Jordan W. Smoller
University of Pennsylvania
Childhood is a syndrome which has only recently begun to receive serious
attention from clinicians. The syndrome itself, however, is not at
all recent. As early as the 8th century, the Persian historian Kidnom
made references to "short, noisy creatures," who may well have been what
we now call "children." The treatment of children, however, was unknown
until
this century, when so-called "child psychologists" and"child psychiatrists"
became common. Despite this history of clinical neglect, it has been
estimated that well over half of all Americans alive today have experienced
childhood directly (Seuss, 1983). In fact, the actual numbers are
probably much higher, since these data are based on self-reports which
may be
subject to social desirability biases and retrospective distortion.
The growing acceptance of childhood as a distinct
phenomenon is reflected in the proposed inclusion of the syndrome in the
upcoming Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition,
or DSM-V, of the American Psychiatric Association. Clinicians are
still in disagreement about the significant clinical features of childhood,
but the proposed
DSM-V will almost certainly include the following core features:
1. Congenital onset
2. Dwarfism
3. Emotional lability and immaturity
4. Knowledge deficits
5. Legume anorexia
Clinical Features of Childhood
Although the focus of this paper is on the efficacy of conventional
treatment of childhood, the five clinical markers mentioned above merit
further discussion for those unfamiliar with this patient population.
CONGENITAL ONSET
In one of the few existing literature reviews on childhood, Temple-Black
(1982) has noted that childhood is almost always present at birth, although
it may go undetected for years or even remain subclinical indefinitely.
This observation has led some investigators to speculate on a biological
contribution to childhood. As one psychologist has put it, "we may
soon be
in a position to distinguish organic childhood from functional childhood"
(Rogers, 1979).
DWARFISM
This is certainly the most familiar marker of childhood. It is widely known that children are physically short relative to the population at large. Indeed, common clinical wisdom suggests that the treatment of the so-called "small child" (or "tot") is particularly difficult. These children are known to exhibit infantile behavior and display a startling lack of insight (Tom and Jerry, 1967).
EMOTIONAL LABILITY AND IMMATURITY
This aspect of childhood is often the only basis for a clinician's diagnosis. As a result, many otherwise normal adults are misdiagnosed as children and must suffer the unnecessary social stigma of being labelled a "child" by professionals and friends alike.
KNOWLEDGE DEFICITS
While many children have IQ's with or even above the norm, almost all
will manifest knowledge deficits. Anyone who has known a real child
has experienced the frustration of trying to discuss any topic that requires
some general knowledge. Children seem to have little knowledge about
the world they live in. Politics, art, and science -- children are
largely ignorant of these. Perhaps it is because of this ignorance,
but the sad fact is that most children have few friends who are not, themselves,
children.
LEGUME ANOREXIA
This last identifying feature is perhaps the most unexpected. Folk wisdom is supported by empirical observation -- children will rarely eat their vegetables (see Popeye, 1957, for review).
Causes of Childhood
Now that we know what it is, what can we say about the causes of childhood?
Recent years have seen a flurry of theory and speculation from a number
of perspectives. Some of the most prominent are reviewed below.
The sociological model of Emile Durkind was perhaps the first to speculate
about sociological causes of childhood. He points out two key observations
about children: 1) the vast majority of children are unemployed, and
2) children represent one of the least educated segments of our society.
In fact, it has been estimated that less than 20% of children have had
more than fourth grade education. Clearly, children are an
"out-group." Because of their intellectual handicap, children
are even denied the right to vote. From the sociologist's perspective,
treatment should be aimed at helping assimilate children into mainstream
society. Unfortunately, some
victims are so incapacitated by their childhood that they are simply
not competent to work. One promising rehabilitation program (Spanky
and Alfalfa, 1978) has trained victims of severe childhood to sell lemonade.
Biological Model
The observation that childhood is usually present from birth has led
some to speculate on a biological contribution. An early investigation
by Flintstone and Jetson (1939) indicated that childhood runs in families.
Their survey of over 8,000 American families revealed that over half contained
more than one child. Further investigation revealed that even most
non-child family members had experienced childhood at some point.
Cross-cultural studies (e.g., Mowgli & Din, 1950) indicate that family
childhood is even more prevalent in the Far East. For example,
in Indian and Chinese families, as many as three out of four family members
may have childhood. Impressive evidence of a genetic component of
childhood comes from a large-scale twin study by Brady and Partridge (1972).
These authors studied over 106 pairs of twins, looking at concordance rates
for
childhood. Among identical or monozygotic twins, concordance
was unusually high (0.92), i.e., when one twin was diagnosed with childhood,
the other twin was almost always a child as well.
Psychological Models
A considerable number of psychologically-based theories of the development
of childhood exist. They are too numerous to review here. Among
the more familiar models are Seligman's "learned childishness" model.
According to this model, individuals who are treated like children eventually
give up and become children. As a counterpoint to such theories,
some experts have
claimed that childhood does not really exist. Szasz (1980) has
called "childhood" an expedient label. In seeking conformity, we
handicap those whom we find unruly or too short to deal with by labeling
them "children."
Treatment of Childhood
Efforts to treat childhood are as old as the syndrome itself.
Only in modern times, however, have humane and systematic treatment protocols
been applied. In part, this increased attention to the problem may
be due to the sheer number of individuals suffering from childhood.
Government statistics (DHHS) reveal that there are more children alive
today than at any time in our history. To paraphrase P.T. Barnum:
"There's a child born every minute."
The overwhelming number of children has made government
intervention inevitable. The nineteenth century saw the institution
of what remains the largest single program for the treatment of childhood
-- so-called "public schools." Under this colossal program, individuals
are placed into treatment groups based on the severity of their condition.
For example, those most severely afflicted may be placed in a "kindergarten"
program. Patients at this level are typically short, unruly, emotionally
immature, and intellectually deficient. Given this type of individual,
therapy is essentially one of patient management and of helping the child
master basic skills (e.g. finger-painting). Unfortunately, the "school"
system has been largely ineffective. Not only is the program a massive
tax burden, but it has failed even to slow down the rising incidence of
childhood. Faced with
this failure and the growing epidemic of childhood, mental health professionals
are devoting increasing attention to the treatment of childhood.
Given a theoretical framework by Freud's landmark treatises on childhood,
child psychiatrists and psychologists claimed great successes in their
clinical interventions. By the 1950's, however, the clinicians' optimism
had waned. Even after years of costly analysis, many victims remained
children. The following case (taken from Gumby & Pokey, 1957)
is typical.
Billy J., age 8, was brought to treatment by his parents. Billy's
affliction was painfully obvious. He stood only 4'3"high and weighed
a scant 70 lbs., despite the fact that he ate voraciously. Billy
presented a variety of troubling symptoms. His voice was noticeably
high for a man. He displayed legume anorexia and, according to his
parents, often refused to bathe. His intellectual functioning was
also below normal -- he had little general knowledge and could barely write
a structured sentence. Social skills were also deficient. He
often spoke inappropriately and exhibited "whining behavior." His
sexual experience was non-existent.
Indeed, Billy considered women "icky." His parents reported
that his condition had been present from birth, improving gradually after
he was placed in a school at age 5. The diagnosis was "primary childhood."
After years of painstaking treatment, Billy improved gradually. At
age 11, his height and weight have increased, his social skills are broader,
and he is
now functional enough to hold down a "paper route."
After years of this kind of frustration, startling
new evidence has come to light which suggests that the prognosis in cases
of childhood may not be all gloom. A critical review by Fudd (1972)
noted that studies of the childhood syndrome tend to lack careful follow-up.
Acting on this observation, Moe, Larry, and Curly (1974) began a large-scale
longitudinal study. These investigators studied two groups.
The first group consisted of 34 children currently engaged in a long-term
conventional treatment program. The second was a group of 42 children
receiving no treatment. All subjects had been diagnosed as children
at least 4 years previously, with a mean duration of childhood of 6.4years.
At the end of one year, the results confirmed the clinical wisdom that
childhood is a refractory disorder -- virtually all symptoms persisted
and the treatment group was only slightly better off than the controls.
The results, however, of a careful 10-year follow-up were startling.
The investigators (Moe, Larry, Curly, & Shemp, 1984) assessed the original
cohort on a variety of measures. General knowledge and emotional
maturity were assessed with standard measures. Height was assessed
by the "metric system" (see Ruler,
1923), and legume appetite by the Vegetable Appetite Test (VAT) designed
by Popeye (1968). Moe, et al. found that subjects improved uniformly
on all measures. Indeed, in most cases, the subjects appeared to
be symptom-free.
Moe, et al. report a spontaneous remission rate of 95%, a finding
which is certain to revolutionize the clinical approach to childhood.
These recent results suggests that the prognosis
for victims of childhood may not be so bad as we have feared. We
must not, however, become too complacent. Despite its apparently
high spontaneous remission rate, childhood remains one of the most serious
and rapidly growing disorders facing mental health professional today.
And, beyond the psychological pain it brings, childhood has recently been
linked to a number of physical disorders. Twenty years ago, Howdi,
Doodi, and Beauzeau (1965)
demonstrated a six-fold increased risk of chicken pox, measles, and
mumps among children as compared with normal controls. Later, Barby
and Kenn (1971) linked childhood to an elevated risk of accidents--compared
with normal adults, victims of childhood were much more likely to scrape
their knees, lose their teeth, and fall off their bikes. Clearly,
much more
research is needed before we can give any real hope to the millions
of victims wracked by this insidious disorder.