6100 Highway 128 - Philo, CA 95466
Telephone: (707) 895-2459
Fax: (707) 895-2154

Editor : Sharon Gowan
email parentsjournal@family.com

Parents versus Peers: Who Matters More?
B Y D E I R D R E W I L S O N

YOUR BOOKSHELF
IS full to overflowing. Your calendar is marked with scheduled workshops and lectures. And you tune in to TV sound bites whenever the subject is mentioned.

Parenting. Just when you've had it "up to here" with the do's and don'ts of childrearing, along comes a book--by a mother of two--who declares that parents aren't as influential as we think. That, as a child develops into an adult, genes and peers matter, but parents don't.

This is the bombshell that author Judith Rich Harris dropped with the September release of her new book THE NURTURE ASSUMPTION: WHY CHILDREN TURN OUT THE WAY THEY DO (Free Press, 1998).

The book is a blunt, sometimes rambling, sometimes funny attack on what parents and child-development experts have believed for nearly 50 years--that children are the products
of nature and nurture. The latter factor, Harris asserts, is a "cherished cultural myth." Parents, she says, are essential for the basics--food, shelter, protection--and for creating a home and family that is successful and happy for a growing child. Beyond that, though, a child's genes and peers are what determine a child's personality, social behavior and values. Not a parent's discipline, affection, advice or the lack of all three.

To prove this, Harris, 60, cites a number of studies, stories and her own experience, both as a child and as a parent. Her book lists more than 700 studies, articles and books as
references. She blasts research that has connected parental divorce with kids, academic failure and behavior problems. She cites studies of twins showing that those raised in the same family are no more alike than those raised apart. And she offers numerous stories of children who were profoundly shaped by their interactions with peers--so much so that long-lasting personality traits were formed.

While Harris says she still believes it's important for children to learn about relationships and rules in their early years, she doesn't believe it has a long-lasting effect once kids are outside the home. "They may cast it off when they step
outside as easily as the dorky sweater their mother made them wear," she writes.

What kind of influence can parents have? Harris says parents' ultimate power play is to choose a good neighborhood and great school system for their children to grow up in, and to make sure their kids look as normal and attractive to their peers as possible, "because looks do matter." She recommends dermatology, plastic surgery--whatever is necessary--to help a child fit in with peers.

Harris is not a scientist or a child-development expert. By her own admission, she was ousted from Harvard University's psychology doctoral program because her professors "didn't think I'd amount to much." She is a former co-author of college textbooks on child development--books which she says led her to question the theories psychologists have relied on for decades to explain the development of children. In fact, she had begun work on a new development textbook when she had the epiphany that led to THE NURTURE ASSUMPTION. She abandoned the textbook and instead wrote a theoretical article attacking the foundations of developmental psychology and presenting her new theory of child development. The article won a major award from the American Psychological Association in 1997. She's a mother of two girls, one biological and the other adopted, who behaved totally differently despite what she says was the same nurturing family environment.

Not surprisingly, she now finds herself under attack from some of the biggest names in parenting education and child development. They worry that her thesis gives parents who
aren't doing a good job raising their kids the excuse that whatever they do won't matter in the long run.

Noted child-development researcher Jerome Kagan contends that parents can influence children merely by identification. The child of a successful, well-liked parent feels a pride she will carry through her teen years, while the child of an irresponsible, substance-abusing parent will feel shame, perhaps into adulthood. As for the peer-influence argument, Kagan says, since children usually pick friends who are most like them, how can peers have more influence?

Then there is T. Berry Brazelton, who has spent a lifetime researching and advocating for the nurturing of children in the early years to set the stage for healthy emotional development, positive relationships and self-esteem.

Nevertheless, Harris has her supporters--among them language-development researcher Stephen Pinker, who cites her theory in explaining why children of immigrant parents end up speaking the language of their peers.

One point that many parenting researchers agree on is that Harris, theory takes the heat off single parents and working mothers, who have been told that their children suffer from a lack of quality parenting. That idea is "ridiculous," says William Damon, director of the Center on Adolescence at Stanford University. "Children turn out perfectly well from single-parent homes, and it's partly because there are so
many other influences."

EXPERTS' REACTIONS
Still, these experts dismiss the essence of Harris, theory--that parents don't have any long-lasting influence. Here's a sampling of their reactions to the book and the woman behind it. Unfortunately, Harris isn't available for media interviews because of an illness.

T. Berry Brazelton, renowned pediatrician, child-development expert and author of numerous books on parenting and child-development: "I think parents are very
pressed right now about having to leave their kids with other people. They probably need the reassurance that children are going to get things from their peers. In that respect, the timeliness of the book is good. But it worries me for the same reason. People in the process of making a decision about going back to work, for example, might think, 'It doesn't matter when I go back to work.'

"None of the other parts of this book are very new or very different. Peer pressure is a very vital competitor for our children all the way through childhood. Children who have had a firm base from parents are going to pick up
what they're meant to."

Jerome Kagan, a professor of psychology at Harvard University who has researched child development--particularly child temperament--for 40 years: "Peers begin to
have an influence around age 7 or 8, and have their maximal influence in adolescence. But what they influence are not deep personality traits; what they influence are values, interests, the way you dress. Are you a person who
becomes anxious easily or not? Are you a person with high energy? Peers don't influence that. Those are both genetic and family based. Are you an idealist or not? Or a skeptic? That's not peers, it's pure parents.

"You select your peers based on your personality. If you're a shy, frightened kid, you don't hang out with bullies. How could you assess the effects of peers since kids don't pick
kids who aren't like them?"

Nancy Samalin, a parenting educator and author of three books on parenting, including LOVING YOUR CHILD IS NOT ENOUGH: "The idea that parents don't have an influence is almost laughable. It disturbs me that people are
taking this so seriously.

"One statement she makes, 'Good parents sometimes have bad kids,' I do agree with. Sometimes parents can do everything possible and because of things beyond their control, it doesn't work out.

"I think peers have more influence than we give them credit for. I don't agree with Harris that it's much greater than that of a parent. In many ways, parents, interference is not very helpful. Your kid comes home crying at age 5 because the kids at kindergarten made fun of her. You can try to mitigate it, but what are you going to do? You can't call every kid's mother and say, 'How dare your child talk to my child like that?' Or suppose you get a kid who's not in the 'in crowd.' I think parents have very little influence over that. I think they can help bolster their child's feelings about being left out and try to remind him or her that kids are very fickle.

As far as values go, I think we parents are teaching values when we don't even open our mouths--by how we treat one another, by the way we speak to the bank teller, by the way we hug or criticize our spouse.

William Damon, a professor of education, director of the Center on Adolescence at Stanford University and author of several books on child development, including THE MORAL CHILD: "She makes some good points, and a lot
of what she says did need to be said, namely that parents are not the whole story and that peers are really important. I think a lot of that hasn't been appreciated.

"My only objection as a scientist is that it's another single-bullet theory which oversimplifies things in the other direction. Of course, parents have incredible influence over
their kids, because of the nature of their interactions with kids. Parents aren't the only thing, their influence isn't always necessary, but it sure does help.

"What Harris misses are the patterns of
communication that parents start the kid off
with, the attachment that Brazelton talks
about--she dismisses that and she's wrong to
dismiss that. Kids do benefit from reciprocal
communication with parents who are reliable
and secure. This gives the kid a head start on
forming good relationships. She also misses the
whole dynamic of the parent setting an example
for kids--a child observing his father giving a lot
of money to charity and really caring about
poor people and the impact that has with the
child respecting the parent. That's a very
powerful influence that parents have and it goes
all the way to college.

"And she misses all of that parental feedback
kids get during all of life. In the long run, not
the short run, it makes a huge difference.

Diary of a Surrogate Mom
B Y T E R R I D E N T O N

FOR ELIZABETH
Bowers, a local mother of two, the road to surrogate
motherhood has been anything but direct. "It has been over two years since I've decided to be a surrogate mother, and I don't regret anything that has happened" she says. And yet, Elizabeth and her "couple," Cheryl and Phillip Martin of the Bay Area, still have a long way to go.

When we last talked to Elizabeth in our October issue, she and an ovum donor were preparing for the second attempt at an embryo transplant.

I've been giving myself those Lupron shots for a few weeks now, and I am ready to do this again. I know the odds will be better this time--over 50 percent with the egg donor--but I also know it's not a sure thing. I don't want to let myself get too excited. Cheryl and Phillip are holding back, too; it hurt so much to lose the pregnancy last time. Please let it work this time.

As November rolled around, Elizabeth kept in touch with the Martins by phone, and on the Internet. The week before the transfer, they met in San Francisco for Elizabeth's blood test and sonogram which would tell if her uterus was ready to accept the Martins' frozen embryos, along with those fertilized from the egg donor.

The sonogram showed that the blood lining in my uterus was a perfect 13mm. We also got word that they retrieved 29 eggs from the donor. We were all hopeful, but also guarded.
What if it doesn't work?

Finally, the day of the transfer arrived. Elizabeth and her mother got to the fertility center first. After Cheryl and Phillip met them in the waiting room, it was a little longer before the doctor was ready for them. In his office, he gave them the bad news.

Of the 29 eggs taken from the donor, only 11 were successfully fertilized. And of those 11, only four were of good enough quality to use for the transfer. And, even more disappointing, Cheryl and Phillip's frozen embryos didn't
survive the thawing process. Cheryl won't have a biological connection with this baby. She was sad, but still excited about the prospect of having a baby, something she and Phillip really want.

Cheryl, Phillip and Elizabeth agreed to implant all four embryos, since the chances of multiples greater than twins was only about three percent. In a soft peach exam room about the size of a generous bathroom, Elizabeth--along with her mother, the Martins, the doctor, the nurse, the embryologist and the technician--underwent the second attempt at invitro fertilization. It was over in a matter of minutes.

Thank goodness I have an introverted uterus; most women have to be on their stomach for this procedure, but I was allowed to remain in a regular pelvic exam position. It was a little uncomfortable being exposed with so many people in the room, but thankfully Cheryl, Phillip and my mom were standing behind me. Since this was the second time, it wasn't a big deal at all--not much different than getting your
yearly pap smear done. Obviously more is riding on this procedure.

The procedure itself is not complicated. The doctor cleans the cervix with a saline solution and then calls for the embryologist, who is with the embryos from the lab until the end of the transfer to ensure that the right person gets the
right embryos. The four little growing babies are then transferred through a tube-like piece of equipment and released into Elizabeth.

I had to lay there for about an hour after the transfer. We all walked out together and hugged good-bye. Now the hard part of waiting begins.

I'm not looking forward to continuing those daily shots. They really hurt. The thought of doing it for three more months, or a few more weeks and not have a baby come out of it--it's really hard. But I know that by taking the shots, they could get their baby. But not knowing for sure, it is hard to be motivated. I really hate those shots.

Ten days after the transfer, Elizabeth had blood drawn. They would soon know the results of the blood test. The phone call from the medical lab came with disappointing news. "It was negative."

"Are you sure it's negative?" I wanted to know. What are the chances that the test was wrong? The nurse said I needed to continue the medication and retest in two days. But she also said that the test has never been positive after an initially negative test result. I didn't understand why I should continue taking the shots if there wasn't any hope. She said it was up to me. After talking with my couple, I agreed to continue with the medication, just in case.

The Martins came to visit Elizabeth on the day of the retesting. After the blood was drawn, they went out to lunch. The results, as they suspected, came back negative again.

We enjoyed a nice visit that weekend despite the disappointment. We exchanged Christmas presents. Phillip played with my two boys, giving them piggy-back rides around the house. We talked about trying again. I said I would, but I need some time to recover physically and
emotionally. Between the hormone shots and exercise limitations, I've got over 10 extra pounds to show for my two failed attempts at being a surrogate mom.

I know that having a child of their own is important to the Martins, and I want very much to see them through this. As each day passes since my last shot, the injection sites are healing and I'm slowly gaining the motivation and drive
needed to shed those extra pounds.

I've said it before: I don't regret anything that has happened since I decided to become a surrogate mom. By allowing another couple to borrow my uterus for nine months, me and my family will be creating a new family that otherwise would not exist.

OPENING THE presents can be a tricky time at a party. Depending on the ages of the guests, they may try to take their present or another present home with them, unwrap all the presents or destroy the presents before the birthday child gets a chance to play with them. It is important that some thought be given to when and how presents should be opened.

Talk to an older child, present the alternatives and help him decide what would be best for him and his guests. For little ones, decide upon a solution and make sure the birthday child understands when presents will be opened to avoid problems during the party. Four options are as follows:

OPENING UPON THE GUESTS' ARRIVAL.
For larger parties, opening each present as that guest arrives might be the most practical
solution. It's too hard to keep 30 children seated long enough to unwrap that many presents. This solution downplays the presents themselves but now that they are open, they are more likely to be played with and possibly broken.

OPENING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PARTY. If you choose this option, try opening the presents right after the refreshments. The kids are slightly quieter and it gives them a rest after the meal and before the next party game or activity.

Open the presents at the end of the party. The advantages of this option is that the gifts stay intact, adds mystery and suspense to the party and may help to eliminate party letdown for the birthday child after the excitement is over. The catch is that presents must be caught as they arrive and be put in a safe place until they will be unwrapped.

OPENING AFTER THE PARTY. This option is disappointing to many guests as well as possibly the birthday child. Many times a big part of the party fun for both the guests as well as the birthday child is seeing what great presents that child gets. However, unwrapping the presents
can be calmer and the birthday child may appreciate each present individually.

Stress can arise at present-opening time. Whose present should be opened first? Here are two games for a fun and fair solution. Play "Musical Presents." Have the kids sit in a circle and pass the presents around the circle to music. When
the music stops, the gift in the birthday child's lap is the one he opens. A variation on this game is "Spin the Bottle." A bottle is spun. The birthday child opens the gift of the child the
bottle points to.

No matter what is decided about the party presents, it is generally agreed, only open presents from party guests. Save the presents from relatives and family for a quiet time
together, either well before or after the party.

GIFT WRAPPING TIPS
Besides regular gift wrap, try these other options for a gift that will stand out at any party. Wrap the present in:

Sunday comics
Colorful fabric scraps
Netting (72-inch wide at fabric store)
Wide butcher paper decorated with markers,
stickers or potato prints
Tissue paper
Streamers
Wallpaper
Used computer paper (for the young computer
hacker)
Baby blanket (for a wee one or to accompany
doll clothes)
Bright sheet or pillowcase
Place present inside a basket lined with a fancy
napkin or fabric
Colorful plastic trash bag or shopping bag

Tricky wrappings for a curious birthday child include:

Add a bell or rattle inside the box of a "quiet" present like clothes to stump the recipient.
Nest a small gift box with the gift inside larger boxes. (This is a sneaky trick that should only be used for children over the age of 6.)
Wrap a box beautifully, but instead of the present inside, place directions on how to find the present around the house.

Imaginative gift toppers and decorations can include:

Use yarn instead of ribbon to wrap around the present

Top with balloons, shoe laces, candy, barrettes, novelty pencils, erasers, rattles, crayons/markers, paints and paint brushes.