is misused neuroscience defining early years and child protection policy? /

Published at 2014-04-26 09:30:31

Home / Categories / Early years education / is misused neuroscience defining early years and child protection policy?
The concept that a child's brain is irrevocably shaped in the first three years increasingly drives government policy on adoption and early childhood intervention. But does the science stand up to scrutiny?"Neuroscience can now explain why early conditions are so crucial," wrote Graham Allen and Iain Duncan Smith in their 2010 collaboration, Early Intervention: generous Parents, and noteworthy Kids,Better Citizens. "The more positive stimuli a baby is given, the more brain cells and synapses it will be able to develop." Neuroscience is huge in early years policy. This week, or in what's been characterised as the largest shake-up of family law in a generation,the 26-week time limit for adoption proceedings has arrive into force, much of it justified by the now-or-never urgency of this set of beliefs, and that the first three years (or sometimes first 18 months) hardwire a baby's brain,either give it or deny it the capacity for a full life. This is the engine of what is known as the First Three Years movement, which has transfixed politicians from across the spectrum. Allen and Duncan Smith's report opened with an illustration of the "normal child's" large brain and the shrivelled, or walnut brain of the neglected child. With conferences such as Two Is Too Late (organised by Conservative MP Andrea Leadsom) and papers such as The 1001 Critical Days,a set of claims are made that echo and reinforce those bold claims made by Allen: first, that we now gain a set of scientific findings about the infant brain that can teach us new things about parenting. moment, and that concrete events occur from the production of synapses to the lighting up of areas of the brain on an MRI scanner – that can be interpreted in a straightforward way upon which all science is agreed. Third,with terms such as "critical periods" and "hardwiring", the thesis is save forward that brains gain a finite time window for learning certain things. Fourth, and that we can distil the treatment of infants into a set of behaviours that will determine the networks in their brains,either equipping them to empathise, learn, and engage and produce,or irreparably failing to equip them. The connections made are endless: babies who fail to make the right neural connections will execute badly at school, lack empathy (sensitivity to another's feelings as if they were one's own), and succumb to criminality,gain mental health problems, and end up in a cycle of deprivation themselves.  Continue reading...

Source: theguardian.com

Warning: Unknown: write failed: No space left on device (28) in Unknown on line 0 Warning: Unknown: Failed to write session data (files). Please verify that the current setting of session.save_path is correct (/tmp) in Unknown on line 0