Schwimmer’s ‘Trust’ Reviewed: Technology / Media Violent to Kids — Parents Need Help!

Originally published by ThinkerMedia: BestThinking.com on March 24, 2011

 

(David Schwimmer and Andy Bellin’s important play Trust had a three months’ debut run at Chicago’s Looking Glass Theater a year ago, and is now resurfacing as a movie. My review of the play follows here.)

Trust is a moving portrayal of the life-changing consequences of an Internet romance between an innocent teenage girl and an adult male predator. Easy access and privacy in real time can be dangerous.

The truth of Trust and how close it is to all our lives and a threat to our loved ones are powerful. The audience seems to hold its breath as it watches the emotional trap laid methodically and carefully by the rapist, who lurks safely in the anonymity of cyberspace as he craftily manipulates a young girl’s budding sexuality. The piece exposes the deep and complex emotional traumas that spread like a concussion wave from the epicenter of the naïve teenager’s pain to her family members, friends, and caring criminal investigators, and portrays their difficult journeys towards coping and healing.

While the topics of cruel and criminal manipulation and rape of youngsters are timeless and compelling, what makes Trust especially relevant today is the role of technology. The audience sees the teen’s text-messages to her imagined lover as she sends and receives them. It is online and cell phone messaging and texting that enable the narrative’s tragedy – the evolving furtive relationship between the naïve child and her predator. Increased access and privacy in real time have real consequences.

The piece’s aim appears to be to bring this painful and real story to life to start a dialogue. After the play, the audience was treated to a discussion with local rape-assistant experts. The director stated that its intent is not to preach or provide solutions. But the well-delivered message is clear: Kids + technology = potential danger. I believe that this drama can be quite useful as a health-education tool that alerts media-soaked youngsters and their parents groping at the same time with powerful technologies, hormonal changes, and still-evolving but immature minds.

But it does not go far enough.

There are critical technology-related issues, central to the play and to our children’s lives, that go beyond the scope of Trust and must be considered if we are to save whole generations of children. These additional threats are not as obvious or sensational as those in the play, but their insidious danger to child development and family life can be more widespread.

The realities: Media are here to stay and will continue to evolve and bring new challenges. We have wonderful engineers and innovators, but they do not have the best interests of our children and families in mind. The basic needs of families have not changed significantly over the centuries, and the basics of child-rearing will not change much in the future, no matter what technology comes our way.

Much of technology can be wonderful and helpful, but if it is not planned, organized, and delivered correctly, it can be harmful. Commonly, however, parents complain that they have too few effective tools and strategies to manage children’s media lives, and too many parents are essentially abandoning their digital children to media that have become the central component of their environment.

The threats: Studies are showing that technology increasingly dominates kids’ time and attention to the detriment of family life and balanced development, while providing few clear benefits. Under-supervised children continue to stuff themselves with junk media as they do junk food. Limit setting and piecemeal ‘expert’ advice are only partially effective. Parents’ current practices — just put those wonderful magical technology devices into their kids’ hands, make a few rules, and walk away — are desperately insufficient. Teenagers keep finding new ways to assert their needs for autonomy, and they are not pretty. (see Tamar Lewin’s “Teenage Insults, Scrawled on Web, Not on Walls”, New York Times 5/5/10.)

The call to action: After over a decade of this laissez-faire approach and growing chaos, the time has come for parents to take a broad, systematic and serious look at the role of technology. Right now, parents are adapting family life to technology. The reverse has to happen, or we are in for a disaster as parents are excluded from larger and larger parts of kids’ lives.

Time is running out.

The solution: It is time to return to child-rearing basics and think of what kids and families need. Parents must change their own mindsets and behaviors and commit to an ongoing serious effort to take charge of the technologies in their homes.

Parents must now start early to actively fit balanced technology use into family life as they do healthy nutrition. Starting in early childhood, parents must begin to make media consumption part of normal family life and to raise kids who use media in balanced and healthy ways. It is time to systematically extract the good and exclude the bad, making technology positive and constructive for kids from the very beginnings of family life.

Parents need to be empowered, educated, and given tools by professionals and industry to manage the media lives of their children. Such an approach could prevent the type of catastrophe portrayed in Trust, as well as the longer-term and potentially more disastrous distortion of family life and development of our children that comes with the unsupervised and unorganized consumption of technology.

If we have the will, we can have better family lives and raise healthier kids who are savvy about the balanced uses of technology.

Article by Eitan ‘Dr. S®’ Schwarz, MD

©All rights reserved

David Schwimmer’s TRUST Is a Call to Action

Drama is Great Tool for Health Education about Technology but Formspring Shows Parental Measures Insufficient

David Schwimmer and Andy Bellin’s important play “Trust” just closed its three months’ debut run at Chicago’s Looking Glass Theater last week-end, and is fortunately slated to resurface as a movie later this year. The drama is a moving portrayal of the life-changing consequences of an Internet romance between an innocent teenage girl and an adult male predator.

The truth of this drama and how close it is to all our lives and a threat to our loved ones is powerful. The audience seems to hold its breath as it watches the emotional trap laid methodically and carefully by the rapist, who lurks safely in the anonymity of cyberspace as he craftily manipulates a young girl’s budding sexuality. The play exposes the deep and complex emotional traumas that spread like a concussion wave the naïve teenager’s pain to her family members, friends, and caring criminal investigators, and portrays their difficult journeys towards coping and healing.

While the topics of cruel and criminal manipulation and rape of youngsters are timeless and compelling, what makes Trust especially relevant today is the role of technology. The audience sees the teen’s text-messages to her imagined lover as she sends and receives them. It is online and cell phone messaging and texting that enable the narrative’s tragedy – the evolving furtive relationship between the naïve child and her predator.

“Trust”s aim appears to be to bring this painful and real story to life to “start a dialogue.” Its intent is not to preach or provide solutions. But the well-delivered message is clear: Kids + technology = potential danger. I believe that this drama can be quite useful as a health-education tool that alerts media-soaked youngsters and their parents groping at the same time with powerful technologies, hormonal changes, and still-evolving but immature minds. But it does not go far enough.

There are critical technology-related issues, central to the play and to our children’s lives, that go beyond the scope of “Trust” and must be considered if we are to save whole generations of children. These additional threats are not as obvious or sensational as those in the play, but their insidious danger to child development and family life can be more widespread.

The realities: Media are here to stay and will continue to evolve and bring new challenges. We have wonderful engineers and innovators, but they do not have the best interests of our children and families in mind. The basic needs of families have not changed significantly over the centuries, and the basics of child-rearing will not change much in the future, no matter what technology comes our way.

Much of technology can be wonderful and helpful, but if it is not planned, organized, and delivered correctly, it can be harmful. Commonly, however, parents complain that they have too few effective tools and strategies to manage childrens’ media lives, and too many parents are essentially abandoning their digital children to media that have become the central component of their environment.

The threats: Recent studies by the Pew and Kaiser Family Foundation and other research show that technology increasingly dominates kids’ time and attention to the detriment of family life and balanced development, while providing few clear benefits. Under-supervised children continue to stuff themselves with junk media as they do junk food. Limit setting and piecemeal ‘expert’ advice are only partially effective. Parents’ current practices — just put those wonderful magical technology devices into their kids’ hands, make a few rules, and walk away — are desperately insufficient. Teenagers keep finding new ways to assert their needs for autonomy, and they are not pretty (see Tamar Lewin’s “Teenage Insults, Scrawled on Web, Not on Walls”, New York Times 5/5/10.)

The call to action: After over a decade of this laissez-faire approach and growing chaos, the time has come for parents to take a broad, systematic and serious look at the role of technology. Right now, parents are adapting family life to technology. The reverse has to happen, or we are in for a disaster as parents are excluded from larger and larger parts of kids’ lives..

Time is running out.

The solution: It is time to return to child-rearing basics and think of what kids and families need. Parents must change their own mindsets and behaviors and commit to an ongoing serious effort to take charge of the technologies in their homes.

Parents must now start early to actively fit balanced technology use into family life as they do healthy nutrition. Starting in early childhood, parents must begin to make media consumption part of normal family life and to raise kids who use media in balanced and healthy ways. It is time to systematically extract the good and exclude the bad, making technology positive and constructive for kids from the very beginnings of family life.

Such an approach could prevent the type of catastrophe portrayed in “Trust”, as well as the longer-term and potentially more disastrous distortion of family life and development of our children that comes with the unsupervised and unorganized consumption of technology.

If we have the will, we can have better family lives and raise healthier kids who are savvy about the balanced uses of technology.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/06/us/06formspring.html?emc=tnt&tntemail1=y

Writings

American Psychiatric Association’s 162nd Annual Meeting

Apologizing

Courage

Helping Children (and Yourself) Cope with Terrorism and Other Violence

Malignant Memories: Signatures of Violence

Mistreating Pets and Other Animals

Teaching Children Alternatives to Violence

Bullying’

Divorce

Is it Punishment or Child Abuse?

School Shootings

National Trauma

Raising Children to Hate, Murder and Suicide

Telling Preschoolers About War

Thinking About Neuroscience, Technology, and Professionalism in Mental Health

The Post-Traumatic Response in Children and Adolescents

Malignant memories: Post-traumatic Changes in Memory in Adults …

Malignant Memories: Effect of a Shooting in the Workplace on School Personnel Attitudes

Malignant Memories: Reluctance to Utilize Mental Health Services After a Disaster

Malignant Memories: Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Adults and Children

A Revised Checklist to Obtain Consent to Treatment with Medication

abc7chicago.com: School Shooting Remembered 20 Years Later

When Death Rides the Rails [Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers]

Too Soon to Reflect on 9/11?

Shootings Leave a Suburb in Trauma – The New York Times

Programmable, user interactive cigarette dispenser and method therefore

Cigarette Dispenser

PROBILL billing software – please enter search PROBILL

“HER” — Robots as Women

7 Tips To Release Your Stress In Minutes

A Child Psychiatrist Takes a Stand on the Dangers & Delights of Digital Media A Plan for Raising Healthy Kids in a High-tech World

A major disaster is now in the making: Kids are becoming Addicted to Media and Parents are Helpless

A SCHOOL SHOOTING IN THE COMFORT OF YOUR HOME

ABC.com: The View Hot Topics

Advergames: McDonald’s Videogame Marketing to Kids Is a Tech Media Management Challenge to Parents

Alert to Colleagues: Hypo-Professionalism in Psychiatry

ALONE TOGETHER is must reading for anyone who has a cell phone; and a must MUST if you also have a child.

Always Connected: The new digital media habits of young children – REVIEWED

American Academy of Pediatrics Gives Good Guidance. Kids iPad ZillyDilly™ App Safe and Effective Media Manager is Next Step.

An Apple tablet will give developers a bigger sandbox. But how many will jump in?

An E-Reader for Kids

APPLE TABLET: The New York Times, The Huffington Post, News Blaze, Slate

Apple’s iPad iBook 2: Textbook Publishing, Students, Parents, Teachers, and Collaboration

Apple’s iPad iBook 2: Textbook Publishing, Students, Parents, Teachers, and Collaboration

Appreciating the Family Side of Technology

Attention Parents: Be Careful — Tablets Can Make Your Child into an Overweight Robot

Baby Twits to Change Own Diaper

Be the Change

Best iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad, Android Kids Apps and Tips for Parents: ZillyDilly innovative iPad browser system empowers parents. Can I have your opinion?

Book Expo America Opens this Week as Industry Scrambles to Respond to Teen-Initiated Tech Trends

Book Review: Dr. Sherry Turkle’s ‘Alone Together’ (Basic Books)

Buy an Apple iPad for Your Child?

Cell Phones, Cancer, and Children: Possible Lethality and Other Threats from Technology

CES 2010: The Circus Begins (And Gadgets Galore!)

Chalk and Cheese Chronicles

Children & Brand Awareness: They’re Never Too Young to Say “GeekDad”

Children Fail to Recognize Online Ads, Study Says

Children, Parents, And Technology: Becoming A Successful Digital Family

Christmas Gifts 2009: 15 BEST Gadgets to Give (And Get) (PHOTOS)

Computing Our Children’s Future

CONVERSATION WITH GOOGLE’S SERGEI BRIN

Cultivating Compassion: Meditation For Better Relationships

Daring to Live Your Life Offline

David Pogue Provides a Fascinating Vista

David Schwimmer’s TRUST Is a Call to Action

Digital Dieting

DIGITAL MEDIA CAN BE DANGEROUS WEAPONS IN KIDS’ HANDS

Disembodied Androids and Robotic chair fine art

Disney to Give Back Money Parents Spent on Baby Einstein Videos

Dr S. Comment: Cell Phone Use Damaging Babies of Pregnant Moms?

Dr S. Comment: Infant Media Exposure and Toddler Development

Dr. S Comment: TECHNOLOGY AND CHILDREN’S BRAIN

Dr. S Opinion: Are “Crib Robots” Good For Babies?

Dr. S to Pediatricians: Please Update Your Screen Time Guidelines ASAP to Include Tablets

Dr. Sherry Turkle’s ‘Alone Together’ Brings Alarming News About Kids and Technology

EXPERT COMMENT: Preparing your kids for the iPad and beyond

Expert to Parents: From Tots through Teens Give Kids Best Internet with iPad App

Expert: Kids’ Tablet Wows Need Parent Response

Expert: Make the iPad a Home Appliance Part of the Solution

Expert: Please Keep Kids’ Brains Green

Facebook Fueling Divorce: STUDY

Family Coping with Disaster: Hurricane Sandy

Family Focus – Is TV Bad for Babies?

Family Information Technology (FIT) Solution Pending via iPad App

Finding the Courage to Be Grateful

Finding The Spirituality In New Media

Focusing on Education From the Get-Go

Food For A Good Mood

Free iOS App – ZillyDilly for iPad

Gadgets to Bring Holiday Cheer to Little Travelers

Genetic-Based Internet Addiction May Be Countered by Parent and Educator Media Management

Getting Kids Ready for the New iPad and Beyond

Give or donate used iPads

Google Glasses and Wearable Computers: Parents, Are You Ready for New Kids’ Technology Crazes?

Google, Facebook, Twitter, and the Wisdom 2.0 Conference

Gov. Schwarzenegger and Maria Shriver on Right Track

Hate Mail and the New Religious Wars in Tech

Here’s What I’d Like To Hear More of In 2010

Home Digital Media: Assets or Liabilities for Children and Family Life?

How Much is Too Much? Screen Time and Kids

How Talking and Listening Are Crucial for Psychiatry…

How Tech Will Transform the Traditional Classroom

How to Make Online Gaming and Entertainment Safe for Our Kids

I Forgot My iPhone. What a relief!

IACC Unanimously Approves 2010 Strategic Plan for Autism Research

If Your Kids Are Awake, They’re Probably Online

In the Good Ol’ Cybertime: An Urgent Alert to Parents

Increased Media Coverage Leaves Cyberparents Even More Helpless

Inner Activism: Three Tricks For A Happier New Year

Internet Addiction: A Clinical Disorder?

Inventing an Internet Good for Kids: ZillyDilly’s Free Offer Extended to Welcome Apple’s Next iPad

iPad Now a Tot and Enthralling to Tots

Is this a Spiritual Crossroads?

It’s Not too Late to Set Intentions for 2010

Jack Jia The Visionary

Junk Food, Junk Media

Just Listen – Overcoming Holiday Shyness

Kids & Families Coping with Disaster

KIDS, PARENTS & TECHNOLOGY

Kids, Parents, and Technology: An Unexplored Space

KIDS, PARENTS, and TECHNOLOGY: New Blog Spot

LinkedIn: Children’s Media

Make Tech Holiday Gifts Good for Families

MEGA DISNEY FINALLY NOW DOING RIGHT THING!

Mom Calls 911 Over Son’s Video Game Obsession

Monitoring Kids’ Cellphone Activity

More Media Coverage Leaves Digital Parents Frustrated

MyDigitalFamily Launches Second Edition of Trailblazing Technology Guide for Families and Children

Neato Robotic Vacuum to Take Over Household Cleaning

Neuroscience and Psychiatry: The Roots of Humane Mental Health Care

New Year’s Resolutions And Time

Nexi: The MDS Sociable Robot

Obama to parents: School nights for homework, not TV

Obesity Will Soon Cost U.S. $344 Billion a Year

Old iPads for Kids or Donate to Schools

Online Communities: The Kindness of Strangers

Oprah: Texting While Driving Is ‘Absolutely Stupid’

Parents Must Choose: Manage Digital Media Better or Unplug Your Child

Parents see spectacle: Eye good kids go gaga at Google goggles

Parents: Give Your Used iPad to Your Child, Start Preparing Now

Part 1: Report from the field: What medical errors would mental health insurance buy many Americans today?

Part 2: Report From The Field

PBS Frontline — Digital Nation: ROUNDTABLE With Correspondent Douglas Rushkoff

Pew Report: Youth Texting and Media Use Explode, but Parent Limits Have Little Effect

Pioneer Thought Leader and Researcher: Robots Are Here to Stay and They Are Us

Preschoolers Watch Too Much TV — Leads to Obesity

Principles for Parenting the Touchscreen Generation

Psychiatrist Gives Parents Tools to Manage Kids’ Media

Psychiatrist to Parents: Make New Apple Operating Systems Good for Your Family

PTA and Facebook Talking: But Kids and Families Need More!

Q: Is the iPad Good for Kids’ Attention Span? A: Yes, But Only If Parents Manage It for Them.

RE: HOW MANY ANGELS CAN TEXT ON A PINHEAD?

RE: Kids, Parents & Technology: A Guide for Young Families Aims To Help Parents With Their Digital Families

RE: Yes, People Still Read but Now It’s Social

Real-time Web, Unreal-time Life

Red Headed Boy Attacked: Police Probe Tie To ‘Kick A Ginger Day’ Message

Robots and Language: What is “I”?

ROBOTS DANCING IN CHICAGO?

Robovie-II Grocery Shopping Robot Helping Out This Holiday Season and Neato Robotic Vacuum to Take Over Household Cleaning

SanFrancisco Magazine: RE: Tech gets a time-out: Charges of hypocrisy be damned: Some Silicon Valley tech wizards are quietly raising their kids outside the lurid digital landscape that their own industry calls childhood.

Schwimmer’s ‘Trust’ Reviewed: Technology / Media Violent to Kids — Parents Need Help!

Screen-Free Week a Chance to Start Managing Kids’ Media

Skout, Social Media, and Other Online Risks by Children and About Becoming Entrepreneurs

Stop drifting in fast technology currents and start swimming!

Stress Much this Season?

Taming the Tech-Wild Child

Technology at the Margins — Social Innovators and Innovations

Technology, Properly Used, Can Be Embraced and Its Power Channeled, Not Be Feared

Ten for ’10: New Gadgets for Home and Away

Terror in Boston: National and Individual Trauma and Healing

Texting While Walking

THAT SPECIAL INFANT TOY, THE IPAD

The 15 Most Influential Games of the Decade

The Best iPhone Apps for Kids

The Dangers Of Multitasking And How To Stop

The Decline of Language – Based Psychiatry

The Future of Social Media with Gerd Leonhard

The Greatest Gift We Can Give

The Growing Backlash Against Over-Parenting

The Huffington Post: Kids and Media: Joined at the Hip and The Wall Street Journal: A Safer Way to Text on the Road and MIT Review: Ban Texting While Parenting

The Huffington Post: The Empathic Web and The Family Education Network: How to Teach Empathy

The Internet Is Making Us Shallow and Vapid! (Or Maybe We Were Just Shallow And Vapid To Begin With)

The Makings of Our Earliest Memories

The New York Times: Business Section p. 7 Junk Food, Junk Media

The New York Times: Cellphones Now Used More for Data Than for Calls

The Online Mom Is technology separating us from our kids…?

The Power of Magical Thinking: Research Shows the Importance of Imagination in Children’s Cognitive Development

The Power Of Not Knowing

The Wall Street Journal: Child Psychiatrist: iPad can be good for kids and families Apple’s iPad Is for Moms Now, Techies Later on Huff and Laptop Killer?

Tips for Controlling Your Teen’s Facebook Usage

TIPS FOR EASING FAMILY SUMMER VACATION TECH STRESS

To Give And To Receive: The When And The Why

Top Teacher Gift Ideas to Show Appreciation

Tots Love iPads, so Please Teach Them to Use Them Right

Tots: You Are Failing Us. We Need You To Manage Our Digital Media Lives Better

Video Games And Children — What’s The Right Amount?

Video Games and Learning from the Norway Massacre About Raising Decent Children: A Veteran Doctor’s POV

Video Games and What We Can Learn from Anders Breivik About Raising Decent Children: A Veteran Doctor’s POV

Video Games Can Be Good: Fight Childhood Diabetes and Obesity

Washington’s Snow and the Lack of Community Spirit

We’re Being Bad: Are Mom And Dad To Blame?

What to Say to a Child Who Wants to Text, an iPad, a cell phone, or any other ways to consume media

What’s Your Hobby?

WHY OFFER SCREEN TIME TO PRESCHOOLERS?

Why The iPad Is The Next Great Educational Tool

Will Young Cyberbullies Become Adult

Wife Beaters? Anonymous Technology Can Hide Abuse and Violence

With “Avatar,” Technology Has Never Looked So Human in Film (VIDEO)

With the Rise of Social Media, No Privacy for Tiger Woods

Working Mother – Is Tech Taking Over Your Teen?

Would You Rather Be Loving Or Loved?

Yes, Santa Claus, There is a Virginia

Youth Psychotherapy With Digital Media

Zillydilly iPad Browser is custom-fitted to each child and empowers good parenting

Baby Twits to Change Own Diaper

Originally published by ThinkerMedia: BestThinking.com on May 20, 2013

A wet diaper detector to alarm mom or dad is soon coming to Twitter!

So odd, at first.

Then funny. “Can’t seem to remember to change your baby’s diapers? That’s what social media is for.” LOL. Great piece, Mr. Cooper.

But is it? Now for the not-so-funny part. (I usually hate to be a party-pooper or rain on someone’s parade.)

OK. Taking some of the guesswork out of caring for Baby seems like a great idea without a downside. Who needs anxious uncertainty and guesswork in parenting? The clever idea is so obvious and simple, it seems elegant: A cute device placed on diaper to sense humidity and twit mom on her phone that it is time to change Baby. Change Baby immediately and Baby avoids a rash and becomes comfortable at once. And parent is assured of doing the best for the baby. Nothing seems better: At first glance, a clear win-win.

Maybe — we don’t know. Consumer technology moves faster than we can research. It may make no difference at all, either way. Or let’s wonder, what can be some harm? Well, it really is just a version of the old “pad and bell” devices for enuresis of older kids, and their use is controversial.

My general POV: Let’s not tamper with infants unless we know what we are doing. So, I believe it important to raise these questions for parents and experts:

Is there some benefit to a parent not knowing, except from Baby’s own signal? Well, for starters, the parent can eventually learn to respond to different cries and builds confidence she knows her baby, binding their intimacy tighter, and increasing the parent’s sense of competence. Or Baby learns to signal distress and that the signal works, developing rudiments of a basic sense of competence in self-expression and trust. Or is there bonding value to mutual tension relief, a shared joy that comes repeatedly from solving an annoying problem together that varies in its annoyance and evokes a range of intensities of reactions in baby and parent?

And do we want to take out some of the intangibles that accrue when one person alerts the other and the other responds? Practicing the “social synapse”? The humanity, empathy, uncertainty, adventure, mystery, awe, discovery, challenge of growing a new life. Normal anxiety about Baby’s comfort. Baby knowing own sensation of warmth or cold wetness and other learning from being wet.

Our cave-dwelling ancestors probably did not have diapers or changed them, so biologically the cycle of wetting, waiting, alerting, etc. may not be crucial. But IMHO the interaction probably does enrich parenting and infancy and provides neurodevelopmentally rich and significant opportunities for human interaction and learning. During infancy are emerging attachment and frustration tolerance circuits in the brain that may be the underpinnings of brain networks for trust, rapport, confidence, and realistic expectations in baby.

So, maybe rather than responding right away, mother can wait a while after the alarm. The compromise seems reasonable, but it provides less intense experiences and would eliminate direct communication. Also, some parents could use this device initially and then learn the specific cry that accompanies being wet.

Telemonitoring bodily functions is a great medical tool. There may be specific instances for its parenting use, for instance for a severe rash or a situation where parent and infant do not communicate directly. So then there is the senses of smell and touch. That’s part of the adventure and intimacy for both parent and Baby.

So I do not recommend routine use of this device. Other questions arise: Would you want it in your own underwear? Do you want to reshape older kids’ – siblings’ – definition of privacy?

More generally, the inevitable introduction of this “convenience” is happening in a new space where kids’ development and technology intersect. The impact on our relationships, society, and public policy and privacy will emerge, no doubt, as opportunities to market in the crib will be explored by startups and commerce not interested in child development. Here’s another piece of evidence that we are getting closer to the time of Crib Robots.

Even more generally, some other easy uses of linking private body function sensors (that might be legitimate medically) with social media would be distant real time communication of sexual arousal (male and female, menses, blood levels of drugs and alcohol, gastric contents and other GI functions – stomach and rectal fullness, ovulation, hormones, bladder fullness and leakage, etc. etc. And then, once this enters into the massive cyberinfo stream, what about who and how this info is used.

Brazillian parents soon will be the first to market test this type of quandary – but only if they realize they are making it a parenting decision, and may pay dearly for what seems like the latest great convenience brought to us by technology.

 

Article by Eitan ‘Dr. S®’ Schwarz, MD

©All rights reserved

 

Dr. S to Pediatricians: Please Update Your Screen Time Guidelines ASAP to Include Tablets

Originally published by ThinkerMedia: BestThinking.com on December 25, 2012

 

Summary: Expert urges American Academy of Pediatrics to update screen time guidelines to include tablets and gives parents interim guidance for best use of new tablets for children.

Now that the holiday season is over, many children have in their hands new iPads and Minis and other tablets. As the use of tablets increases among children of all ages, questions and concerns are once again raised about the effects these devices have on children. But parents have had little guidance. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recently reaffirmed its stance that parents hold off on any form of screen time until children are two, and limit older preschoolers to less than two hours daily.

However, according to Eitan Schwarz, MD, faculty member at Northwestern University Medical School, expert child and adolescent psychiatrist, families, media and violence, “The AAP guidelines are simply out of date and wrong. While that may seem like a dramatic statement, it stems from the facts that not all screens are the same, nor that interactive experiences are necessarily equivalent to watching TV, nor that any studies have shown damage from early supervised exposure to interactive tablets. To the contrary, several studies and many enthusiastic anecdotal teacher reports show that children become better engaged and learn well via tablets.”

Dr. Schwarz adds, “Simply put: Parents may be doing more harm than good by removing or over-limiting tablets from the lives of their preschoolers. Moreover, the AAP’s two hour daily maximum for preschoolers passively watching TV (while often snacking and leading to obesity) is way too long.” In fact, Dr. S believes that much less TV and more tablet interactivity time of balanced developmental and educational challenges with parent involvement would be much healthier (and probably less likely to be accompanied with snacking.)

Why tablets are beneficial to children

According to Dr. Schwarz, “Unlike television, which can damage psychological development, touchscreen devices – like tablets – have been found to promote learning. Recent research has shown that touchscreens can enhance learning and that calm, creative activities on the touchscreen, such as painting, were similar to their “real world” counterparts in that they “do not seem to adversely affect children’s behavior or attention in the short term.””

Tablets are an essential part of preparing kids for a lifetime of responsible technology use. As tablets and touchscreen devices proliferate, ask this: Will my child be left behind if her grade school, high school or college integrates these popular technologies into the classroom? Being present with children as they learn about tablets helps them realize the benefits while minimizing the risks.

According to Dr. Schwarz, “Rich graphics and engaging gameplay are big motivators for young children. More and more, tablets and educational video games are being embraced by educators and have been shown to increase learning and engagement. There is actually powerful increasing evidence that interactive video games can actually promote healthy behaviors. Parents can bring to children the rich contents of the Internet and many educational and fun apps.”

What tablet activities are harmful to children?

In the past, aggressive games commonly included war games, fighting with toy swords or rifles, and waging war with G.I. Joes by (mostly boy) children. Such limited violence experiments served much the same way as in many mammalian species to practice survival and hunting skills. The vast majority of kids played to master and eventually transform childhood aggressive impulses into later sports competition, healthy ambition and assertion.

According to Dr. Schwarz, “Video games are supposed to serve our kids today in the same way. But something is now very wrong. Magical enchanting video games, with their brilliantly engaging action, graphics and audio, can too readily draw our (mostly boy) children over the top into too intense anti-social and too violent attitudes. The unlimited anti-social or sometimes addicting mayhem and utter pointless damage perpetrated by our youngsters themselves to animal- or human-like creatures in violent games tragically bring out the worst in kids.”

The role of parents in supervising and limiting video game use has again recently taken center stage. Parents worry correctly that tablets can be used anywhere and anytime and are more difficult to supervise. Yet actually, some tablets can be much easier to control than TV, for example with ZillyDilly for iPad and Mini, a new browser management system, so that the best content can be preselected and time spent limited.

The bottom line

Dr. S states, “The time has come for the AAP to revise its screen time guidelines for preschoolers to include less TV and more supervised and controlled interactive media time.”

In the meantime, the benefits of tablet use amongst children are being researched and discovered every day, so parents should make informed, responsible decisions about their children’s tablet use to ensure that they get all the benefits they have to offer. How can you start incorporating positive, fun, educational tablet activities into your family’s life? It’s easier than you think. Dr. Schwarz compiled a list of ten easy ways for parents to ensure safe tablet time for their families.

The Doctor’s Checklist: 10 Ways Parents Can Encourage Safe, Fun Tablet Use

  1. Ensure that your child’s games have an agerating that is appropriate for their age. 90% of teenagers say their parents never check game ratings before allowing them to buy them. Always refer to App Store ratings to ensure the games your child wants are rated for his/her age group.
  2. Ensure that any tablet or game use is done in a family setting.Allowing children to use tablets or other smart devices in private can encourage unhealthy and antisocial behaviors. Instead, limit use to family settings and snacking and accompany your young players in their adventures.
  3. Consult fellow parents and trustworthy resourcesfor an accurate, in-depth review of a game/app before purchasing it. If you’re unsure of a game’s rating or content, check with the child’s teacher or use online resources like Common Sense Media to help inform your decision. You can also visit MyDigitalFamily.org or refer to Kids, Parents & Technology: A Guide for Young Families .
  4. Limit time spent with tablets/media. Games are good for eye-hand coordination, but they can easily occupy inordinate amounts of time. Be sure that tablet time is balanced with quality family time and activities. A browser likeZIlliyDilly for iPad or Mini provides age-appropriate time limits and content.
  5. Keep tablets and smart devices in a common area.Tablets should be treated like appliances, so create a common area where they can be charged and parked to help create media free zones.
  6. Balance contentbetween healthy growth and mere entertainment, imaginative creativity and empty-headed reactivity to screen content, reflective and busywork, handling three-dimensional and other materials like clay and painting and manipulating images on two dimensional screens, and between active play and lazy sitting and snacking. Be aware of signs that your child is over-engaged or addicted to games or a device, and put proper use restrictions in place to counteract this behavior, and don’t hesitate to consult a credentialed specialist. The younger your child, the more permanent is the brain he is forming.
  7. Limit web use to age-appropriate sites. It’s too easy to stumble upon unsafe or inappropriate online content. Keep online activity restricted to age-appropriate sites and monitor online activity closely. Not all “educational” apps are actually educational.
  8. Get involved with your child’s teachers to ensure that school work isn’t suffering. To make sure that you’ve struck the right balance of tablet use in your home, keep a close eye on your child’s performance. If grades begin to slip, it might be time to revisit his/her media plan and adjust it.
  9. Talk to the parents of your child’s friends to learn what media they allow in their homesso when your child begins to have sleepovers and play dates, they aren’t playing any violent games or spending too much time online or snacking.
  10. Require your approval for all game/app purchases.Establish the rule early on that your approval is required for all game purchases. If tablet purchases are made using your personal information, be sure to keep your username, payment information, and password private. This will ensure that no unapproved apps will show up on your device.

Eitan Schwarz, MD, FAACAP, DLFAPA, is a double board-certified child and adolescent psychiatrist with 42+ years of continuing office practice and service to kids and families in Chicago area schools and agencies. Dr. Schwarz, also known as Dr. S, was also a play therapy tech media researcher, has done extensive writings on the effects of violence, technology and screen time on children. He is the inventor of ZillyDilly.

(c) Copyright 2012 Eitan Schwarz MD

Keywords:  iPad, tablets, screentime, screen time, american academy of pediatrics, kids, TV, Mini, Apple, video game, violence, parent control, zillydilly, browser, education, safety, video game violence, video game healthy, interactive, media, guidelines, manage

Article by Eitan ‘Dr. S®’ Schwarz, MD

©All rights reserved

How Talking and Listening Are Crucial for Psychiatry…

Originally published by ThinkerMedia: BestThinking.com on December13, 2014

 

These ideas are worth bearing in mind as parity for mental health coverage and major healthcare reform take us into uncharted waters.

Our brains give us language, and used expertly it can be an awesome neuroscience tool.

In fact, the profession that trained me — modern psychiatry — was first built on the careful and caring art of listening to speech and language in all their nuances and responding in kind as a central element of psychiatric practice. Medical and non-medical psychology pioneers have worked brilliantly and diligently for over a century to free the mentally ill from stigma and to understand and treat them humanely. These pioneers tried to base their practices on systematic notions of the brain / mind that made sense. They tried to infer brain function and structure from mental processes and behavior in the most humane ways — talking with and intensely and actively listening to patients.

Of course, psychoactive medications and other substances, their development, production, and consumption, and their side and main effects are our current industrial-scale neuroscience applications. These applications are still pretty crude, since we are unable to target specific brain functions without affecting others or the whole body. Nevertheless, we are able to remediate mood, anxiety, and thought disorders, and people do find relief from many very painful mental states.

And, of course, we also already have language — highly refined tools to address specific functions of the brain with minimal side effects. We already have precise ways to effect specific changes in behavior, cognition, experience, and consciousness. Our brains are already hard wired to develop language to evolve us into self-aware humane creatures possessing powerful ways of monitoring, understanding, organizing, and managing ourselves in our world and of governing our bodies. And we are good at using it as a neuroplastic tool.

For ages, man has wondered about his mind: Where do his behavior, awareness, consciousness, cognition, identity, irrationality, and emotions originate and how are they all orchestrated? More recently, the mind had been understood to be connected with the brain, yet their relationship has remained a fascinating mystery. In the last few exciting decades, the traditional mind / brain duality has become less distinct as we are carefully unfolding the wonders of the brain. I have a brain, therefore I am. Here’s a brief overview:

Even before the awesome brain imaging technology we have today, neuroscience has interested humankind for generations as we have attempted to understand the mind in terms of its physical home base, the brain. In the 1930’s the Canadian neurosurgeon Dr. Wilder Penfield stimulated the living human brain directly in conscious people and elicited thoughts and images they described in language. Like the Italian Dr. Luigi Galvani’s electric stimulation of frog muscle tissues centuries earlier yielding movement, Dr. Penfield’s brain stimulation revealed the mind.

Earlier yet, in fact about 120 years ago, Austrian Dr. Sigmund Freud himself started his career in his new psychiatry as a neuroscientist with his “Project.” He wanted to understand the severely mentally ill, and tried to understand and treat inpatients with another physician, the Parisian Dr. Pierre Janet. Dr. Freud was first to predict the existence of neurotransmitters, the bases of currently the most developed aspect of neuroscience, psychopharmacology. He also predicted correctly that neurophysiologies of traumatic memories differ from “ordinary” memories. Dr. Freud essentially posited that raw love and aggression are built into basic brain wiring, but need refining, balancing, and development via childhood experiences, mediated largely by language. These were astounding speculations for his time, founding modern psychiatry on his conviction that mental health is rooted in science.

But he also understood that the science he knew was just the beginning of understanding people. Lacking the technology to continue his investigations on a neuronal level, he and his colleagues settled for the functional level. They struggled to picture and heal the mind/brain with careful observation and use of language-based data and behavior.

He brought the idea of the unconscious into the mainstream of Western thought, i.e. that most mind / brain activity is outside of our direct awareness. He also emphasized that language-based functions dominate when we address social and intellectual challenges. In part, his “making the unconscious conscious” means putting urges into words that can delay, encourage, or substitute for behaviors. Obviously, nuanced language and its myriad speech expressions provide the highest level of our intra-species interactions.

So the histories of psychiatry and its basic science, neuroscience, are intimately connected. Indeed, many of the pioneers of modern neuroscience were steeped in Freud’s psychoanalytic methods and teachings, and similarly became curious about the mind / brain connection.

For example Dr. Paul Schilder studied how our body image is produced in the brain, and his wife Loretta Bender MD and her outstanding colleague at Bellevue Hospital, Barbara Fish MD, tried desperately to understand and treat children severely ill with psychosis as suffering from brain disorders, even before we really understood the differences between autism and schizophrenia, and their papers show true wisdom about brain and mind development.

Our National Institutes of Mental Health became the most important international neuroscience resource as research and training blossomed in psychiatry departments in medical schools the world over until the early 1980’s. Many psychiatrists and scientists trained in such programs, which always contained heavy emphases on “talk therapy” language and play (language in action) therapy with children. Basically, this training was in applied neuroscience.

In fact, in recent years, energized by Columbia University’s psychoanalyst / neuroscientist Dr. Eric Kandel’s Nobel Prize winning findings several decades ago, neuroscience soon exploded when technology gave it the tools. Dr. Kandel demonstrated that relevant environmental events can cause a physical alteration in brain structure and function we otherwise call learning. Learning is in fact brain changes visible under the microscope.

This bears repeating: Learning IS physical brain changes AND NOT “brain changes are caused by learning.” And psychotherapy IS learning…and IS brain changes too (the therapy happens in the patient, as every psychiatrist has to know, just as the sale happens in the buyer, as every good salesman knows). Psychotherapy – a blend of emotional and intellectual learning that often enhances brain maturation – needs nuanced language to fine tune judgement and social behavior. So brain changes need language to fine tune judgement and social behavior. Compared to medications, brain changes from language-based therapies can be more targeted and relatively free of unwanted effects.

Thus was the mind / brain duality finally breached by Dr. Kandel. Serious mental health professionals and scholars are now justifiably excited about repeated brain type confirmations of clinical wisdom about the mind part of the mind / brain entity accumulated over the past 120 years. American psychiatrists are scholarly leaders in current neuroscience research, especially brain functioning and its applications in the diagnoses and treatments of the mentally ill.

Neuroscience is the basic science of psychiatry. Today’s psychiatric practice is to neuroscience as, say, chemical engineering is to chemistry in a humane medical context.

Technology now allows us to co-relate very limited aspects of brain and mind. But let us remember a significant limitation. Knowing how muscles and bones make movement does not get us anywhere near explaining the wondrous art of the piano, ballet, or gymnastic performer. Or superb knowledge of telephony or computer science does not bring understanding of the rich language-based communication and information handled by the machines. (But this type of knowledge does help us understand and “fix” broken “brains” and minds and substantially help people.)

As a clinician, I have been thinking actively and using what is known about the mind / brain for almost fifty years each time I interact with a patient through language and offer medications, which makes me a neuroscience engineer.

While we all hope that the most impactful medical value of neuroscience will come soon to prevent, diagnose, and treat people with mental illness, it is also already bringing wonderful new opportunities in education, child development, and even law. Neuroscience is way more significant than its current faddish brain training sideshow.

For example, neuroscience shows that the elderly playing some videogames slow down the aging process of their brains. Dementia is slowed in the elderly by greater exercise of their mind / brains in an engaging everyday life. The declining brain thrives on exercising its highest functions, including language.

So, this suggests that we must also challenge our kids’ brains and minds well with disciplined language and its uses in math, social studies, and science. Let’s show them the best of esthetics in poetry, music, dance, and painting, etc. if we want to develop their mind / brains and whet their appetites for more of these truly effective brain foods.

IMHO, the power of placebos and healing relationships are still understudied in neuroscience (Louis Lasagne, M.D. and Jerome Frank, M.D., Ph.D, were among my most memorable and wisest teachers). Placebos were always powerful medicines. Great physicians from antiquity recognized the power of hope in healing. Hope works wonders, as does great advertising and great leadership. And that too is probably wired into our brains (as are trust and faith and love). But you must access hope through language and mind.

One final opinion: I firmly believe that the actual form and contents of the creative living brain’s nuanced complexity will always, if not for a very long time, remain awesomely mysterious, and its ever changing, shimmering gossamer (Dr. Penfield’s description, I think) a totality and elegance unexplainable.

Language, supported by its biological infrastructures interacting with environment, is the human mind / brain’s main function, and a royal road to understanding its workings. It is essential to understanding individual people’s minds and connecting with them across space and time.

Paradoxically, at the very same time that neuroscience is confirming the biological bases of much what we have learned clinically about the human mind in language-based therapies in the past century, actual American psychiatric practice in most areas away from rare metropolitan pockets is rapidly drifting too far away from its intelligent, disciplined, humanistic, mindful, language-based roots bridging the mind and brain. This trend is especially true of inpatient and outpatient care reimbursed by Medicaid and Medicare on behalf of poor people who are mentally ill.

To learn about neuroscience and its applications today, Dr. Kandel and Charlie Rose’s The Brain series is a unique resource.

http://psychiatrists.psychologytoday.com/rms/178252?_ga=1.62766633.441222680.1393170801   

 

Article by Eitan ‘Dr. S®’ Schwarz, MD

©All rights reserved

Neuroscience and Psychiatry: The Roots of Humane Mental Health Care

Originally published by ThinkerMedia: BestThinking.com on December 15, 2013

 

I have a mind, therefore I am: psychiatry bridges neuroscience, language, medicine, consciousness and daily life. Where is it heading?

Neuroscience and Psychi...

All rights reserved.

 

These ideas are worth bearing in mind as parity for mental health coverage and major healthcare reform take us into uncharted waters.

Our brains give us language, and used expertly it can be an awesome neuroscience tool.

In fact, the profession that trained me — modern psychiatry — was first built on the careful and caring art of listening    to speech and language in all their nuances and responding in kind as a central element of psychiatric practice. Medical and non-medical psychology pioneers have worked brilliantly and diligently for over a century to free the mentally ill from stigma and to understand and treat them humanely. These pioneers tried to base their practices on systematic notions of the brain / mind that made sense. They tried to infer brain function and structure from mental processes and behavior in the most humane ways — talking with and intensely and actively listening to patients.

Of course, psychoactive medications and other substances, their development, production, and consumption, and their side and main effects are our current industrial-scale neuroscience applications. These applications are still pretty crude, since we are unable to target specific brain functions without affecting others or the whole body. Nevertheless, we are able to remediate mood, anxiety, and thought disorders, and people do find relief from many very painful mental states. But it is not enough.

But, of course, we also already have language — highly refined tools to address specific functions of the brain with minimal side effects. We already have precise ways to effect specific changes in behavior, cognition, experience, and consciousness. Our brains are already hard wired to develop language to evolve us into self-aware humane creatures possessing powerful ways of monitoring, understanding, organizing, and managing ourselves in our world and of governing our bodies. And we are good at using it as a neuroplastic tool.

For ages, man has wondered about his mind: Where do his behavior, awareness, consciousness, cognition, identity, irrationality, and emotions originate and how are they all orchestrated? More recently, the mind had been understood to be connected with the brain, yet their relationship has remained a fascinating mystery. In the last few exciting decades, the traditional mind / brain duality has become less distinct as we are carefully unfolding the wonders of the brain. I have a brain, therefore I am. Here’s a brief overview:

Even before the awesome brain imaging technology we have today, neuroscience has interested humankind for generations as we have attempted to understand the mind in terms of its physical home base, the brain. In the 1930’s the Canadian neurosurgeon Dr. Wilder Penfield    stimulated the living human brain directly in conscious people and elicited thoughts and images they described in language. Like the Italian Dr. Luigi Galvani’s electric stimulation of frog muscle tissues centuries earlier yielding movement, Dr. Penfield’s brain stimulation revealed the mind.

Earlier yet, in fact about 120 years ago, Austrian Dr. Sigmund Freud himself started his career in his new psychiatry as a neuroscientist with his “Project.” He wanted to understand the severely mentally ill, and tried to understand and treat inpatients with another physician, the Parisian Dr. Pierre Janet. Dr. Freud was first to predict the existence of neurotransmitters,   the bases of currently the most developed aspect of neuroscience, psychopharmacology. He also predicted correctly that neurophysiologies of traumatic memories differ from “ordinary” memories. Dr. Freud essentially posited that raw love and aggression are built into basic brain wiring, but need refining, balancing, and development via childhood experiences, mediated largely by language. These were astounding speculations for his time, founding modern psychiatry on his conviction that mental health is rooted in science.

But he also understood that the science he knew was just the beginning of understanding people. Lacking the technology to continue his investigations on a neuronal level, he and his colleagues settled for the functional level. They struggled to picture and heal the mind/brain with careful observation and use of language-based data and behavior.

He brought the idea of the unconscious into the mainstream of Western thought, i.e. that most mind / brain activity is outside of our direct awareness. He also emphasized that language-based functions dominate when we address social and intellectual challenges. In part, his “making the unconscious conscious” means putting urges into words that can delay, encourage, or substitute for behaviors. Obviously, nuanced language and its myriad speech expressions provide the highest level of our intra-species interactions.

So the histories of psychiatry and its basic science, neuroscience, are intimately connected. Indeed, many of the pioneers of modern neuroscience were steeped in Freud’s psychoanalytic methods and teachings, and similarly became curious about the mind / brain connection.

For example Dr. Paul Schilder studied how our body image is produced in the brain, and his wife Loretta Bender MD and her outstanding colleague at Bellevue Hospital, Barbara Fish MD   , tried desperately to understand and treat children severely ill with psychosis as suffering from brain disorders, even before we really understood the differences between autism and schizophrenia, and their papers show true wisdom about brain and mind development.

Our National Institutes of Mental Health became the most important international neuroscience resource as research and training blossomed in psychiatry departments in medical schools the world over until the early 1980’s. Many psychiatrists and scientists trained in such programs, which always contained heavy emphases on “talk therapy” language and play (language in action) therapy with children. Basically, this training was in applied neuroscience.

In fact, in recent years, energized by Columbia University’s psychoanalyst / neuroscientist Dr. Eric Kandel’s    Nobel Prize winning findings several decades ago, neuroscience soon exploded when technology gave it the tools. Dr. Kandel demonstrated that relevant environmental events can cause a physical alteration in brain structure and function we otherwise call learning. Learning is in fact brain changes visible under the microscope.

This bears repeating: Learning IS physical brain changes AND NOT “brain changes are caused by learning.” And psychotherapy IS learning…and IS brain changes too (the therapy happens in the patient, as every psychiatrist has to know, just as the sale happens in the buyer, as every good salesman knows). Psychotherapy – a blend of emotional and intellectual learning that often enhances brain maturation – needs nuanced language to fine tune judgement and social behavior. So brain changes need language to fine tune judgement and social behavior. Compared to medications, brain changes from language-based therapies can be more targeted and relatively free of unwanted effects.

Thus was the mind / brain duality finally breached by Dr. Kandel. Serious mental health professionals and scholars are now justifiably excited about repeated brain type confirmations of clinical wisdom about the mind part of the mind / brain entity accumulated over the past 120 years. American psychiatrists are scholarly leaders in current neuroscience research, especially brain functioning and its applications in the diagnoses and treatments of the mentally ill.

Neuroscience is the basic science of psychiatry. Today’s psychiatric practice is to neuroscience as, say, chemical engineering is to chemistry in a humane medical context.

Technology now allows us to co-relate very limited aspects of brain and mind. But let us remember a significant limitation. Knowing how muscles and bones make movement does not get us anywhere near explaining the wondrous art of the piano, ballet, or gymnastic performer. Or superb knowledge of telephony or computer science does not bring understanding of the rich language-based communication and information handled by the machines. (But this type of knowledge does help us understand and “fix” broken “brains” and minds and substantially help people.)

As a clinician, I have been thinking actively and using what is known about the mind / brain for almost fifty years each time I interact with a patient through language and offer medications, which makes me a neuroscience engineer.

While we all hope that the most impactful medical value of neuroscience will come soon to prevent, diagnose, and treat people with mental illness, it is also already bringing wonderful new opportunities in education, child development, and even law. Neuroscience is way more significant than its current faddish brain training sideshow.

For example, neuroscience shows that the elderly playing some videogames slow down the aging process of their brains. Dementia is slowed in the elderly by greater exercise of their mind / brains in an engaging everyday life. The declining brain thrives on exercising its highest functions, including language.

So, this suggests that we must also challenge our kids’ brains and minds well with disciplined language and its uses in math, social studies, and science. Let’s show them the best of esthetics in poetry, music, dance, and painting, etc. if we want to develop their mind / brains and whet their appetites for more of these truly effective brain foods.

IMHO, the power of placebos and healing relationships are still understudied in neuroscience (Louis Lasagne, M.D. and Jerome Frank, M.D., Ph.D   , were among my most memorable and wisest teachers). Placebos were always powerful medicines. Great physicians from antiquity recognized the power of hope in healing. Hope works wonders, as does great advertising and great leadership. And that too is probably wired into our brains (as are trust and faith and love). But you must access hope through language and mind.

One final opinion: I firmly believe that the actual form and contents of the creative living brain’s nuanced complexity will always, if not for a very long time, remain awesomely mysterious, and its ever changing, shimmering gossamer (Dr. Penfield’s description, I think) a totality and elegance unexplainable.

Language, supported by its biological infrastructures interacting with environment, is the human mind / brain’s main function, and a royal road to understanding its workings. It is essential to understanding individual people’s minds and connecting with them across space and time.

Paradoxically, at the very same time that neuroscience is confirming the biological bases of much what we have learned clinically about the human mind in language-based therapies in the past century, actual American psychiatric practice in most areas away from rare metropolitan pockets is rapidly drifting too far away from its intelligent, disciplined, humanistic, mindful, language-based roots bridging the mind and brain. This trend is especially true of inpatient and outpatient care reimbursed by Medicaid and Medicare on behalf of poor people who are mentally ill.

To learn about neuroscience and its applications today, Dr. Kandel and journalist Charlie Rose’s The Brain series is a unique resource.

http://psychiatrists.psychologytoday.com/rms/178252?_ga=1.62766633.441222680.1393170801

©All rights reserved

Part 2: Report From The Field

Originally published by ThinkerMedia: BestThinking.com on June 13, 2015

 

Continuing a chronicle of a doctor’s journey, will include children’s services, discussion and personal remarks.

All rights reserved

 

Part 2 of 2

For part 1 click here

A STATE HOSPITAL UNIT (cont)

(On becoming a bad fit 3)

A most amazing accidental discovery 1: Human souls can be revived unexpectedly. Like in Dr. Oliver Sack’s Awakenings   . After about three weeks, we saw a renewed spirit sprouting. Patients lifted their heads to look with sparkling eyes at a more hopeful world and solidified their community and nourished each other. The world was opening up for them. They were opening up for the world. Knowledgeable people noticed and nodded and quietly smiled when I repeatedly checked with them if we were on the right track.

What was happening?

The men got good doctoring, and enough good staff joined a healing fest. I made ongoing, careful assessments of each patient’s individual psychological and medical needs during my daily on-site real-time psychiatric presence: I got to know them as people who are now my patients, as their doctor. Sensitive, courteous, thoughtful conversation and careful listening, casual interactions, impromptu meetings on the unit and in my office, checking on how a man is doing after we changed a medication. Just sitting together.

Each man had his own, colorful, consistent narrative about himself, his past, and future that deserved a serious respectful hearing, no matter how illogical or delusional he managed to survive with an impaired brain over the years. We used language…Just checking on the progress of a project or physical complaint. Focusing on the here and now. I decided to wear my doctor coat after a couple of weeks to legitimize my reality. A doctor’s uniform.

Then, they needed working doses of the right medications based on the right diagnoses refined in real time for current symptoms, and they needed a voice about their fate. The state required this, and it was done routinely but perfunctorily. I engaged them to their limits in this conversation early, establishing a connection that served as the basis for what came next:

“What medication worked best for you?…How?” They do know which, and they do know how. And they do know that trust has to go both ways. For example, one man’s request (btw, he dressed impeccably, had a gracious manner about him, and loved singing hymns for the group) for ibuprofen to help him stay calm and relieve his chronic headache was repeatedly rejected because it is not standard and can cause rare GI bleeding. The internist also believed the man’s request was delusional. Well, it turns out that current research shows that such anti inflammatory meds can be helpful in schizophrenia    and they did calm him down and relieve his headache. Competent about this matter, the patient made that discovery for himself, and the internist approved after a small change in medical management.

Medications today are often really better, and there are more of them to carefully weave together with language-based doctoring and existing social work/supportive activities by competent, genuinely caring staff. We started them off gently as healing sprouted, and stayed present and in the moment with them as they took their first steps, safely refined their medication and tweaked their social environment, focused them on daily personal and community goals, and began to collaborate with some on long term discharge plans.

There was plenty of testing of limits, too — it was definitely not a rose garden. And they each watched closely as I treated others and what happened, and they liked how I encouraged their own little community and mentored their leaders to succeed.

But the secret sauce — what largely made this possible — was language as a powerful neuropsychiatric tool. It turned out that they could thrive. They needed strong, well-timed sparks to restart their engines, and then basic navigating guidance and a safe, fenced road.

Up real close, smell-to-smell. Ready to fist bump. Visible. Approachable. Meticulous about small requests and symptom follow up. Respectful of boundaries. Fair. Patient. Firm. Insisting on some behaviors and punishing others, not intimidated, and always following through: “You are men. This is a hospital, not the street. You live here. I am your doctor. I look out for you. You deserve to have a caring doctor who treats you like a person. Manage your self and relationships with self respect and kindness, or we’ll do it for you.”

Most of our patients’ brains — in various conditions of gross and fine repair, development, and/or functionality, are apparently still well wired enough to welcome proper stimulation. And the spark is wired into our mammalian brains. The spark was simply the thing that excites all humans from birth. That spark electrified mirror neurons and their neural social networks and the many other circuits that feed off them to make our brains miraculous social organs.

This spark is well known, and our brains are prepared to accept it from the first day of life — a human face. A vigorous, safe, interactive human presence that affirms. Stimulation from a full, close, eye-to-eye, face-to-face smiling and nodding. Like the painful knuckle rub on the chest that initiates CPR. A multidimensional sensory human engagement, especially amplified when coming safely from a trusted doctor. Our patients were ready to react with healing, hope, and a natural reaching out.

After about five weeks, the men engaged in more vigorous self-governing, emerged from their rooms, showered more, showed kindnesses to each other, and clamored in community meetings to sing and rap. People were further away from their verge of rage or panic. Those who spoke about it did reveal a personal faith they do not abandon. Singing for most and rapping for some is their celebration as a community. Amazingly, one reclusive aggressive man revealed such creative intelligence in his rapping and conversation that knowing staff exchanged surprised and approving nods. No more slurred speech, no more drooling, more smiles, straighter smoother walking. Less bed wetting. Less smelly rooms. Cleaner clothes. Less tremor. Less ADHD, less depression.

Several more men started their long ways towards discharge. One reticent man diligently sought his daily quota of fist bumps and started showing me his shiny basketball card collection. Another sat next to me in meetings and often invited me to prompt more appropriate behavior. Most dramatically, one reclusive man surprised and delighted everyone and actually had the barber shave off his hairy thicket and started to attend meetings. (And yes, the changes seemed entirely lost on some of our nurses. It would be interesting to compare their daily charting notes with technician notes, mine, and those of the language-based psychologist and social worker.)

Patients, doctor, and most staff joined together to form scaffolds for growth, embodied in an invigorated daily or impromptu community meeting. Once primed, impulses to health cascaded exponentially, recruiting existing neural and social networks, and even entraining otherwise aloof staff to participate. Wow. That’s the best of modern neuroscience at work!    That’s psychiatry how it can be! That’s exactly what I signed up for in medical school.

No one, including me, had expected the amazing inspiring awakenings that happened. Language-based staff were openly thrilled. Administrators with mental health backgrounds recalled them proudly to me so that I would know they too are colleagues. There was a buzz. Word spread beyond the hospital. Something in this contagious flare up of life touched every man and deserves further attention. At least, it was a powerful placebo that kicked brains into gear beyond decades of dormant hospital “care” (and, not infrequently, beyond the around 15 lbs. of brain medication a decade poured into each man, or about 450 lbs. into all the men in this group to date while under state care — correct me if I am wrong, based on an my estimated averages: 2000 mg daily, 20 yrs. LOS. That’s industrial strength neuroscience, possibly harmful).

Anyway, IMHO, the power of placebos and healing relationships are still understudied in neuroscience (Louis Lasagne, M.D. and Jerome Frank, M.D., Ph.D., were among my most memorable and wisest teachers). Placebos were always powerful medicines. Great physicians from antiquity recognized the power of hope in healing. Hope works wonders, as does great advertising and great leadership. And that too is probably wired into our brains (as are trust and faith and love). But you must access hope through language and mind. And there seems to be a lot more room for more on this unit.

On the unit, I began to speak with staff about slowly reducing my active pace to prepare patients for my departure when my contract ended. But I was abruptly and quickly removed (some staff actually gasped when I announced my departure) exactly halfway through. So what happened next to the men on this unit? I won’t know. Sadly. That’s the contract.

Most amazing discovery 2: A human spirit can blossom in most folks who work in a state hospital, too. A majority of seemingly competent and caring administrators and staff, much as in the private sector, “go with the flow”. In hushed sincerity they bemoan and attempt to disown the “jaded system,” shaking their heads and gazing down at their feet, almost like apologizing. They are hanging on, too, I guess, to avoid falling down cracks in the system. But they also are devoted.

Many employees do clearly and even cynically grasp the charade, yet can patiently stay on anyway to steadfastly, quietly care for and connect and give to our thrown-away neighbors — and that’s awesome. Even some housekeepers make their peace with this hell and join the singing. That’s love. These precious people are truly our best healers, our humane, gentle, saintly fixers of the world.

Even as a powerful few dehumanize, these steadfast folks manage to steadily rehumanize to keep patient hope alive. Each has a story about how many times they almost quit. They do resist the flow selectively, I guess, and they also like their state benefits and overtime pay and pensions; nothing wrong with that. Those who give so much deserve it. You know who you are. Thank you. I wish I could have your strength!

This is what also happened, from my POV: Patients in all hospitals depend on productive collaborations between physicians and nursing leadership, and a new doctor especially needs clear communication with the head nurse. But unlike most of their colleagues, a few nurses — the ruling clique — openly and stubbornly made a show of their refusal to communicate and collaborate with me.

I was tipped off early by several clandestine self-appointed “allies” that, should I have any friction with one particularly hostile nurse, I will be the one who ends up leaving. It was a no brainer for them. Near the end, another self-appointed ally tipped me off to a “setup” that will be coming soon and to how it might happen.

Indeed, the ruling clique and their allies seemingly mounted its offensive more openly when it became clear that I was succeeding. They apparently had critical words with the nursing staffers that did work well with me. They apparently spread stories that made their replacement in the unit difficult by transferring other nurses. They also apparently stonewalled for weeks administration efforts to respond to my urgent demands for a simple nursing protocol for quickly evacuating to an ER a severely medically ill uncooperative man in a manner that could save his life. (I learned later, to my relief, that my persistence did indeed finally lead to life-saving abdominal surgery soon after I left.)

And the ambushes did come, wrapped in plausible deniability, always in front of witnesses. In one meeting, during a discussion of transitioning a soon-to-be-discharged man back to his family, a social worker employee, non-language oriented and mostly functioning as a case worker and psychoeducational group and activities leader, suddenly burst into tears, complaining that I did not like her but liked another (female on another unit) social worker better, and that I did not like women in general (a first for me). Crossfire quickly followed, even as I made a stunned strategic retreat for the door while tactfully trying to calm her. This time the attack came from another employee, known by others for such behaviors, who goaded me maliciously with something like, “You are the psychiatrist. Don’t go. Please keep talking with her.” This setup happened just around the time and in the manner predicted.

Another ambush followed quickly during morning rounds when the hostile nurse, in the presence of her supervisor, refused to report blood pressures of a patient who had fallen during the night. It is routine nursing practice to check BP sitting / lying and standing in such events and inform the doctor, but only one measurement was done, it turned out. The nurse told me to check the chart myself.

Had the supervisor not been there to give tacit approval, I’d have merely faced yet another bit of familiar nastiness by the same nurse. Instead, I now saw a flagrant abuse of medical protocol and clearly and shamelessly arranged by the entire nursing hierarchy to scuttle me. So I asked the supervisor to contact her boss, the head of nursing. It was all very calm. Soon, head of nursing arrived with my own boss in tow, grumbling sadly something like, “We just can’t have more fracturing in this unit. In a few days, they will miss having a doctor here. Today is your last day, so do what you need to leave.”

Alas, as an experienced administrator and clinician, careful to prevent new conflicts or splits that could harm morale and patient care, in the end, I did eventually succumb to profound system failures and deep splits. And good people counseled me repeatedly to compromise more and stay away from the edge of splits, to sugarcoat my approach more, and to put away my “sledge hammer.” I pushed a tired status quo too hard, seemingly well beyond its willingness to respond, and it pushed back. Fortunately, I had the advantage of naïvité, relative administrative insularity as a non-employee, an irreverent sense of humor, and speed and surprise that all bought me the time to invest myself fully and enthusiastically. All things move slowly in this system, as did my undoing.

While I did want to continue serving the men on this unit in some capacity beyond the term of my contract, I eventually understood that I could not fit for very much longer. I even joked about that to those I trusted. I had neither the time nor temperament to slow down, hang my head down and navigate around land mines hidden by entrenched, well-practiced experts. Keeping my vision focused on patients took all of my energy. I felt helpless and mostly alone, without effective administrative interest, guidance, or protection (or interference), even after my repeated threats to leave, which were “getting old”, as one top administrator semi-warmly quipped. In retrospect, I now want to believe that the administrators helped more than I know.

Reader: You really have to see this jaded culture of devotion, incompetence, grace, competence, courage, dignity, love, moral corruption, and fear to believe it. It is tucked right into our midst and is also part of who we truly are. (Anyway, BTW, I may have also discovered a new treatment method. Let’s give it a name — GPP, for Good Psychiatric Practice. That’s sarcastic.)

CHILDREN’S SERVICES IN A WELL-REGARDED FAMILY SERVICE AGENCY

Still hoping to work in a facility serving poor people in a setting that respects them and their caregivers by striving for good care, I continued my journey, returning to a private outpatient community agency that had employed me for eight great years at the beginning of my professional career, when a team of social work colleagues and I had set up and ran a large aftercare clinic for over 250 state hospital adult dischargees. We had worked energetically and collaboratively in the tradition of the community service team model I learned from family therapy educator and pioneer Charles Kramer, M.D.    (who got me the job) and child / adolescent psychiatry innovator Sherman Feinstein, M.D.    I thought it a hopeful sign that the term “behavioral health” was not mentioned even once in my return to this agency.

American-trained M.A.- level social workers and psychologist therapists varied widely in competence. I worked only with staff members having children patients on medication, but it would be reasonable to assume that they represented at least minimal agency standards. Hoping to manage expectations, and as a way of introducing myself, I asked that administration and staff read an earlier version of this article before I was hired, and some supposedly did, adding to my optimism that I would fit into this agency’s enlightened culture.

So, for five hours every two weeks my duties now were to evaluate and treat high risk children and adolescents with a variety of disorders. In addition, these children are growing up under the stressors, physical and psychological risks, and the challenges of poverty, sometimes extreme. Often, parents may be mentally ill, substance users or criminals, and poor parenting, displacements, moves, violence, and early parent loss are frequent.

My predecessor had practiced like a “queen bee”, without bothering to talk with patients or parents in very brief and infrequent visits. One child on medication was actually seen twice or three times a year for a total annual time of less then an hour. So I began to get to know the kids and parents with increased time spent with each.

One dedicated staff member worked closely with me, and we sometimes met with kids and parents together. This beginning paid off quickly. The dramatic changes began. For example, a bright teen girl who had chronically avoided school because of long undiagnosed ADD was now successfully back in the classroom, an anxious boy with severe PTSD was finally engaged in treatment and was getting traction in a job, and most parents were relieved and word was getting around that a doctor was finally spending time with them and their children. My goal was to upgrade the care of each child to the best level possible within the six months of my contract, and then possibly stay on.

To accomplish this, I needed information about the whole child and family, apparently for some reason not routinely collected at this well-regarded agency. To provide essential actionable credible information for basic evaluation and treatment of children and families, I requested that pediatric and family information be obtained via the parent questionnaires, and school functioning data via the teacher questionnaires I introduced. We were beginning to implement this and important predictive information began to flow, but some professional staff were surprisingly suspicious and resistant.

To increase time with each patient, I proposed steps to streamline receptionist management of patient flow, chart preparation, and scheduling. In spite of passive grumbling, the first two were starting to improve. But the scheduling issue quickly became a deal breaker because this was where this well-regarded agency’s broken core became exposed.

—————

(On becoming a bad fit 4)

An anemic culture of mediocrity and poor communication dominated. I had insufficient meetings with staff to discuss cases, and encounters I initiated with the clinician-administrator were rushed, procedural, and uncollaborative. He never seemed to be around for curbside consultations, often leaving me isolated with a new load of his clients and setting a tone for the rest of his staff.

What’s worse, teamwork was relegated to mostly useless occasional one-paragraph notes left for me. Agency practice apparently no longer included the modern, decades old, multidisciplinary collegial integrative team approach, developed almost a century ago in the child guidance movement   . This crucial innovation enabled work with complex childhood disorders in their family, school, and community contexts. An ongoing formal and informal conversation among staff in real time is needed to understand and effectively treat multi-system childhood disorders, and has been standard practice. This movement also spawned a proud, enlightened, and humane social work profession, and additionally pioneered the now pervasive practice of using multidisciplinary collaborative teams in many progressive workplaces.

Instead of energy and teamwork, this is what I found: inadequate, naive, and superficial diagnostic conceptualizations and treatment planning; seeming ignorance or distrust of the biopsychosocial model (“I don’t believe in medication for children”); insufficient history, paltry developmental information, and poor communication with schools; reactive rather than proactive therapy with unclear treatment goals; and rigid isolation of the psychiatrist as merely a pill dispenser, with staff mostly resistant to open collaboration (“The psychiatrist should just prescribe and not talk too much or do therapy”). I have spent a lifetime working in many capacities with agencies serving children, even some with poor leaderships, but this one really took the cake.

We are back to the dark ages of services for children, to an era even before the child guidance movement many decades ago   . The basic minimal underpinnings of good practice at this well-regarded agency too have deteriorated, much as at the hospital units I describe above. I was now witnessing how young voiceless children and their parents are shafted as outpatients too.

So I struggled from the beginning with, “Should I stay and work slowly to improve things for these underserved children? Who will serve these voiceless high risk kids and broken families?” So I hung in. A colleague friend pointed out that, clearly, I was simply not hired to make changes. She was right. I eventually realized that there was no support forthcoming from the top for actual collaborative work, just increasing grumbling, apathy, hostility, and resentment.

The final irony and deal breaker was this: despite — or because of — my efforts to spend more time with each child, as many as five or even six ended up regularly squeezed by the receptionist into my last hour on site. The locum tenens arrangement dictates strict adherence to contracted hours, so staying late repeatedly was not an option. That basically shortchanges five children to ten or less minutes per child that hour, if you count coming in and out and settling down.

Obvious solutions would have been to redistribute these appointments over the five hours to allow at least twenty minutes, or to shift my working hours to later to better accommodate after-school needs. But for weeks, administration just would not respond to my repeated written requests to redistribute my time, nor have a dialogue, nor itself suggest a strategy to solve this problem.

Things came to a head early one cold afternoon, about three months into my contract, when I arrived at the office. A stunning unequivocalIy clear answer did come in the form of my schedule for that afternoon: not only were five children with parents yet again squeezed into the last hour, but, additionally, in the first ninety minutes, not one patient was scheduled. Not a one in the ninety earlier minutes, yet five in a later hour.

Wow. Stonewalling. That was the agency’s clear answer to my requests for more reasonable scheduling. The administrator did not comment when I found him, but when I asked him on the spot to reschedule some right then, he firmly refused: “Agency policy”. Unbelievable. So agency policy is to curtail and withhold adequate care. Unnecessary, arbitrary, bad practice, shameful.

So what’s the big deal here? Why make a fuss?

First, complexity. These high risk children suffered from poverty, behavior disorders, depression, anxiety, ADD/HD, PTSD, LD, OCD, bipolar disorder, eating disorders, and usually a hard-to-sort-out mixture of several of these together to tease apart and treat, and the always-accompanying impaired home, school, and community functioning to track. They deserve adequate time with a doctor.

Second, urgency. I have known first hand the special urgency here, having just worked immersively inside the hellish futures some of these kids will most definitely have, described above. It is especially important to get it right the first time now, when we can still make a difference.   These kids have the same histories as hundreds of adults I had just treated in hospitals. These kids are very high risk and deserve the best possible care now, their mind / brain maturation still sensitive, when we can still push their developmental trajectories towards healthier futures.

Third, thoroughness. With collaborative teamwork and administrative support lacking, a child psychiatrist wanting to practice good medicine at this agency has one hand tied behind his back. No matter the setting, patients deserve his professional best. So he needs even more time to do his work: greet and connect with a child and parent, separately or together, sometimes using a translator; break the ice; catch up; engage; interact (assessing kids must include flexible pacing and careful tuning into the child and cannot be rushed — it takes more time, but kids trust people who respect that); sometimes measure HR and BP and assess physical complaints (I auscultated one athletic teen boy’s heart when he reported chest pain and referred him to his pediatrician for the murmur is heard); review questionnaires; complete an entry in the medication log; write a progress note; code the visit by figuring out how many minutes I spent on medication-related and how many speaking with the child and mom to further our relationship, while assessing functioning and stressors; and hand-write multiple prescriptions in carbon paper triplicate (the old kind, where a cardboard flap prevents ruining the next set if you press too hard. Well, you can guess how that goes when you’re in a hurry.)

Fourth, cruelty. This administrative shortcut amounts to unnecessary callousness and cruelty. At this well-regarded agency, they had no problem nor professional shame about administratively arm-twisting a doctor so crassly, expecting him to agree, with full knowledge ahead of time, to routinely unethically withhold good care. What was the big necessity here? Why schedule hurried, insufficient, bad care? In essence why be cruel, yes, cruel, the opposite of kind and healing?

Fifth, callousness. Having stonewalled discussion, this agency seemingly actually planned to resolve the issue unilaterally with an arbitrary administrative maneuver. No explanation to me or the patients. And do the parents and kids have a choice? Maybe the administrator-clinician and his superiors got away with such outrageous callousness in the past with the “queen bees” they had hired for their several offices. Maybe it was a sign of poor leadership, bad standards, inadequate internal communication, ignorance, or just indifference. Whatever the reason, that’s how far standards have fallen for serving poor people.

I do understand well the uphill pursuit of excellence against the constraints of shrinking funding as a recent board member of another well-regarded large multi-site family agency serving children and teens. I had a view from my high perch near management, working closely with site directors and the executive director for over ten years. But in this agency it was not about that. It was mainly about shamefully low professional standards, callousness, and poor leadership.

Bottom line: Even here, in the midst of a nice suburb of a major metro area, in a nice office located on a nice street among houses with nice lawns and neat businesses, mostly poor high risk kids as young as five and their parents routinely and intentionally receive sloppy dregs of mental health care, the ultimate of professional cruelty, disrespect, and irresponsibility, from a well-regarded agency with a prominent blue-ribbon board of directors.

My heart sank at this clumsy Kafkaesque brutality. This well-regarded family agency is pathetically failing its mission, and it is too broken inside for me to function there. This confrontation clearly signaled that there was no hope of continuing my work at this awful place and maintain my standards.

So I immediately resigned on the spot, and I walked out. I could no longer participate in this charade. I did trust that parents and kids scheduled for that afternoon would be given a copy of the apologetic note I insisted on hurriedly drafting. I had some difficulty endorsing how the facility would now use family practitioners in the community for filling in psychiatric care that only a specialist could deliver well. But people needed continuity of some care — another compromise. One staff member asked why I hadn’t contacted a board member, but no one from the agency ever followed up with me.

I wonder, do agency leaders and staff even know how bad the fundamental flaws really are in their culture, basic integrity, and professionalism? How did they view and react to this incident? Would they care? Would they minimize or cover up? Would they even get it?

I did feel a deep sadness, this time close to home, that high risk savable children needing the best care in the worst way are not getting anything close, and nobody seems to know or care.Looking back at my four failures to fit, I am most upset about this one because of needlessly lost precious opportunities to reformat the futures of these high risk kids. So innocent, so voiceless, many so savable.

WHAT I THINK HAPPENED, AND PSYCHIATRY’S ROLE

Something really bad has been happening in the past few decades that few speak openly about. Of course, it is all about priorities, values, money, governance, ethics, morality, taxes, etc., and there is plenty of blame to go around for anyone who wants to sling it or accept it. (One urgent matter I know little about is that too many poor Americans who are mentally ill end up in overcrowded jails receiving even worse services I have described here   .)

But let’s be real — the buck has to stop somewhere, and more than a few cents stop with psychiatrists, individually and as a profession. If you are poor and mentally ill, no matter anything else, you will get relatively little relevant personal attention, spotty psychiatric expertise, and it is rare that anyone really knows you or speaks with you seriously about your past and future in a Behavioral Health system.

Our public and private psychiatry delivery systems right now are dangerously broken (much as the entire medical care system) and not bringing even a small fraction of the promises of neuroscience to people who are poor because its current psychopharmacology application is too often incompetent. And because largely “mindless” queen bees can barely reach people. (Click here  for a fuller discussion of these concepts).

The tragedy is that a patient is lucky to get a fraction of the value taxpayers buy. Except that these days, facilities are mostly decent physically, subject to modern hospital standards, medications can work pretty well when used correctly, and there are probably some very fine programs, staffed by psychiatrists and others, struggling to give the best possible care in an abysmal climate.

IMHO the reality has become a national disgrace and crisis    infecting all of medicine. People still believe that they can trust care based on professional medical standards based on the accumulated scientific and professional wisdom of American medicine as a special patient-centered calling that takes years of sound training to master. No more. Patient-centered medical standards have become largely defunct over the past few decades. Instead, rich and poor folks alike and their hospitals and doctors are now harnessed to mostly money-centered insurers who pay the bills.

While we psychiatrists are celebrating the wonders of the human genome and neuroscience, we are also justifiably losing our credibility as physicians because too many of our colleagues practice extremely poorly in some Behavioral Health hospital units and outpatient settings serving poor chronically ill people, and too many have delegated their best skills to others who serve folks who are not poor.

The profession that trained me — modern psychiatry — was first built on the careful and caring art of  listening    to speech and language in all their nuances and responding in kind as a central element of psychiatric practice. Medical and non-medical psychology pioneers have worked brilliantly and diligently for over a century to free the mentally ill from stigma and to understand and treat them humanely. These pioneers tried to base their practices on systematic notions of the brain/mind that made sense. They tried to infer brain function and structure from mental processes and behavior in the most humane ways — talking with and intensely and actively listening to patients. By “language-based” psychiatry and related professions I mean practice conceptually rooted in solid understandings of the human mind with all its richness as the function of the brain with all its blessings.

Paradoxically, at the very same time that neuroscience is confirming the biological bases of much of what we have learned clinically about the human mind in language-based therapies in the past century, actual American psychiatric practice in most areas away from rare metropolitan pockets is rapidly drifting too far away from its intelligent, disciplined, language-based roots that bridge the mind, brain, behavior, consciousness, and healthy living. A huge and increasing number of practices apparently neither utilize language nor correctly deploy medication. This disastrous trend is especially true of inpatient and outpatient care reimbursed by Medicaid and Medicare on behalf of poor people who are mentally ill.

As the use of language declines and “mind”lessness becomes the psychiatric norm, are we breaking our already broken neuroscience delivery system even more by starving poor people of humane language-based healing? Are we giving up our relevance as doctors? Are we abandoning our unique skills in integrating mind, brain, behavior, and healthy daily living for the whole patient? Are pill mills the new standard of care? Is this good for people?

Yes. Yes. Yes. Maybe! No!! Furthermore, IMHO in many ways psychiatry has been the “canary in the coal mine” of American medicine. So — all doctors and patients beware!

Medicaid- and Medicare-funded systems are a main funnel of today’s neuroscience applications, and these are badly broken. A few medical businesses, much like in other specialties, eventually became known as Medicare or Medicaid Mills or pill mills: Non-language based production lines for poor people — high volume / less quality control / lower profit margin / more errors. Some doctors — and I hate using that word for them — at first mostly western-trained in all specialties — innovated the earliest, Medicaid and Medicare mills a few decades ago. These providers were sometimes investigated and even indicted and jailed for fraud and other illegal practices    that sometimes even caused hospitals and nursing homes to close. The problem of how to deal with bottom-feeding colleagues flirting with ethical boundaries is not unique to psychiatry nor to any profession, while the absence of language as a treatment tool is absolutely crucial to psychiatry.

Too many fellow Americans, especially poor folks and their children   , are tragically not receiving the care they need simply because they are receiving the wrong care. The system is seriously and dangerously broken, even as everyone seems to choose words carefully to comply to the letter with reimbursement   .

This is also part of major social problems in our country. But as citizens and individuals, each professional must search their own conscience to decide where they stand on this issue and how much, by deed done or silence, they are perpetuating or enabling this travesty. That’s the least we can do. Many who work in the system have become dulled to its egregious norms and incompetence. But that is not an excuse. Neither is economic hardship.

This is my main point: IMHO, psychiatric care is minimal and substandard in the Behavioral Health units I saw, and as long as that is the case, such units will not be truly competent, humane or optimally efficient. I have come to believe that patients in these facilities depend on too many Behavioral Health provider colleagues, who knowingly, intentionally, or not, are “keeping their heads down” and contributing to profound social injustice, as had doctors in state hospitals fifty years ago.

What we might have now is a failing system, featuring incompetent medical standards, that actually perpetuates social injustices and prejudices against our society’s throwaway peoples. It is a silent blight in our midst. I also fear that wither psychiatry goes, so does the rest of medicine — general decline in professionalism and attendant mediocrity and the gap between rich and poor have now become institutionalized, and we have a multi-tier system.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Nor is this an overnight blight, but decades old. In fact, one of my most senior mentors, actually a pioneer department chair and psychopharmacologist, accurately predicted in the mid or late 1970’s or so, because at that time the National Institutes of Mental Health was stopping subsidies to psychiatry residency training in teaching hospitals, that the profession would sink seriously and move away from its best traditions.

I remember the moment I heard him (on a beach in Miami after a professional meeting), much as people remember what they were doing just before a bomb goes off. It has been in the back of my mind ever since, and now I see what my mentor meant as the trend is really accelerating and has become industrial strength.

We all saw psychiatric services in general hospitals “bleeding money” because of unequal coverage of mental illness by private and public insurers, especially those serving many poor people. Less than 20 years ago, I remember sitting in budget meetings in my doctor coat with growingly impatient, fidgety administrators wearing suits. We always lost money, especially children’s programs, because no insurance scheme paid enough to take care of sick families and children. And we had to account for every pencil and eraser in our programs because the hospital carried us as a goodwill service to the community.

Another piece of reality (not frequently discussed openly, but always a big elephant in the room) is that not all doctors or nurses are alike: Looking back, there has always been a big divide within medicine, especially psychiatry, with mostly US medical school, university hospital-trained graduates serving employed and insured (even if poorly) Americans and their families.

Our practices    and settings were language-based, generally lower volume/customized service, higher quality/higher profit margin / fewer errors / commercial insurance and out of pocket fee payment. We continued naturally an identity, relationships, and other educational and practice activities. We worked in public clinics for an hourly pay, usually part-time, consulted, and set the pace and general treatment course of patients of a collaborative team.

My network of similar practitioners usually started off careers treating inpatients in community or university-affiliated hospitals right after our training, but then continued to outpatient practice settings, combining outpatient, teaching, research, consultation, and / or pro bono and other community work. Some colleagues continued in community, public, and academic settings. About half of today’s mental health professionals are now opted out    of all insurance so that we can use language in our practices. This trend now continues with nurse practitioners, especially in states where they are able to prescribe medication.

But we all knew about another side, and very few of us engaged with it, or with their private practices. Doctors serving the poor in public institutions were mostly trained elsewhere, almost never the cutting edge West, and are industriously struggling for their place in American life. They tend to be much less expensive and a lot less trouble, much as also seem many RNs in the public settings I worked. Their numbers seem to have grown over the past decades, and they also predominated in some of the hospitals where I worked.

Historically, there wasn’t much mixing among psychiatrists from these systems. However, there were some excellent collegial collaborations between university-based biological psychiatry researchers and non-language based colleagues and scientists, especially in state-run facilities affiliated with teaching hospitals training programs. These were other strata of professionals, that few of us ever cared about or welcomed, to our shame, that were grateful to serve in public hospitals and shortage rural places. Whenever they can, however, these practitioners, including now nurse practitioners, usually later try to leave public psychiatry to start their own private practices, considered more lucrative and prestigious. Only rarely have language-based US-trained practitioners crossed over from their private or academic practices into public psychiatry, and when they try, they are rarely welcomed by administrators and threatened entrenched clinical staff, as I have discovered repeatedly.

~~~~~~~~~~~

The wider context has been a general decline in humaneness in medicine. I have my own personal view of this general decline. Before WWII, most specialists retained strong callings as physicians and continued some general medical practice, while most generalists practiced some specialties. WWII military doctors were often assigned as generalists, no matter their training. In America’s neighborhoods, generalists engaged the whole patient and her family. People kept doctors for lifetimes in relationships of mutual loyalty.

Since about then, several powerful forces started changing that: Exponential knowledge and intensive skill sets, bureaucratization of hospitals and growth of insurers, the greening of medicine, changed American society, and eventually, flagrant corruption as government and large insurers came into medicine.

Fee payment, first embedded in a personal, ethical doctor-patient relationship, became a business transaction between insurers and doctors, and disenfranchised patients. The identity of “doctor” as person with a calling, as an ethical and moral healer in the best tradition of the profession and modern science, moved away, first to “specialist” and then, alas, “provider”, “hospitalist“, etc. Malpractice suit fears and astronomical premiums added a dimension of mistrust in an increasing estrangement between doctors and patients, as lawyers joined insurers and administrators at the bedside.

Private practice, where a doctor owns his own place and is free to be his best (and worst), is on the decline   , and many experienced doctors are pulling away from a devoted engagement when they become someone else’s 9 to 5 employees. People left their trusted doctors who did not participate in new networks set up by insurers to control fees. Another factor today is how the economic crisis causes increased stress on the poor and damages safety nets serving them.

Yet another factor is that doctors have lost their sense of neighborliness to patients and to their own professional communities, as hospitals turn away from the local practitioners that gave them quality and professional accountability to become production lines. (Hospitals were centers of professional life. We used to have staff meetings, grand rounds, department meetings and doctor dining rooms. We used to talk to each other. We used to monitor each other formally and learn together from our mistakes, even in small community facilities.)

Nevertheless, last time I checked, psychiatry was still a fully credentialed medical specialty. So what happened to the American Oslerian ideal of rational medicine applied humanely that so many top medical students in my now retiring generation signed up for as psychiatrists?

What happened to the fundamental medical principles of “do no harm” and to the professional, ethical, and moral obligation to practice at least competently, if not creatively? What happened to following carefully made diagnoses with appropriate, thoughtful and effective treatments? What happened to the term “psychiatric treatment” in a world of “behavioral health”? How did I get to be a “behavioral health medical provider”? Can the promises of neuroscience be delivered by this broken system?

IMHO, You can’t get ever quality anything by rewarding the lowest bidder and “going with the flow”. And in medicine, that is deadly. In vital services, the lowest bidder is not the best healer. You end up getting the worst. Lives are at stake. It is plain wrong. Our taxes at work — I’d estimate we get about five cents, even on your cheap dollar, on a good day in both private and public sectors. Basically, both probably technically legal, is private Behavioral Health seemingly failing us with naked, active greed, and the state system with greed by a few rotten apples manipulating tired, unionized bureaucracies?

We all bear responsibility. Shareholders of corporations own many Behavioral Health facilities   , as taxpayers own local and state public clinics. A wild thought: Why not merge the sectors after scooping out their purulent cores? Or, only if “caregivers” doctors and nurses just practiced according to the letter and spirit of their professional standards and refused to compromise, we would have a great start towards decency.

SO, IF NOT NOW, WHEN?

Would the words “Behavioral Health” now signal a new context and redefinition for psychiatry, just as the word “providers” in the 1990’s changed the professional context for all doctors, and most just accepted it? These words now pass for who we are to many people and ourselves, and apparently work as long as you don’t deal with people’s need for healing.

Here we are today, with the ACA here, in the age of the human genome, neuroscience, and technology, still with one foot in the sewer. We are all morally soiled by the muck. Looking forward, I doubt that poor mentally ill people will ever get many resources as they compete in a public service economy also struggling with broken physical infrastructures and educational systems. But they can get more if we stood up for our profession and its standards.

Things have changed in psychiatry and can be re-changed now that we have the brain in our vision: Psychiatrists are supposed to be the experts in accessing the mind / brain through language. Most language-based psychiatrists were trained for years in this craft and created the model now followed by other professionals, and they used to be tested to pass the boards.

But about a decade or two ago, psychiatry board exams stopped employing live patient interviews (paid volunteers) to assess doctors’ language-based interview skills. So now, most board-qualifying psychiatric residencies give only lip service to teaching language-based skills, once an egregious deficit reserved for the least competitive training programs. And now, it appears OK in some settings to interrupt the connection with patients by multitasking with the clinical onscreen computer record. Ironic, how we are doing to our patients what I have taught we must not do to our children and vice versa, as an expert    such matters, I view full face to face engagement as necessary to provide the best professional healing care for the buck. That means no distractions, including frequently interrupting eye contact to engage in record keeping via computer, now considered a norm.

Shortsightedly trying to move psychiatry closer to the scientific medical mainstream, actually we have needlessly shamefully abandoned essential medical practices and values that make doctors healers. Instead, our “professional” signatures mainly enable systems very few of us would have our own family members go near.

And maybe there are many more creative solutions possible we have not considered, especially since as US medical school graduates we are supposed to be America’s best and brightest. In the general context of what is happening in medicine: If psychiatry wants to continue its humane leadership as the best hope for the mentally ill, we’d better examine our roles ASAP in this mess. Neuroscience is a basic science and cannot fix it directly (except if we all wake up use our brains), but its applications need our engineering skills.

As the best trained and placed scholars and professionals bridging the mind, the body, the brain and everyday healthy functioning, we must speak out from our credible history of compassionate intelligent care and design worthy systems. We psychiatrists must review our own roles in this shameful destruction of our profession and its humane — that means competent — treatment of poor mentally ill people.

We must shift our attention back to the severely ill in the facilities that treat them. We must advocate for our patients, provide and police better standards, support well-trained professionals of whatever discipline in the best professional and ethical tradition of medicine, and educate our colleagues.

For example, can we innovate and adapt tele psychiatry    and IT systems    to translate conversation in clinical encounters directly in real time into parsed text and codes, thereby removing the huge current obstacle to humanelanguage-based care (here’s another great entrepreneurial opportunity!)? Detecting deficits and activated by strings of language (e.g. “Has anyone ever hurt you or touched you in private places?”) the software could require minimal language-based competence to yield coded texts and detect clinical omissions and, for trainees, positionof the eyes? It will free clinicians to use language without interfering with creation of a billable record.

Can we welcome, empower, and help better train the new wave of eager, compassionate, talented, and diligent behavioral health RN+ nurse practitioners in the US, who do still practice in the best traditions of the nursing profession and evidence-based medicine, resist corruption, and serve the disenfranchised mentally ill as a “last line of defense” and advocacy. Like psychiatry residents, too few are learning the power of language-based practices today. Careful deployment of such well-trained and supervised Western-trained professionals, including doctorate-level psychologists, might alleviate the shortages that force today’s poorer care. Strong affiliations with university-based teaching programs could only improve professionalism at all levels.

We must try to influence policy makers to shift entrenched basic economic incentives driving this shameful system so that good medical practices dominate. I am not an expert in that, but our civil service and private industry    have plenty of credible talent. A shift to greater professionalism should not be that expensive.

Here’s a silver lining: We all know that people and institutions in crises are actually more accessible to positive changes. We definitely have a crisis. Another: Behavioral Health and public services today are located nearby, inside cities, not exiled and isolated to the far-away countryside. Here’s another: At least, we are not burning mentally ill people at the stake any longer in our country, as we were doing just a few hundred years ago. We have laws against that now, I think.

PERSONAL NOTES

My repeated failures to fit have come as a shock (to everybody involved — the nice people who bet on my endurance, valued colleagues who recommended me, and to the cordial places that employed me, and to me. In retrospect, my naivety seems embarrassingly clear. How could I have missed it? Everybody, including me, assumed I knew what I was getting into.

I had not noticed, nor did anyone ever spell it out for me until I worked in several places, that I had been wrong to assume, as usual, that I was hired simply to do my best as a doctor. That meant practicing as competently as possible and advocating for the best medical care of my patients. But I was wrong. I was expected to understand automatically that I was also expected to cover up my own basic medical standards as I was covering these practices.

I see now how, from an administrator’s POV, requiring the most efficient coding to obtain payments, everything I did seemed disruptive: “Imposing” my own diagnoses and treatments, prioritizing, encouraging a collaborative atmosphere of learning, teaching, and largely “interfering.” I suspect that a major unspoken worry was how the contrast with my practice “methods” can place the permanent doctors, who are hard to find and whose daily signatures are desperately essential for the system’s financial viability, in a contrasting light. “Why bother to write about this at all? I could be embarrassing myself. Let it go,” I told myself, “Keep your head down.” The trouble is, no one, especially me, would ever come close to understanding what had happened until I had worked it out, out loud in writing for this chronicle.

“Also, why write this for public view? Isn’t that poor judgment?” Maybe. I hope not. After much careful reflection and many rewritings, I feel obligated to share what I saw. I believe that the details of misfittings by an accomplished psychiatrist with high standards can reveal enough about us and our institutions to accomplish my goal, which is to teach and to provoke discussion in the right circles that would lead to positive actions. I believe that as America experiments with new models of healthcare delivery, all current practices must be considered.

Reader: I beg your forgiveness for any errors of omission and commission and urge you to think critically, keeping in mind my goal. Of course, because I am too close to the subject and have only a small window on it, I cannot expect to be considered fair. But I do keep my biases clear and do try to be honest, balanced and transparent. This is, after all, a unique subjective account of a journey into controversial places. Once I understood what was happening, I found myself in the ethical quandary I pose above that I am now attempting to solve for myself. So far, I have decided to continue working to serve people who are poor and severely mentally ill, teach colleagues, and write. So — reader — please consider this essay a step.

Looking back and making sense of my recent journey, I initially sought locum tenens work because I needed the pay, but immediately became intensely wrapped up in rediscovering my medical and psychiatric roots, and was seduced by the immersive challenge of seeing very ill people actually quickly improving in front of my eyes again! That relit flame is still burning in me. But it blinded me at first. Now, as I pass a certain hospital and glance up at the second floor, I still think, “Folks could be stumbling through nightmarish medico – bureaucratic purgatories, right up there, just beyond those windows”.

I hope my writings here beget positive results. I realize fully — and so should any reader — that generalizing from what I saw in just a few units and drawing major conclusions about a whole industry and the people who man it is simply not valid nor fair. My use of “non language-based” is not intended to describe specifically any folks or colleagues. My intent here is only to create transparency and signal an alert from a professional and patient advocacy POV that would prompt more valid, larger, helpful studies.

In practical personal terms, however, IMHO these observations are reliable enough for me to now know how to find work that fits me. What I saw is extremely alarming and the valid bases for my own personal reactions described herein. And clearly, this is why fitting into the Behavioral Health inpatient and state hospital units I serviced, and going with the flow and keeping my head low to cover these practices, was impossible for me personally during my 44th year of practice and after a lifetime of pursuing professional excellence.

I am now obligated to take responsibility for my own part of the current mess, especially for ignoring the plight of so many neighbors. So this essay is not about bashing anyone, and I don’t even know who the main players behind this scenario are. The taxpayer pays and patients suffer with unacceptable psychiatric services –that much I know. I am grateful and humbled for being among US university-trained psychiatrists, well trained medically and then mind / brain diagnoses and treatments and always striving to excel on behalf of patients.

But, reader, you know who you are, and so do others. If you believe what I wrote, silence would put you too in a moral quandary, if you choose to see it that way. Of course, if this essay is too much of a challenge to some entities and hopefully has sufficient impact, predictably, my credibility could be questioned and conclusions even attacked ad hominem by anyone who disagrees (or the opposite, my opinions used out of context by activists).

My POV might be dismissed as coming from just another fading old dinosaur, longing for good old days that never existed; a self-righteous, self-serving wrinkled relic of the social activism of the turbulent Sixties; or from a disingenuous, effete, condescending elitist, an arrogant self-promoting eccentric, or just an ungrateful, hypocritical, conspiracy theorist and troublemaker. Or all of the above. Or worse. No matter. Even if I am found inaccurate in some of my perceptions or details or faulty in some of my conclusions, or have some personal failings, I did craft the above language carefully to describe what I see and think as a doctor. Please understand that, ethically, I am compelled to speak up for the sake of our present neighbors and to leave a better world for my grandchildren and their generations.

Finally, my fond personal thanks again to the dedicated administrators, nurses, staff, and doctors who accepted me into their workplaces, and additionally to the many patients, for collaborating in some of my most challenging and rewarding professional work in years. You know who you are.

Sept, 2015.

http://psychiatrists.psychologytoday.com/rms/178252?_ga=1.62766633.441222680.   

 Article by Eitan ‘Dr. S®’ Schwarz, MD

Part 1: Report from the field: What medical errors would mental health insurance buy many Americans today?

Originally published by ThinkerMedia: BestThinking.com on September 21, 2013

 

A third (and rising) of all deaths in America come from medical errors, while mental illness is the most expensive of all illnesses. How are these facts related? A psychiatrist recounts his immersive professional journey through our crumbling medical infrastructure.

Some rights reserved

 

Facts: Mental illness is the most expensive of all medical conditions, while an epidemic of preventable medical errors is the third largest killer in America.  How are these facts related? A psychiatrist recounts his immersive professional journey through America’s crumbling medical infrastructure.

PART 1 of 2. For part 2 click here. Part 2 describes an amazing experience at a state hospital and a sad stint at a children’s service.

Report from the field: Careful and caring chronicles of one doctor’s recent journeys into some corners of his profession, currently rarely noticed by most colleagues and the public, illuminate issues now in the news with grave implications for all our futures. Some solutions to the basic conflict between the need to create billable records and the delivery of competent language-based psychiatric care are offered, including development of IT systems.

In the popular mind, mental hospitals may be pictured as gracious rural spas where gentle platitudes and long rests restore people; or as snake pits filled with agitated, violent, cross-eyed, drooling people and deranged sadistic nurses with poor dentition and doctors with thick accents tugging patients into canvas straight jackets; or as callous, filthy insane asylums dispensing punitive electric shocks and bizarre mind-destroying drugs. IMHO these images often mostly reflect common fears we all instinctively harbor about unlucky people with troubled minds and the hospitals where we hide them. We are also often creeped out by their strange caregivers and bearded humorless doctors, who must obviously also be somewhat odd themselves to actually choose to spend professional lives so close to them.

So OK, I am one of those doctors, well into my career, but there is absolutely nothing strange nor odd about me, and no beard, either. My recent journey into modern psych hospitals started like many today: I needed the income, so I was lucky to find several opportunities as an hourly temp. I was quickly placed in a succession of private Behavioral Health and public state hospitals, that sought psychiatrists. I also spent some months in a well-regarded outpatient family service agency. These seemingly agreeable settings and the locum tenens (temporary covering doctor) arrangements were new to me.

But I found my journey more novel and difficult to understand than I expected, with some realities as appalling as the popular stereotypes, yet with other aspects amazingly and wonderfully inspiring. The whole journey took me some time to sort out, but I can now begin to describe what I saw and what I did, much as a memoir, punctuated by personal comments in italics. My essay concludes with reflections and a personal note. Reader please note: From time to time, I may amend or edit this essay.

———–

I made the following discoveries during recent immersive roles as a temporary substitute physician. In three adult inpatient units in hospitals in urban areas, I served several months for 10-40 hours weekly, taking over care already started by others or admitting new folks, and covering pediatrics, emergency rooms, drug rehab, medical consultation, and adolescent services nights and days. In a family agency, I spent about three hours a week as a child and adolescent psychiatrist. And so I came to care for hundreds of people of all ages, individuals, families, and staffs, and became intimately familiar with their experiences.

My professional standards are based on fortunately superb education and training, decades of successful and fulfilling psychiatric practice in many settings, including original widely cited published research, teaching and board certifications and many stints as a board examiner in adult and in child and adolescent psychiatry all over the US. I view patients as ordinary people doing their best to cope with neurobiological illnesses affecting their minds and dealing with the enormous stresses of being in a psychiatric facility (or currently,”Behavioral Health” unit, whatever that means) at the same time.

I set the bar pretty high because I believe doctors owe that to their patients. Giving poor care is an ultimate act of cruelty and disrespect when good care can reasonably be given. When it comes to compromising and shortcutting patient care because of selfish self interest, incompetence, or sloppiness, I am known to typically hold licensed professionals and institutions to non-negotiable standards, especially when they know or should know better; and especially when good care is within their grasp, as it often is. I give care to all as I would like to have it given me.

Although I believe the settings I saw are largely typical, I realize — and so should the reader — that drawing major conclusions about a whole industry or groups of people from such a small sample may be neither valid nor fair, but I saw what I saw that needs an urgent telling.

“BEHAVIORAL HEALTH” INPATIENT PSYCHIATRISTS AS QUEEN BEES

The several facilities I have worked, each occupying a part of a floor in a larger hospital, are roughly similar physically and in staffing patterns, since all hospitals are inspected regularly according to basic procedural and physical standards. A unit holds 30 patients usually roomed in clean, suicide-safe, unlockable double dorm-like rooms with a half-bath, special window glass, basic furniture built in or bolted to the floor, and no mobile phones nor computers. One or two land-line phones hang on hall walls. Common areas include stalled showers, a large, comfortable lounge or two where patients are encouraged to spend their time, and occupational therapy rooms.

When you are buzzed into a unit, you see a Spartan hospital wing as the solid security door gently locks behind you. The wing is always locked, confining patients because of security and insurance preferences. Visitors are allowed, but must be identified and are sometimes searched or the entire visit monitored.

It is generally quiet and peaceful. Some staff work in their offices, often with doors open, or offices are outside the unit. People can be found gathering or milling in the halls, their rooms, an activity room, community therapy meeting, or watching TV, and some patients must always remain in staff’s direct line of sight.

Staff members, including nurses, wear street clothes or distinctly-colored nursing “pajamas.” Nurse practitioners, master’s- or doctorate-level nurses specializing in psychiatric care can offer enlightened leadership and and clinical care rooted in nursing traditions. Patients can be seen in safety-screened street clothes or bundled in layered, loose hospital gowns over surgical “pajamas.” Nursing and other staff and patients often congregate around wide open or enclosed and locked nursing stations. Hospitalists are hospital physician employees and can wear surgical “pajamas”. Psychiatrists and internists often wear ties.

Patients are screened medically upon admission by private practitioners or hospitalists. Street clothes and personal belongings are stored. Security is tight, and unit hygiene fair. Patients or staff can be injured rarely by sudden patient violence. Many can become more agitated, especially initially, and require emergency injections after frightening staff and patients. For example, a man who just learned of a brother’s death became violent in his despair.

Most patients attend group and occupational therapies. Any type of individual or family therapy is absent. Physical restraints are rarely used and considered a last resort, and then governed with strict protocols. ECT (electro convulsive therapy) is generally not available.

A uniformed, unarmed, usually quite friendly security officer (often an actual retired or off-duty policeman) can appear when the buzz and activity level are high. Some staff visibly carry a device to activate the general sound and light safety alarm. Male staff capable of restraining people are scheduled every shift. Staff avoids sitting in chairs just occupied by some patients.

In some units psychiatrists are hospital employees. However, in the units I saw, unlike most others who interact with inpatients and are held closely accountable within a supervisory hierarchy, psychiatrists are not actual employees of the hospital. They are independent unsupervised practitioners, legally distanced from the facility, who bill insurers and are reimbursed separately. Medical practices are supposed to be monitored by a medical governance structure, but I saw no evidence whatsoever of sorely needed real-time medical quality control. Psychiatrists see patients during daily rounds, practiced in a private conference room with the doctor, a nurse, and at least one computer.

The effects of healthcare reforms, doctor shortages, and budget cuts in social services are dramatically seen here: in the units I saw, doctors’ output is essential to the profits of an enterprise that seems to teeter on the edge of catastrophe because of thin and fluctuating profit margins and stiff competition in some places. Like efficient queen bees    producing eggs for their hives, doctors must labor assiduously to yield a stream of dictated admission, daily progress, orders, and discharge notes.

A person’s entire hospital stay and almost every associated charge hinge on crucial wording that is then carefully coded by an office full of cordial clerical staff to enable billing and profit from the unit.

The basis for care is mostly driven by economies and statistics and not by what’s medically best. Often units cannot survive    financially, especially these days, leaving serious gaps in the safety net of too many Americans. Census (how many beds are occupied) is the topic most often discussed by staff and doctors. Average length of stay (LOS) is less than a week, but can extend into several, depending on severity of illness and availability of discharge placements. Everyone is relieved when units are full and resources really stretched. Unit nursing and other staffing commonly expands and contracts every eight hour shift, paralleling unit census to avoid waste. So jobs and income are at stake to keep census high.

Charting is a crucial activity, and staff and doctors closely monitored by specially trained utilization reviewers to comply to the letter with the language of rules imposed by the insurer to avoid raising red flags and assure reimbursement. Key language terms must be included in nursing and medical notes to allow for smooth coding and reimbursements.

THE PEOPLE RECEIVING BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES I MET

Our neighbors, people past high-school age, are brought in, mostly in the evening hours, by ambulance or police, family members, or from emergency departments and far away nursing and group homes, or transferred from other hospital medical units. Some just tried to jump off a bridge. Many are ordinary folks who are extremely stressed by overwhelming crises. Others overdosed and are admitted after medically cleared.

Dr. S Opinion: Are “Crib Robots” Good For Babies?

Originally published by ThinkerMedia: BestThinking.com on July 9, 2012

 

Brilliantly engineered, intelligent, cute, engaging “Crib Robots” will soon be marketed for infants and toddlers, but will most likely affect brain wiring for core personality and other human qualities. Avoid such devices, despite the fascination, until we know they are safe in the long run.

 

According to recent NY Times stories, major toy companies are developing and introducing interactive digital media for babies and toddlers (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/08/technology/in-a-fisher-price-lab-apps-are-childs-play-prototype.html?_r=2, http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/04/after-14-years-furby-has-returned/?nl=technology&emc=cta4_20120712#comments),

and

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/29/science/brainlike-computers-learning-from-experience.html?emc=edit_tnt_20131228&tntemail0=y&_r=0   

and

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/02/technology/if-our-gadgets-could-measure-our-emotions.html?emc=tnt&tntemail0=y).

I call these toys CRIB ROBOTS, and as a child psychiatrist am alarmed about their potential damage to the underpinnings of the future personalities of babies and youngsters in their intended market.

We should become aware and alarmed. In our everyday lives, we have already become insidiously attached to, trust, and depend for our lives and livelihoods on disembodied robots that inhabit, make, and run our elevators, appliances, and cars, digital media, and those that mediate our conversations.

While thinking machines have provided many benefits in business, industry, and the military, they have mostly wreaked relative chaos in human relationships that we are slowly working through. We did not anticipate the cybercrime, sexting, gaming, cyberbullying, multitasking, endless power struggles with our teens, disrupted family life, dumbing down of youth, and other sensational happenings that are capturing our attention and are probably yet but tips of an iceberg. We have yet to see the long-term impact on our family lives, relationships, and development. Magical touchscreens will soon enchant too many infants into the childhood media consumption frenzy that will hopefully be recognized as a public health threat sooner rather than later.

So this digital media mess is coming into the nursery. Some folks are already doing it, and soon all parents will be urged to put embodied or disembodied (tablets, etc.) crib robots into babies’ hands. Merchandisers will spin these as expert-approved, convenient, fun, and effortless ways to reduce the uncertainty and mystery of dealing with infants, and instead engage, calm, educate, babysit and jumpstart their development (despite the reality that in natural processes, “some good things just cannot be hurried before their time,” as every good winemaker and parent knows.)

Already, smart toys are being marketed that simulate a mother’s presence with a recording of her voice to soothe Baby. It is now clear that very young children’s play and awake moments will become a marketplace for sophisticated, interactive media devices and intelligent toys. We must carefully consider how these may impact our children. This article is for stimulating general discussion and raising awareness and does not necessarily comprehensively treat this subject. This piece is based on “Kids, Parents & Technology: A Manual for Young Families”, see http://www.mydigitalfamily.org.

We Build Robots to Be Great Fakers

Dr. Sherry Turkle (Alone Together) and her MIT colleagues have been breaking new ground in the study of human / machine interactions. These pioneer scientists have seen how elders and children become easily attached to “relational artifacts”—interactive computer-based dolls programmed to show and vocalize “feelings” and even respond to touch and tone of voice. Young and old alike nurture these humanoid robots as if they are alive. Children struggle to understand the differences between these digital objects and actual living creatures, and sometimes regard the two as interchangeable.The robot engineers built in sufficiently animal-like movement to fool brain centers that identify living from inanimate motion.

These mechanical pets are helpful to the lonely elderly. Dr. Turkle reports how the elderly in nursing homes enjoy the opportunities for supportive interactions with relational artifacts in spite of their (presumable) awareness that they are not real. This is already common in Japan.

Uncannily, even super-rational scholars, despite their traditional impatience with how others anthropomorphize and project feelings onto their machines, now themselves develop feelings about the robots they themselves built, as if they were in a relationship with a living creature. This is BIG: Just because we have been anticipating them for centuries (at least since the 270 A.D. Golem), let us not be too casual now that they are actually here.

As we adapt to the digital world, we are still attached to people, but are increasingly interacting via the mediation of disembodied robots. Sadly, we end up treating each other shabbily as these devices also lead us to willingly chop up and squeeze the richness of our nuanced and felt human connections with each other into small, thin, narrow-bandwidth data trickles. Then we feel desperately compelled to keep this thin channel open. No, wonder — it’s hard to feel a good hug through a straw.

We are already discovering that, given free rein, even as we intend them to improve our connections with one another, and to many extents they do, these tools often actually fragment communication, and can be harmful to us. It is also often easier to anonymously mistreat each other and ourselves. Our beloved devices filter too much out, and their use is dumbing down our kids and weakening our family lives. In addition, we now seem so attached to the devices themselves that we are scaring ourselves by just how out of control we can be.

Moreover, few of us seem to care much that the talking machines we encounter daily that use the personal human “I” and call us “you”, as in the “I don’t understand your question” of Apple’s Siri and the airline reservations “clerk” (who may well be on their way to elope and become the parents-to-be of Kubrick’s 2001’s Hal in Sorry Son of Siri — that’s a joke.)

But the joke is hardly funny because it is too close to a kind of troubling confusion or indifference that feels to me highly personal. It is about being human with a unique human self I call my “I”. And now machines too refer to themselves as I’s. Despite clearly not being human and having no unique selves, a machine can also use an “I”, with a nuanced human voice and address me as a “you”. How weird, when you really think about it. Personally, I always find it uncanny and annoyingly dishonest, as if I am forced to interact with an odd and fake stranger in some crazy pretense of a relationship, yet I accept it silently as yet another absurdity of modern life, and, sadly, I am getting used to it and hardly cuss back at the machine as much.

The Core of Being Human and Sane is the Capacity for Human Relationships and Differentiating Human from Non-Human, Made Up from Real

But I cannot accept this craziness for developing brains because it is inherently dehumanizing and dangerous. If the faking machines can fool scientists and elders and even get the rational and self-aware me to interact with them, how can they not affect young babies and toddlers?

Crib robots may introduce a terrible confusion into the very heart of becoming human, a core which must thrive and become firmly rooted in real, tangible, sane, multi-sensory, nuanced human to human interactivity. Admittedly, there are almost no scientific data on the effects of crib robots on very young children and we know too little about early neurodevelopment. (There will be folks who will discredit and dismiss this article on this basis alone. Well, I wouldn’t envy their children nor the people around them if they disregard these pages, and I do hope to convince them.)

However, what we do know about how kids develop, the infant brain is wired, and the way core elements of personality form in the early months and years should alert parents to avoid exposing infants and toddlers to such devices. If we wait for conclusive research, we will have taken unnecessary and probably irreversible risks with our young.

For example, we know that the core neural networks that form basic personality begin during infancy and are extremely sensitive to reciprocal interactions with the mothering person. The brain infrastructure for much of what makes us human develops during the first 5 years, and the earlier the faster. Carelessly inserting interactions with nonhuman intelligences into this early phase could be disruptive to normal personality development and damaging to one of Nature’s most precious gifts to us — the developing human brain. The long term effects may not manifest until much later, when the baby is grown and faces the social challenges of adulthood and parenting (Harrow).

Baby Invents a Relationship Toy and Does Not Need a Crib Robot

Let us begin giving careful thought now about what might work and what might hurt by reviewing our understanding of the brains and minds of very young children.

People have always been social creatures who have needed each other. Humans have always been plugged in — connected to one another through our senses and minds and bodies — with what resemble Cozolino’s (The Neuroscience of Human Relationships) broadband “social synapses”, hard-wired into us from birth and programmed to be refined by development. Making possible our survival as a species, these deep channels carry a wealth of highly choreographed uniquely human information among us. always have and always will need good family relationships, values, education, and parents’ full love and presence to develop into human creatures with healthy brains and minds. Children are programmed to form broad-band social synapses, primarily with parents, that feed them the rich data that organizes and shapes their brains and fullest humanness. Brain development continues through the life cycle, but is almost complete by the early 20’s, yet continues to evolve while declining.

Healthy brain maturation and psychological development through childhood, adolescence and beyond depend on how a child advances along two basic interwoven processes—separation and individuation, as child psychology pioneer Margaret Mahler (The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant) has taught us. The separation-individuation process is highly evolved in humans, and is mediated by, but also, influences the structure of the child’s evolving brain. This process is undeniably central to the development of the mind and what it means to be human, and there are as many variations on how this works as there are people.

Individuation is the process of becoming an individual with unique qualities through internalizing and reorganizing what is learned from identification, imitation, learning, and other means. To become one’s own person with a strong claim to being one’s own self, each person must also differentiate and separate from his parents.

Following the intense bonding of early infancy, it is not easy for a child to undertake this difficult process. For a child to feel secure enough to undertake separation itself and experience being a distinct individual, requires a degree of self-reliance and awareness that may not have yet formed sufficiently.

Article by Eitan ‘Dr. S®’ Schwarz, MD

©All rights reserved