Finding the Middle, Early

I read an interesting Huffington Post Blog today about the need for early childhood to be a major world-wide focus in order to ensure positive global development in the future.

Find the article here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/todd-grindal/the-next-stage-of-global-_b_3978868.html

The article points out that in the last 20 years, there have been major increases in children attending primary schools across the world. However, there has been less progress with enrolling children in “proven early childhood development programs” worldwide.

The authors then go on to discuss the importance of a strong early childhood to build a foundation for later healthy growth and development, and the links to a successful global workforce and economy. They outline the importance of healthcare, parental support, and basic nutrition as being major factors early in life that can substantially impact later academic, behavioral, and global economic success.

All of this is fairly straightforward to me. It’s the party line I’ve heard (and have generally subscribed to) from day one of my studies in child development.

However, something of this post smacked a little too much of the idea that there is only “one right way” to do something for my taste.

Though I certainly understand the benefits and values of early childhood supports and education, and fully support the need to expand resources for families who are at-risk for highly preventable mental and physical health conditions, the idea that “proven early childhood development programs” are the one, and perhaps only way to go makes me a little leery.

 

Diversity 6 (via stock.xchng)

Especially when we’re taking a world-wide focus on the issue, focusing in on early childhood programs, which in many places are nationally funded and/or monitored, seems a little short-sited. Though I fully understand the importance of evidence-base in developing programs and interventions, I also know that science is one, but not the only, way of knowing something is good for kids.

Don’t get me wrong; it drives me nuts when people assume that they know everything that I know about child development just because they have kids. But it also drives me nuts when scientists claim to know everything about children when they’ve never worked directly with them outside of a laboratory setting one day in their lives.

There are generalizable realities in the human condition, to be sure. And science can help elucidate some of that generalizability.

But it is not, nor should it be, the end all and be all, largely because the field of child development has not studied everything in and across every world culture. There are nuances, differences, and beautiful variations in the way in which humans approach and experience the world around them. Science has a tendency to trounce on that beauty and chalk it up to “variations” or “outliers” that either aren’t important enough to explore, or are just noise in an otherwise coherent data set.  

Breaker (via stock.xchng)

This just in: Science doesn’t know it all.

And that’s okay. Frankly, it’d be a pretty boring world if we did know it all. Plus, all the scientists out there would have to pack their bags and go home if there was nothing else to learn.

My point here is that though science has incredible value and can shed light on some of the most complex things in our world, it is not the only answer.

“Evidence-based” isn’t, and shouldn’t be the only way.

There are a lot of ways to do things right. There are a lot of ways to know the right thing to do. There are a lot of ways to get to the same positive outcome. ‘Because science says so’ is one of many valid reasons to do something.

I’d just hate to think that we’re getting to a place where nations institute a 'one and only right way' to raise children, based solely on what science tells us. That mindset is limiting, and squashes the beautiful variations inherent in the human race.

Now, I don’t mean to be an alarmist. Nor do I mean to suggest that the authors of this article don’t recognize the value in other ways of knowing, or the variation in culture that may be lost in a more one-size-fits-all approach.

But I worry that there are people who may read this article, and who may subscribe fully to the belief that universal, evidence-based early childhood education is the only way to “correctly” raise children. And the more early childhood education gets entangled with state and federal policy and funding, the more this belief will become intractably instilled in our collective psyche.

But instead, let’s call this what it is. Early childhood education programs are a very western idea of child-rearing. And that's okay. But that doesn't make it suitable for the whole world. 

So I fear we are again getting into a situation where the West thinks it knows the “right way” to raise children, to the detriment of other less powerful, but equally vibrant cultures throughout the world that might raise their children differently.  

Children (via stock.xchng)

It’s a hard line to walk because on the one hand, there are certainly universal things that are very detrimental to the successful development of a child. Poor health and nutrition, traumatic experience, lack of family support and connection, mental illness, violence, the list goes on. And there are things that early childhood supports can do to help buffer against those negative early life experiences and enhance the lives of young children. Some of those supports are early interventions and quality early childhood care. Raising global awareness of these things is a laudable goal. 

But on the other hand, where do we stop? Quality is important, to be sure, but if certain cultural beliefs and practices are not in the “evidence-based curriculum” does the funding stop? Where does the western world draw the line on what’s an acceptable way to spend taxpayer dollars? What does it deem as “okay”? What’s defined as “not good enough”? Who decides?

These are the questions I fear we haven’t discussed enough.

And I worry that it will be the loud, powerful voices of western thinking demolishing all others in their path without careful consideration of what might be lost in the process.

And that sounds eerily familiar, and feels a little like groundhog day.

What do you think? Are we just repeating history all over again? Or will we find a middle ground, early?

On Failing to Give My Best, Everytime

Do you ever feel like you’re never giving things as much time as they deserve? As much time as you’d like to give them?

I feel this way ALL. THE. TIME.

(Especially right now as I realize it's been a MONTH since I last blogged.)

It’s partly the plight of being a bit (okay, more than a bit) Type-A. Checking things of the list is sometimes the most important thing in my world, but only if I can check them off with a satisfactory exclamation of “Yes! I gave that my full and best effort, and could not have done it any better.”

It doesn’t even have to be a perfect product. I can live with mistakes. That’s just a part of the process. 

No, it doesn’t have to be perfect, but I just have to have given it my best, every time.

The problem is that my definition of “my best,” is always very high. Sometimes unattainably so.

Part of the problem is, I think that I should be able to get things done in a certain amount of time. Sometimes I’m right about the amount of time it will take. Sometimes, I’m horribly, horribly wrong. Then things get shuffled, pushed off, neglected, to the point where when I am forced to address those things, I don’t have enough time to be able to give them my best effort and attention.

 

Office (via stock.xchng)

Then the guilt sets in. Guilt that I didn’t give it my all. That I let other stuff get in the way of doing my best work, of living my best life. That I let “good enough” for other people be my “good enough.”

And that, for whatever neurotic, perfectionist reason, is unacceptable to me. That, my friends, is failure.

It’s not about failing to do something. It’s about failing to do it well.

And I fail to do things well all the damn time. And it drives me crazy.

But here’s the funny thing. To the outside world, I’m sure most everything seems fine. I still get the things done I need to get done. I’m still a productive worker and a “have it together” wife, daughter, and friend (most of the time). But inside, it’s a different story.

Where the sausage gets made is sometimes a guilt-ridden, imperfect, hideous mess.

And I know what you’re thinking, “give yourself a break, you’re only human.”

Yes. I am.

But the world is constantly throwing messages of “do more, be better, you should be able to do it all, all the time, all while keeping it together and being perfectly happy all the time.” And frankly, I expect more out of myself than is probably reasonable, due in part, but not entirely, to these messages.

The other part of it is just me. Plain, old, failed me.

I’ve always been this way. The drive to do and be more, to give my best no matter what, is a characteristic I’ve always had. It's a large part of what's gotten me where I am today, no question.

A friend was recently reflecting on her own life and said that despite the perception of the outside world that everything is fine and dandy, sometimes what’s going on behind the scenes is a total mess. But that accepting and living in that mess is often the hardest part.

But living in the mess, where things seem to be falling apart, where nothing goes as planned, and where pity is a more common bedfellow than joy, well that’s part of the process of life.

I realize I’ve got a lot of things in my life together. And there’s a lot of great stuff happening in my life right now. I’m thankful and grateful for all of the opportunities, successes, support, and just plain luck I’ve had in life.

But that doesn’t stop me from feeling like a failure when I can’t put 125,000% into everything I do all the time.

I know it’s not realistic to expect that, but here I am.

Does anyone else out there feel like this? Or am I, as I often feel, alone in my perfectionist-driven guilt-fest?

…and now on to the next task, to give it my all, and nothing less…