|
Information
Section: Behavior
Article: What Do You Mean
by "Behavior?"
Source: Leslie E. Packer,
PhD December, 2002
(revised 2004)
|
Page 1 of
1
|
|
"A
Rose By Any Other Name...."
|
|
One of the most
frequent questions I get from parents and school
personnel is "How do I know if this is a symptom or
a behavior?" My usual reply is "Why do you want to
know? Is it because if you think it's a
behavior, you might use negative consequences,
whereas if it's a symptom, you might handle it
differently?"
If you were to think
of a particular behavior as a "symptom," do you
think it might change your reaction to the behavior
or your strategy for handling it? Or what if you
still called it "behavior," but called it an
"involuntary" or "unvoluntary" behavior? Do you
think it would change your approach? When someone
asks "Is this intentional behavior or involuntary?"
there are four implications to the
question:
|

|
- That
behavior is either one or the
other
- That it
is possible for us to know whether the
behavior is voluntary or whether it is
involuntary
- That if
it's voluntary behavior, then it is
"intentional" and the person has
somehow chosen to engage in the
behavior (on the assumption that we
have "free will"), and
- That if
it's a "symptom," it's involuntary (or
unvoluntary)
|
This type of thinking
often interferes with developing effective
strategies. In my opinion, asking whether a
particular behavior is "voluntary" or a "symptom"
may be as unhelpful as posing the old "Is it Nature
or is it Nurture?" question because -- with the
exception of reflexes (like knee jerks) -- most
behaviors involve higher-order cortical inputs from
the brain and are modifiable on some level. For
example, breathing is involuntary in the sense that
we usually don't have to think about it, but it is
also true that people can learn to regulate or
modify their breathing (within limits). Does that
mean that breathing is "voluntary?" Of course not.
The same type of
thinking applies when we talk about neurological
"symptoms." Some symptoms may be involuntary, while
other symptoms may be primarily involuntary but be
modifiable or have a voluntary component to them.
Does that mean that they are all "voluntary"
behaviors? Of course not.
If we were to change
our language system, for the moment, so that what
we were calling "symptoms" we now think of as
"characteristic or probable behaviors under
particular conditions," then how might that change
our thinking? Does taking the behavior out of a
medical (i.e., "symptom") model and into a
psychological framework help us and the child? In
my opinion, it does, as the "why" of the behavior
may not be as helpful as determining "how" and
"under what conditions" the behavior occurs, but it
may be hard for parents to let go of the medical
model, so let's deal with the reason that parents
may get too vested in the medical model.
|
|
PARENTAL
FEARS AND GUILT
|
|
For many parents,
learning that the child has a condition or "medical
problem" was both a relief and a source of fear,
grief, and guilt. Relief to have a name and an
explanation for why the child is acting the way
they do and relief that their misbehavior isn't a
reflection on their parenting skills, fear for
their child's future, and grief over the loss of
the perfect child. For many parents, there is also
a strong component of guilt as parents berate
themselves for all the times they may have scolded
the child or punished them for behaviors that they
now understand are part of the "diagnosis" or
"disorder."
Having discovered
that the child has a [disease, illness,
condition], parents may become even more
protective of the young child. The need for
protectiveness is obvious to anyone who's parented
such children, as they are often ridiculed for
their symptoms, or asked to suppress symptoms that
may currently be impossible for them to suppress.
"Don't ask Joey to do
[x] because he can't." As a consequence of
accepting the notion that the child's behavior is a
symptom of a medical illness, the parent may often
land up spending a lot of their time explaining to
others why their child can't do what every other
child is doing or why their child shouldn't be
punished for doing what other children might be
punished for.
Parents who try to
explain to the child's school that these
"behaviors" are really neurologic symptoms are
generally doing so because of a fear that the child
will be blamed for something that the parent has
reason to believe that the child can't help or
can't manage easily. They are instinctively trying
to protect their child from a system that tends to
punish departures from a fairly rigid set of
expectations for how children should behave. Just
as some parents may "medicalize" or
"overmedicalize" behaviors, some teachers attribute
too much voluntary intention to the behavior. One
of the most frequent examples I see of this in my
work is teachers who, describing a child's tics or
compulsions, characterize them as
"attention-seeking" behaviors. In some cases, then,
parents and teachers are polarized in their
understanding or explanation of the child's
behavior. In my experience, disagreements over the
cause or voluntary nature of the child's behavior
is one of the biggest sources of conflict and
disputes between parents of children with
neurobehavioral conditions and school
personnel.
All too often, I
think that what eventually happens is that the
parent comes to believe that the child can't
control very much of their behavior and the parent
accepts too much as they stop trying to discipline
the child at all for fear that the child's
"symptoms" will become worse. Sometimes the notion
of "accepting the child" gets taken to the extreme
of not trying to help the child improve that which
they need to improve.
|
|
DISCIPLINE
MEANS "TRAINING"
|
|
Recognizing that we
don't want to be harsh or punitive about something
that the child really can't control, but that there
are some behaviors that really are problematic,
what would happen if we take punishment off the
table? Would parents be more inclined to
acknowledge that something needs to be addressed?
Would parents and teachers find it easier to come
up with an appropriate plan to help the student
self-manage? My experience suggests that they
would, but both parents and teachers need to share
the goal of helping the child learn to
self-regulate. If the teacher is stuck in the
noncreative "He has to be taught a lesson for this
by punishing him" mode, this won't work. The
teacher is right on one level: the child does need
to be taught something. But what you teach the
child and how you teach the child will make a
tremendous difference in whether the child learns
to self-manage.
When a child is
struggling behaviorally, I take a "no fault"
approach to understanding and trying to change
things. I start from the premise that for whatever
reason, the child or adolescent is predisposed to
have particular behaviors, and that in light of
those strong predisposing factors, we need to
carefully consider what kind of environmental
supports the child needs if they are to modulate
this behavior. I do not assume, however, that just
because the parents and teachers may not like
something that it makes it a target for
intervention. As you shall see, there are certain
"tests" a behavior has to pass before I would
attempt any intervention that involved consequences
to the child.
And the very first
thing I change or try to change is not the child or
adolescent, but what the parents and teachers do
before anything happens.
|
|
Information
Section: Behavior
Article: What Do You Mean
by "Behavior?"
Source: Leslie E. Packer,
PhD December, 2002
(revised 2004)
|
Page 1 of
1
|
|
Tourette
Syndrome "Plus" © Copyright 1998 - 2005 Leslie
E. Packer, PhD. except as noted.
All rights reserved
This page last updated January 7, 2005.
Reprint
Policy.
Privacy
Policy.
Contact.
|
|