Pushing kids and their mental health

[Anonymous]

The high rates of high school students in my area (competitive public in the DMV full of pushy UMC parents, not TJ) seem to coincide with the controlling nature of the parents, IME. Here’s an article I read recently that talks more about that:

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/10/why-are-kids-so-sad.html

It’s a bit rambling, but the relevant bit is that kids need autonomy in order to develop “the sense that your choices and actions affect your life, that they matter” (what psychologists call an “internal locus of control”). By contrast, having one’s life controlled by others (an “external locus of control”) has been shown to correlate with “hopelessness, depression, and suicidiality.”

The teen depression crisis is being driven by a perfect storm of societal-level factors, and there’s only so much one family can do to counteract all that. But giving the kids some control over their own decisions and choices may be one of the biggest.

I get the fact that we live in late stage capitalism and wealth inequality is at an all-time high, but I think the pushiness so common in the DMV to have our kids on the “right” side of that divide is harmful to our kids’ mental health.

What do you think?

[Anonymous]

I think it depends on a lot of things. Very hard to generalize.

[Anonymous]

I don’t think I had any more ‘control’ over my life when I was in school. I had less opportunities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The high rates of high school students in my area (competitive public in the DMV full of pushy UMC parents, not TJ) seem to coincide with the controlling nature of the parents, IME. Here’s an article I read recently that talks more about that:

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/10/why-are-kids-so-sad.html

It’s a bit rambling, but the relevant bit is that kids need autonomy in order to develop “the sense that your choices and actions affect your life, that they matter” (what psychologists call an “internal locus of control”). By contrast, having one’s life controlled by others (an “external locus of control”) has been shown to correlate with “hopelessness, depression, and suicidiality.”

The teen depression crisis is being driven by a perfect storm of societal-level factors, and there’s only so much one family can do to counteract all that. But giving the kids some control over their own decisions and choices may be one of the biggest.

I get the fact that we live in late stage capitalism and wealth inequality is at an all-time high, but I think the pushiness so common in the DMV to have our kids on the “right” side of that divide is harmful to our kids’ mental health.

What do you think?

Wrong.

It’s social media that’s causing the problem.

[Anonymous]

Parents push frantically living in areas with other like-minded families. Kids self-medicate using social media as well as the traditional routes.

[Anonymous]

OP:

I am guessing you were the person ranting and raving in this thread, weren’t you?

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1067220.page

[Anonymous]

Yes, it’s controlling parents + social media/tech + the exorbitant cost of college, which makes teenagers and their worried parents do outrageous things to try and get “merit” or scholarships.

[Anonymous]

When will you realize…Vienna waits for you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it’s controlling parents + social media/tech + the exorbitant cost of college, which makes teenagers and their worried parents do outrageous things to try and get “merit” or scholarships.

Instagram has been directly implicated in the suicide spike among teens - particularly teen girls.

Phones = declining mental health in teens.

[Anonymous]

I do not plan to push my kid DMV-style and agree that it can lead to mental health strains. Kids deserve a childhood, and much more free play time (and less stress) than we give them here.

On the flip side, though, parents should be aware that some anxiety, etc. is innate or inherited and you may get a high-strung kid obsessed with grades/achievement even if you take a laid-back approach. My parents both had intensive, pushy parents themselves so made the decision to be very laid-back and "your best is enough" with us. I was still an absolute obsessive neurotic freak when it came to achievement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The high rates of high school students in my area (competitive public in the DMV full of pushy UMC parents, not TJ) seem to coincide with the controlling nature of the parents, IME. Here’s an article I read recently that talks more about that:

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/10/why-are-kids-so-sad.html

It’s a bit rambling, but the relevant bit is that kids need autonomy in order to develop “the sense that your choices and actions affect your life, that they matter” (what psychologists call an “internal locus of control”). By contrast, having one’s life controlled by others (an “external locus of control”) has been shown to correlate with “hopelessness, depression, and suicidiality.”

The teen depression crisis is being driven by a perfect storm of societal-level factors, and there’s only so much one family can do to counteract all that. But giving the kids some control over their own decisions and choices may be one of the biggest.

I get the fact that we live in late stage capitalism and wealth inequality is at an all-time high, but I think the pushiness so common in the DMV to have our kids on the “right” side of that divide is harmful to our kids’ mental health.

What do you think?

Wrong.

It’s social media that’s causing the problem.

Very odd to make a categorical statement like that. A lot of things can be harmful to our kids’ mental health.

[Anonymous]

Interesting article. On one hand, I agree with the premise that it’s a too pat and convenient to just blame phones, as if individuals restricting phones is the only answer. The discussion about the sharp rise in mental health issues in teens reminds me of the discussion of the sharp rise in obesity: it’s a universally recognized problem that just happened to happen to a whole bunch of people all at once, but somehow the solution is supposed to be entirely individual, and societal blame for the cause is entirely on the individual family. On the face of it, that’s logically absurd but yet we as a society are peculiarly badly suited to dealing with problems that go beyond the individual. “Teens shouldn’t be depressed and should just put down their phone” is about as ineffective a statement as “Fat people shouldn’t be fat and should just not eat junk food.” But despite the wildly obvious ineffectiveness of both those approaches to problems, it is where people reach first. I have a lot of thoughts as to why, but I think for the purpose of this post, I will agree with the author that “it’s the phones” is a spectacularly useless answer.

On the other hand, while the article is rambling and unclear on this point, one thing I strongly disagree with is the sense I get that the author seems to believe that eradication or reduction of adult-teen boundaries is a good thing that will reduce teen depression. At one point the author writes “Maybe having a professional dialectic behavioral therapist on call is less important than having a Mad Aunt around to nonjudgmentally answer weird questions.” And sure, it’s important for kids to have non-parent trusted adults in their lives. But the problem is that over and over and over, a lot of adults that step up to play that Mad Aunt role have turned out to be exploitative predators. I think a lot of today’s parents don’t want to give their kids much autonomy in the adult relationships in their lives because so many of those parents were horrifically victimized by adults themselves when they went through adolescence, but didn’t have the words to talk about it because when they were kids, that exploitation and abuse was accepted. As a society we are finally having a conversation about that, but it is still early days in acknowledging just how many current adults were the victims of predators as teens, predators they thought at the time were the “cool” adults or the author’s Mad Aunt. And this blurring of boundaries, this idea that teens should be reaching beyond the family and their parents without their parents knowing has already and is going to lead to some horrific exploitation. It’s delusional to think that places where kids are encouraged to go behind the backs of their parents for emotional support from adults are not going to draw exploitative predators like evil moths to an incredibly attractive flame. The author is rambling on this point, but this boundary-blurring is a common theme of a lot of more liberal parenting advice, and it’s one that I think is deeply problematic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interesting article. On one hand, I agree with the premise that it’s a too pat and convenient to just blame phones, as if individuals restricting phones is the only answer. The discussion about the sharp rise in mental health issues in teens reminds me of the discussion of the sharp rise in obesity: it’s a universally recognized problem that just happened to happen to a whole bunch of people all at once, but somehow the solution is supposed to be entirely individual, and societal blame for the cause is entirely on the individual family. On the face of it, that’s logically absurd but yet we as a society are peculiarly badly suited to dealing with problems that go beyond the individual. “Teens shouldn’t be depressed and should just put down their phone” is about as ineffective a statement as “Fat people shouldn’t be fat and should just not eat junk food.” But despite the wildly obvious ineffectiveness of both those approaches to problems, it is where people reach first. I have a lot of thoughts as to why, but I think for the purpose of this post, I will agree with the author that “it’s the phones” is a spectacularly useless answer.

On the other hand, while the article is rambling and unclear on this point, one thing I strongly disagree with is the sense I get that the author seems to believe that eradication or reduction of adult-teen boundaries is a good thing that will reduce teen depression. At one point the author writes “Maybe having a professional dialectic behavioral therapist on call is less important than having a Mad Aunt around to nonjudgmentally answer weird questions.” And sure, it’s important for kids to have non-parent trusted adults in their lives. But the problem is that over and over and over, a lot of adults that step up to play that Mad Aunt role have turned out to be exploitative predators. I think a lot of today’s parents don’t want to give their kids much autonomy in the adult relationships in their lives because so many of those parents were horrifically victimized by adults themselves when they went through adolescence, but didn’t have the words to talk about it because when they were kids, that exploitation and abuse was accepted. As a society we are finally having a conversation about that, but it is still early days in acknowledging just how many current adults were the victims of predators as teens, predators they thought at the time were the “cool” adults or the author’s Mad Aunt. And this blurring of boundaries, this idea that teens should be reaching beyond the family and their parents without their parents knowing has already and is going to lead to some horrific exploitation. It’s delusional to think that places where kids are encouraged to go behind the backs of their parents for emotional support from adults are not going to draw exploitative predators like evil moths to an incredibly attractive flame. The author is rambling on this point, but this boundary-blurring is a common theme of a lot of more liberal parenting advice, and it’s one that I think is deeply problematic.

I totally agree with all of this, except I don't understand the statement that boundary-blurring is a common theme of a lot of more liberal parenting advice. With liberal parenting advice I think you're told to do the dialectical behavioral thing rather than go to an aunt's house. That seems like a more conservative bit of parenting advice.

[Anonymous]

I think a lot of more liberal parents are supportive of policies that provide kids access to mental health support, therapy, healthcare, etc. without parent involvement or knowledge. And while in an ideal world that is the non-judgmental Mad Aunt, in many instances that lack of parental supervision is going to and already has attracted predators.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do not plan to push my kid DMV-style and agree that it can lead to mental health strains. Kids deserve a childhood, and much more free play time (and less stress) than we give them here.

On the flip side, though, parents should be aware that some anxiety, etc. is innate or inherited and you may get a high-strung kid obsessed with grades/achievement even if you take a laid-back approach. My parents both had intensive, pushy parents themselves so made the decision to be very laid-back and "your best is enough" with us. I was still an absolute obsessive neurotic freak when it came to achievement.

This. Nurture is important, but nature also matters.

I think mental and physical health are more important than anything. This area and others like it have a toxic culture around achievement and parenting, IMO.

- PhD high achiever and non-Marxist