the other hand, when dopamine (sensitivity) plummets, we may feel bored, or like we don’t want more of something (or someone)—or like we just made a huge mistake the night before.
Whether unusually high or low, we’re on a mini-drug trip or having a bit of a hangover. Either way, we’re laboring against chemically induced odds. Fortunately, the impulses pass—before or after we act—and clarity generally returns.
When moral-compass malfunction lingers
Some of us arrive on the planet with brains that make us more impulsive or prone to overvaluing novelty, thus skewing our compasses. However, it’s likely that most of us are susceptible to lingering compass malfunction (that is, distortion of limbic tone) in one circumstance: Engage in too much intense stimulation and another genetic program kicks in for a time: the binge program.
Let’s say you discover a racy online chat room or a titty bar. Surrounded by all those potential mates, your brain releases extra dopamine (“Yes!”), coloring your perceptions and often your judgment for a time. In fact, today’s opportunities to be turned-on by novel, hot potential mates, synthetic sexual stimuli and hyper-stimulating junk food register as so valuable to many brains that they automatically suppress their sensitivity to keep their owners seeking more goodies. Instead of feeling greater satisfaction, such folks often experience growing malaise (unless and until their brains reboot).
These subtle, but very real, brain changes occur without conscious awareness. To restore equilibrium and sound judgment, they need time without intense stimulation, (but, preferably, lots of affection or friendly interaction). Until they’re back to normal, even a beloved may look…unsatisfying. Said one man after lots of hot sex for two weeks in a new relationship,
I feel dumb for getting involved with a woman who wants a steady relationship. She is good woman. I like her, but when I interact with other women and the chemistry is there, it’s hard to ignore.
His reward circuitry is overvaluing the promise of intense stimulation (via novelty) because dopamine is surging in his numbed brain at the very thought. He feels a restless need to act.
Here’s the thing: Neither his cravings nor their consequences have much to do with his moral character. The culprit here is limbic tone. It can produce a fog of unsettling perception distortions, inner conflict, and self-doubts. We act without realizing we’re under a spell. When our neurochemistry shifts again, we wonder, “What was I thinking???” Answer: we weren’t; we were on neurochemical autopilot, or at least suffering from distorted perception that enabled us to rationalize reckless behavior.
Consider this exchange about how extreme sexual stimulation shifts perception even among solo porn users. (The issue here isn’t porn. It’s the shift in perception, which can happen after too much stimulation of any kind.)
Boomerang! The short story of a divorce, reconciliation, and remarriage
A woman’s hard questions bring her back to her ex-husband.
Published on January 13, 2011
by Rachel Clark
The real soul mate is the one you are actually married to. –J.R.R. Tolkien
One night, a few months post-divorce, I’m kneeling well after midnight at my window. My new partner (we’ll call him Joe), someone I now fully believe is my soul mate, lies asleep behind me in the cheap, too-hot apartment we now share, and in which we have begun to welcome my two young sons on their periodic visits as per the joint custody schedule.
Staring out the window I cannot place my unrest and unease. After the years of doubt, turmoil, and the agonizing months leading up to it, I had wanted this divorce, and imagined that once it was enacted things would get easier, lighter, more fun…that I’d be happy.
As I stare into the dark night, I recall how I’d entertained doubts about my compatibility and chemistry with my ex-husband (we’ll call him Sam). On our first few dates more than fifteen years earlier, I’d known instinctively that with him there would be a real family, and bedrock of trust the likes of which I had never known. I’d fallen in love with the surefooted, devoted, adult way he’d loved me. But by the time of our divorce fifteen years later, our story didn’t sound so sweet. It had changed drastically to something more like this: We only stayed together back then because we were both young and naïve. We didn’t really know what we wanted. It felt safe, but not in a healthy way. Qualms that had surfaced over the long course of our partnership had catastrophically overturned our experience of our own reality. But I don’t realize this yet.
Instead, tonight, the dark outside mirrors a black sense of dread in my heart. Because tonight I’m finally starting to ask questions.
Right now, kneeling here, I have to believe that the doubts were true. My whole life and the lives of my children have changed because I believed those doubts: That we had serious problems in our marriage. That we no longer loved each other “like that.” That it was time to move on because we weren’t compatible and couldn’t find joy together. Yet for fifteen years we’d we strode forward together. We’d made substantial careers for ourselves, visited our families, had dates, made good food and friends, moved across the country twice, bought houses, took trips, had beautiful children.
Stepfamily, Blended Family, Remarried Family or Married with Baggage Family?
Sally Connolly, LCSW, LMFT Updated: Jan 26th 2011
What do you call yourselves?
What do you call the person who is married to your parent?
How do you refer to your spouse’s children?
What you call yourselves affects the way that you relate to others in your family.
Think about it. The term, “stepfamily†tends to have negative or evil connotations. How would you describe one of the most famous stepfamilies … Cinderella’s family? Most people automatically think of wicked stepmothers and stepsisters.
The term “blended family†has problems of its own. The dictionary definition of blending is “to create a harmonious effect or result†and in many remarried families, harmony might not be noticed very often at all! It is extremely difficult for many families to “blendâ€. Relationships are complicated and feelings, history and loyalties make blending impossible for a large percentage of stepfamilies.
Remarried family numbers are growing. In a nationwide Pew research study released recently, 42 percent of 2,700 adults polled said that they had at least one step-relative. Three in 10 have stepsiblings or half-siblings, 18 percent have a living stepparent, and 13 percent have at least one stepchild.
More of these newly constituted families also come from single adults with children who had previous relationships but never married.
Unrealistic expectations are common.
Setting unrealistic expectations, which the idea of “blending†seems to do, invites family members to expect that everyone will get along, like, and maybe even love each other … and be as happy as the two adults who fell in love and married.
Men More Likely To Stick With Girlfriends Who Sleep With Other Women Than Other Men
Article Date: 30 Jan 2011 – 0:00 PST
Men are more than twice as likely to continue dating a girlfriend who has cheated on them with another woman than one who has cheated with another man, according to new research from a University of Texas at Austin psychologist.
Women show the opposite pattern. They are more likely to continue dating a man who has had a heterosexual affair than one who has had a homosexual affair.
The study, published last month in the journal Personality and Individual Differences, provides new insight into the psychological adaptations behind men’s desire for a variety of partners and women’s desire for a committed partner. These drives have played a key role in the evolution of human mating psychology.
“A robust jealousy mechanism is activated in men and women by different types of cues – those that threaten paternity in men and those that threaten abandonment in women,” says Jaime C. Confer, the study’s lead author and a doctoral candidate in evolutionary psychology.
Confer conducted the study with her father, Mark D. Cloud, a psychology professor at Lock Haven University in Pennsylvania.
The researchers asked 700 college students to imagine they were in a committed romantic and sexual relationship with someone they’ve been dating for three months. They were then asked how they would respond to infidelity committed by the imagined partner.
Mate guarding is classified as excessive or unwarranted jealous or protective behavior towards a spouse or mate. This is common among many different species and can be useful to defend territory, guarantee paternity, or prevent disease. The authors of a new study published in Personal Relationships have discovered that this behavior is more common in societies which practice arranged marriages or in cultures that place a high value on parental influence in the choice of mate for their children. Furthermore, the authors comment on the fact that mate guarding is not an exclusively male phenomenon, and women can be just as forceful in protecting their monogamous relationships.
In many cultures, rules, behavioral practices, and physical measures, including veiling and walled courtyards, have been applied to prevent contact between women and potential sexual partners. The current findings indicate that the occurrence of mate guarding is more prevalent in Muslim, Indian, Chinese, Turkish, Moroccan, and South Asian societies.
By Rick Nauert PhDSenior News Editor Reviewed by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. on January 14, 2011
A new laboratory study on fruit flies may lead to a new way of looking at social behavior.
Texas A&M scientists believe the discovery that certain genes become activated in fruit flies when they interact with the opposite sex can change the way human dating and courtships are viewed.
Their research shows that our romantic courtship behaviors may be far more influenced by genetics than previously thought.
In addition, understanding why and how these genes become activated within social contexts may also lead to future insights into disorders such as autism.
“Be careful who you interact with,†said Ginger E. Carney, Ph.D. “The choice may affect your physiology, behavior and health in unexpected ways.”
To make this discovery, the scientists compared gene expression profiles in males that courted females, males that interacted with other males, and males that did not interact with other flies. The investigators identified a common set of genes that respond to the presence of either sex.
Marriage Good For Men Physically And Women Mentally, Both Live Longer
Editor’s Choice
Article Date: 29 Jan 2011 – 9:00 PST
Marriage does not only increase male and female longevity, but also tends to benefit wives mentally and husbands physically, researchers from Cardiff University, Wales, wrote in the BMJ (British Medical Journal. The authors include both the “smug marrieds” and those in long-term committed relationships.
Authors David Gallacher and John Gallacher wrote:
“. . . on balance, it is probably worth making the effort.”
The authors believe males benefit from long-term stable relationships because their lifestyles are conducive to better health, compared to other men, and. . . . :
“. . . . the mental bonus for women may be due to a greater emphasis on the importance of the relationship.”
True love does not necessarily run smoothly in all cases, the authors added, relationships during the teen years are linked to a greater risk of adolescent depressive symptoms, this improves as people get older.
18 to 25 year olds tend to enjoy better mental but not physical health if they are in a romantic relationship.
By Rick Nauert PhDSenior News Editor Reviewed by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. on February 11, 2011
To get out of a romantic rut, a new study by a Wayne State University professor recommends that dating couples to integrate other couples into their social circle.
Richard B. Slatcher, Ph.D., found that couples that spend quality time with other couples are more likely to have happy and satisfying romantic relationships.
His study, “When Harry and Sally met Dick and Jane: Experimentally creating closeness between couples,†which recently appeared in Personal Relationships, investigated 60 dating couples in a controlled laboratory setting.
The study looked at how friendships between couples are formed, and how these friendships affected each couple’s romantic relationship.
Each couple was paired with another couple and given a set of questions to discuss as a group. Half of the groups were given high-disclosure questions intended to spark intense discussion, while the other half were given small-talk questions that focused on everyday, unemotional activities.
I’m totally confused and caught up in this person. Some years go by without us speaking, but we always come back to each other. Convenience, you say, or possibly hoping for the best. I don’t now. The problem is that I’m hopelessly in love with this person and willing to give up all in every way there needs. But relationships are severely limited. You can justify anything in this world, especially the things you want most. The feeling of love is exceedingly strong and seductive, as is the feeling to be needed and to be loved. So I search spiritually, mentally …
If you read all the comments on the affair post and others like “12 Ways to End Addictive Relationships,†you might curse God for creating romance. After all, it’s like a drug (quite literally with all the dopamine and oxytocin that infatuation dumps into our systems) that drives us to do crazy things, like drive across the country in diapers (remember… the astronaut?).
Because I’ve read so many tales of heartaches from Beyond Blue readers, and I want to know what, if anything, I should say, I studied Time Magazine’s special issue awhile back on love and chemistry. The science of romance is fascinating to me because for some susceptible people, the rush involved in new love mimics a good buzz from drugs. Addiction is born very easily in the body of a person who craves the ecstasy created by elevated levels of dopamine and oxytocin in our blood.
Let me excerpt some important paragraphs from Jeffrey Kluger’s article “Why We Love†for people like Michael so he can learn about the different places inside our brains those idealizations and love fantasies make and how they infect his blood with potentially dangerous chemicals:
By Rick Nauert PhDSenior News Editor Reviewed by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. on February 14, 2011
On-line dating appears to be as segregated as the real world, say researchers from the University of California, Berkeley.
Researchers gathered information from more than 1 million profiles of singles looking for love online.
They learned that whites overwhelmingly prefer to date members of their own race, while blacks, especially men, are far more likely to cross the race barrier.
The Berkeley scientists analyzed the racial preferences and online activity of people from the United States who subscribed between 2009 and 2010 to a major Internet dating service.
In their profiles, the online daters stated a racial preference. Some said they preferred to date only within their race, others preferred someone outside their race, and yet others said they were open to dating someone of any race.
Researchers were then able to compare the online daters’ stated preferences with whom they actually contacted for a date, and they found profound differences between blacks and whites.
“Those who said they were indifferent to the race of a partner were most likely to be young, male and black,†said Dr. Gerald Mendelsohn, lead lead author of the study, which will soon be submitted for publication.
Overall, he said, “Whites more than blacks, women more than men and old more than young participants stated a preference for a partner of the same race.”
If Your Romantic Partner Recovers Well From Conflict, You Reap The Benefit: New University Of Minnesota Study
Article Date: 14 Feb 2011 – 2:00 PST
People searching for fulfilling and stable romantic relationships should look for a romantic partner who recovers from conflict well. Yes, it turns out that if your romantic partner recoups well after the two of you have a spat, you reap the benefits, according to results of a new study by the University of Minnesota College of Education and Human Development’s Institute of Child Development.
The research looks at how people recover or come down after a conflict with their romantic partner, said Jessica Salvatore, the lead researcher in the study “Recovering From Conflict in Romantic Relationships: A Developmental Perspective.” The article is set to appear in the journal Psychological Science, and has been released online. Co-authors of the study are university researchers Sally Kuo, Ryan Steele, Jeffry Simpson and W. Andrew Collins.
Salvatore and her colleagues’ research digs into a new area. In the past, marriage researchers have focused on how people resolve conflicts, but they never looked at what happens after the conflict ends and how people recover, Salvatore said.
“What we show is that recovering from conflict well predicts higher satisfaction and more favorable relationship perceptions. You perceive the relationship more positively,” Salvatore said.
The interesting finding is that you don’t have to be the one who recovers well to benefit.
“If I’m good at recovering from conflict, my husband will benefit and be more satisfied with our relationship,” Salvatore said.
The study’s participants were 73 young adults who have been studied since birth and their romantic partners.
Couples In The UK Are Happy In Their Relationship, Study
Article Date: 15 Feb 2011 – 3:00 PST
Whether you are married or cohabiting with your partner, the vast majority of couples in the UK are happy in their relationship. Initial findings from Understanding Society show that around 90 percent of individuals who are living with a partner are happy with their relationship.
Researchers at the Institute for Social and Economic Research asked both individuals in the couple to rate their happiness on a seven point scale; from the lowest score of ‘extremely unhappy’ to the middle point of ‘happy’, the highest point being ‘perfect’. The self-reported happiness rating revealed that 90 percent of married women and 88 percent of cohabiting women are happy in their relationships. Ninety-three percent of married men and 92 percent of cohabiting men said they were happy in their relationship.
The findings indicate the happiest couples are those in which both are educated to degree level, have no children, have been together for less than five years and the man is employed. Factors such as being married or cohabiting, age of the individuals and duration of the partnership all have an effect on the level of happiness in a relationship.
Professor John Ermisch, one of the authors of a book due to be published later this month that showcases a range of findings from the survey, commented: “Understanding Society has opened up many new avenues of research in studying both marriage and family life across the UK’s population and will continue to do so over the years to come.”
Dana Vince, M.A., LPC, MHSP Updated: Feb 17th 2011
In continuing my work to share stories of couples who sit on my couch, it is my goal to provide hope and encouragement out there to those who are struggling in their marriage.
Infidelity is one of the most painful and difficult challenges for a couple to work through because it pulls the floor of safety and security right out from under you. But the marriage can be restored. In fact, it can be better than before. It’s been said that time heals all wounds. When it comes to infidelity, time is certainly a factor, but it’s not the only one. There is work to be done in that time to restore trust, emotional safety and connection to the relationship. Time alone won’t solve those problems.
This story is about a young couple I’ll call Tom and Suzanne (fictitious names, of course). Suzanne had lost her father at a young age which left her feeling abandoned. She grew up never having felt “good enough”. When she married Tom, she had a lot of insecurities and needed a lot of approval. Because of this she avoided conflict like the plague. She was afraid if Tom got upset with her, he would abandon her. He would see the qualities that she saw in herself and he would not want to be with her any longer. Because of this fear, she manipulated herself to please him, never really being authentic. As some years past, she felt a loss of her sense of self.
Along came an older, attractive co-worker who showed her a lot of positive attention. With him she could really be herself because there was no fear of loss. With him she didn’t have anything, so she had nothing to lose and in that, she felt free. The relationship progressed into a physical affair.
In counseling, along with healing from the affair and rebuilding trust, Suzanne had to do a lot of individual work to understand her pain and fear and how it created problems in her relationship.
FILM stammerer Michael Palin has met six youngsters being treated for the condition as part of a new BBC1 show.
Michael, 67, played speech-impaired Ken Pile in the 1988 comedy A Fish Called Wanda.
And after meeting the children for My Life: Stammer School, to be aired next Saturday, the Monty Python star said: “My father had a very severe stammer.
“His life might have been so different if he had had this therapy.”
On the kids, he added: “If children can leave here with their stammer reduced and confidence restored, it’s the best feeling you can have.”
Lots of different definitions of giftedness exist. While these theories differ in important ways, such as their dimensionality, their emphasis on creativity, or their focus on developmental and environmental factors, there is one important way they don’t differ: they all include preexisting ability as the most basic requirement.
To be fair, definitions of giftedness have evolved quite a bit over the years. Prior to 1972, practically every school used one criterion and one criterion only: an IQ cut-off of 130. This criterion was heavily influenced by the pioneering work of Lewis Terman, who equated high IQ with genius.
Then the first federal definition of giftedness came along in 1972, which was undoubtedly an important step forward. Noting that only a small percentage of the 1.5 to 2.5 million gifted school children were actually benefiting from special education services, former U.S. Commissioner of Education Sidney P. Marland, Jr. proposed a broadened definition that went beyond just IQ to also include specific academic and creative aptitudes. That report was important in its broadening of giftedness, but note that it only broadened abilities.
A more recent report released by the National Department of Education in 1993 (“National Excellence: A Case for Developing America’s Talent“) kept the multidimensional definition of giftedness but once again lamented the sorry state of gifted education. In the report, Secretary of Education Richard Riley called gifted education the “quiet crisis.”
Various psychologists have put forward their own pet theories of giftedness, hoping they would catch on. They haven’t. Most school districts still stick to the IQ 130 cut-off. Nevertheless, let’s look at some of these alternative theories, as they have played an important role in research on giftedness.
Howard Gardner proposed eight independent abilities: verbal-linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, musical, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalist. Robert J. Sternberg proposed a synthesis of wisdom, intelligence, and creativity. Interestingly, part of Sternberg’s definition of intelligence is the ability to capitalize on strengths and compensate for, or correct, weaknesses (more on that later).
By Rick Nauert PhDSenior News Editor Reviewed by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. on February 18, 2011
For years, health professionals have advocated lifestyle changes in the form of diet, exercise and stress reduction to lower the risk of heart disease, diabetes and other chronic illnesses.
New research shows that lifestyle changes — such as getting more exercise, spending more time in nature or helping others — can be as effective as drugs or counseling for many mental health concerns.
A wide range of mental health conditions, including depression and anxiety, can be treated with certain lifestyle changes as successfully as diseases such as diabetes and obesity, according to Roger Walsh, M.D., PhD., of the University of California, Irvine’s College of Medicine.
Walsh reviewed research on the effects of what he calls “therapeutic lifestyle changes,†or TLCs, including exercise, nutrition and diet, relationships, recreation, relaxation and stress management, religious or spiritual involvement, spending time in nature, and service to others.
Walsh reviewed research on TLCs’ effectiveness and advantages, as well as the psychological costs of spending too much time in front of the TV or computer screen, not getting outdoors enough, and becoming socially isolated.
In light of today’s Welfare Reform Bill, which sets the course for the move from Disability Living Allowance (DLA) to Personal Independence Payment (PIP), The National Autistic Society (NAS) has serious concerns that these changes will result in those with hidden disabilities like autism missing out on vital benefits.
Mark Lever, chief executive, NAS says, “We have substantial concerns about the introduction of a face-to-face assessment for the new benefit. Autism is a complex condition and it’s much harder to assess the impact of the disability on daily living than for other disabilities. This has already proved to be hugely problematic with the work capability assessment for Employment Support Allowance (ESA), resulting in costly appeals and unnecessary distress for an already socially isolated and vulnerable group.
Many adults with autism are extremely worried about the possibility of losing benefits they desperately rely on and the proposed reforms to the welfare system are pushing them to a state of near constant anxiety. With 30% of people with disabilities already living below the poverty line, it is understandable that there is such great concern. We therefore urge the Government to ensure that the design of the new assessment specifically covers the needs of people with autism if they are serious about their promise to help those who need it most.”
Denyse Kirkby felt like an outsider until she recognised her social problems in her eight-year-old son
Thursday February 17,2011
By Bess Manson
DENYSE KIRKBY, 43, a midwifery lecturer, felt like an outsider all her life until she recognised her social problems in her eight-year-old son
WHEN I was growing up I always felt different to other children. I didn’t like playing noisy games in the playground, preferring to read quietly in a corner. I didn’t understand why I detested physical contact or why any sudden loud sounds upset me so much.
I didn’t understand why as I grew older I never really got jokes or why I was ostracised for saying the wrong thing. I was odd. I always have been.
As a child I took everything literally. I was very gullible and children would ridicule me for being socially inept. If someone swore, I would copy them and get into trouble for shouting the word out.
As I grew up I learned ways to fit in. For short periods of time I could pretend I was the same as other people. I learned to prepare myself for meeting people at work, to stop myself saying the wrong thing. I became a midwife since my obsession with following procedures methodically made me good at it.
I also found I could form relationships with men. Unfortunately I didn’t really understand myself so I didn’t choose the right people and my first two marriages ended in divorce.
My third husband Chris, who is 47 and a postman, has always been understanding and patient. For the first time I didn’t feel anxious about what was expected of me but it didn’t stop me wondering why I am the way I am. The answer only revealed itself after I became a mum to TJ, now eight.
I knew TJ was different when he was just three days old. He was very fretful, he’d be up feeding all night and was always very tense.
At nursery he was different to the other children. He didn’t communicate. Rather than join in games and songs he was obsessed with opening and closing a particular toy, arranging things in order, over and over again. The nursery couldn’t handle TJ so I sent him to the Willows Centre, a school in Portsmouth for children with special education needs.
I had long suspected he could have autism and our community paediatrician sent him for an assessment. This process takes a long time and while going through various tests I couldn’t help but notice similarities in his and my own social behaviour. One night I said to Chris, “perhaps I should find out if I am autisticâ€. Chris wasn’t sure it was necessary for me to know, having lived 40 years the way I was but the more I watched TJ the more I needed to know. Our GP referred me to the National Autistic Society’s diagnostic centre and for the next few months I too was assessed.
In January 2008 I was diagnosed with Asperger syndrome, which is a form of autism. It was a relief. There was a reason why I was different. I wasn’t just being a wimp at school, things were genuinely more difficult for me than for other people. At last I could understand my own behaviour.
TJ was diagnosed with Asperger syndrome in April 2009. Socially he is about three years behind his peers. He is so vulnerable and it worries me because I recall what I went through at school with the bullies and taunts. I didn’t want that for my son. For TJ’s sake I’m grateful I have autism too. It helps me understand what he’s going through. When he struggles to express himself I can help interpret his feelings. I tell TJ autism is not an excuse for not being able to do something, it’s an explanation for why it’s more of a struggle for us.
An East New York boy diagnosed with autism has gotten dozens of detentions this school year for behaviors caused by his condition, his parents say.
Brandon Strong, 10, who attends fifth grade at Achievement First East New York Middle School, has been held after school and at lunch for fidgeting, talking to himself and failing to look teachers in the eye.
The boy’s parents say his ongoing disciplinary problems at the Richmond St. charter school are out of his control – and the punishments he’s receiving are ruining his life.
“This situation at school is driving my son crazy,” said Laila Strong, 37, a small business owner. “He hates it so much he’s starting to come apart.”
The talkative kid with glasses hasn’t always had such a tough time in class. Brandon was diagnosed with attention deficit disorder when he was 3 years old, after preschool teachers noticed he had trouble sitting still. Two years later he was diagnosed with autism but he worked hard with his family to succeed in mainstream classes.
“We built a life for Brandon that worked,” said Strong, who helped the boy with his homework every afternoon and discussed the upcoming school day with him each morning while he brushed his teeth.
Strong said the routines that kept Brandon balanced in elementary school were disrupted this year when he started at middle school.
That’s when he started getting held for “not tracking,” “talking” and “not following directions” during class, according to school documents.
Two months into the school year, he started having trouble sleeping. He began to throw hysterical fits before school when he begged his mother to not send him to class.
“I kept getting in trouble for things I can’t control,” said Brandon. “It wasn’t fair.”
The Strongs don’t want to move him to another school because they say it would disrupt his life even more. “We want to Brandon to succeed in the school he’s in,” said Laila Strong.
He’s nervous and awkward with people, can’t tell the difference between biting sarcasm and sincere praise, and doesn’t take well to crowded rooms, loud noises or sudden interruptions.
He’s just about the worst multitasker you’ll ever see.
He’s also one of your best employees.
Workers on the autism spectrum don’t always fit in at first, but with training and a little extra consideration, they can be among the most innovative and detail-oriented employees.
That was the message Thursday from 3M, Cargill and Best Buy managers who took the stage at 3M’s “Autism and Employment” forum, which was organized by the St. Paul-based Autism Society of Minnesota.
For employers, here’s the bottom-line: As baby boomers retire in the years ahead, companies will have to scramble to fill openings at all levels, from janitors to engineers. Accommodating otherwise-talented employees who suffer from social deficits will be one way to fill the void — especially in competitive artistic and technological fields that tend to draw on those with forms of autism.
“You get the people who are kind of quirky, kind of different, and they’re very good at one thing,” celebrity author Temple Grandin, who has autism herself, told hundreds of attendees at 3M’s Maplewood headquarters. “Don’t try to de-geek the geek. You can’t make him something he’s not.”
Grandin is a longtime Cargill consultant, prolific writer and expert on animal behavior whose life story has turned her into a kind of spokeswoman for the autistic.
A professor at Colorado State University and possibly the best-known national figure with autism spectrum disorder, she served as a screenplay consultant on last year’s “Temple Grandin,” an HBO biopic starring Claire Danes.
The film, which won seven Emmy Awards, featured an unflinching portrayal of Grandin’s isolated, socially awkward childhood in the 1950s, before much was known about the disorder, as well as her later struggles in the workplace.
Grandin said autism — and a related disorder, Asperger syndrome — describes a wide range of people who grapple with the condition at different levels. The basic common thread is that the “interoffice”-like communications inside the brain have been disconnected, making it hard to process social information. Many suffer from sensory overload, too, and are sensitive to loud noises, the bustle of open-air work environments and fluorescent lighting.
But other parts of the brain are often hyperfocused. Grandin said that when most people are asked to think of a church steeple, they generalize a generic steeple in their minds based on their associations with the word. Not her “photojournalistic” brain. She instantly calls up a detailed image of a specific steeple she’s seen, almost like an Internet surfer searching Google for images.
“When you disconnect some of the social circuits, the geek circuits (flourish),” she said. “Autism is a true continuum. There’s no difference between Asperger’s and ‘geek.’ “
For employers, she said, that may mean having to give an autistic employee explicit instructions such as “Don’t call customers fat.”
“Don’t be subtle,” she told the audience, recalling how hard it was for her to function at her first few jobs. “It’s got to be specific. There’s a scene in the movie where an executive slams down deodorant on a desk and says, ‘You stink, use it.’ … That actually happened.”
The advice, delivered tactlessly, stung. Nevertheless, in terms of improving relations with her co-workers, she soon became grateful for the lesson.
Grandin said that because the autistic learn differently, it may be important for parents to do the thing many of them least want to do: loosen the reins a bit and allow kids to amass their own archive of experiences to learn from, whether it’s ordering by themselves from a restaurant menu or holding down a neighborhood job mowing lawns.
She said it took her a long time to realize that most other people do not think in detailed pictures and cannot see intricate engineering designs in their mind’s eye the way she can. It took her even longer to pick up on basic body language.
“I didn’t know people had these secret little eye signals until I was 50 years old and read about it in a book,” she said.
Grandin noted how important it is for people with varying levels of autism to sell themselves to prospective employers using portfolios or concrete examples of their work. Social cues are often too difficult for the autistic, making job interviews potentially disastrous.
“I’ve never sold a single job with my personality,” she said.
Larry Moody, a board member with the Autism Society, said in an interview that he was successful enough as a chemical engineer to survive waves of staff cuts at various jobs and retire at age 50 with a sizable nest egg.
“I required more management than others, but I produced at a higher level, faster and more accurately,” he said.
Moody is now on the board of a new startup effort, Autism Works, that aims to place autistic professionals in highly skilled industries, much as Eagan-based Lifeworks places disabled workers in lower-skilled employment.
Through Lifeworks, Gabe Bonham, 29, has worked for 3M for seven months, doing everything from data entry to cleaning glassware. Bonham, who has Asperger syndrome, said the job allows him to live in a Maplewood apartment, independent of his parents in Hastings.
Linda Ireland, a partner with the Aveus consulting firm, told the crowd “if we changed hiring and retention practices matched to people with autism, everybody wins.”
Ireland then showed a brief clip from the “Temple Grandin” movie in which Grandin’s high school science teacher tells her mother that the girl is “different, but not less.”