I have always been particularly fascinated by the adolescent part of life. I am fortunate enough myself to have a record of large portions of my own, in the fairly consistent journals I kept starting at age 11 (though there are some unfortunate gaps from about 16 to 18 when I decided angst-ridden poetry was a better form of expression) and I have spent many amusing hours with some of my friends going over these records, trying to determine what my motivations might have been.
I would like to use that same fascination for this class. As I explore what interests me in the texts, I will share pieces from my very overwrought high school years and try to connect those dots, utilizing it to ask some of the questions I still find myself with -- not only about myself but for others as well.
While there were a number of fascinating concepts in the last few weeks, one of the ones I really found myself drawn to was how do teenagers make decisions? Why do they make decisions that have such capacity to harm them? And how can we keep them from doing that?
In Siegel's book Brainstorm he lays out many of the fundamental differences between the rapidly developing adolescent brain and a fully adult one. He explains it as "hyperrational decision-making." Hyperrationality simply means to think in extremely literal terms, without an ability to see the larger picture of the situation. We have no context for the experiences we are currently living at this age -- we are simply witnessing, evaluating, and reacting. That doesn't make those reactions stupid, or even necessarily impulsive. However adolescents value benefits much more highly than they value risks. So although they may be aware of the potential negative consequences to their actions, those negative consequences (in literal, concrete terms) are not as likely as the positive ones, and are also not as important.
This means, among other things, that attempting to use scare tactics on kids to get them to not do something is not really going to work. The problem is not that they are unaware of the risks. And you aren't likely to be able to overcome their brain chemistry to make risks more important than reward. But that doesn't mean that nothing can be done; it only means a change in tactics. Siegel offers an example of how many campaigns to stop teen smoking did not work until they realized that the best option was to tell kids (truthfully, which I think is important because kids are smart) that they are being manipulated by big corporations to smoke so that they will give up their money. Suddenly smoking is connected to values, and not smoking is about taking a stand for themselves and their own identities.
I thought immediately of Baby B (as I will generally refer to my younger self as) when I was reading about this. For context, while I made a number of mistakes and had a number of problems as a teenager, my main bone of contention with my parents, and what they believe started it all, was a boy. I was raised in a very hardcore fundamentalist home, I was homeschooled and in church several times a week, every week. And yet, through a series of events that don't matter, I met the "love of my life" when I was 14 years old. We will call him K.
There were a number of problems with this situation. One was that I was not allowed to date. Really not at all, although like with most things my parents would go through many waves of inconsistency on their policies with this. But certainly not at 14 (although K was not my first boyfriend). Another was that K was 18 years old. Also he was not a Christian. Also he came from a "bad" family, his mother was an alcoholic, there were always drugs and alcohol around his house. His friends all did drugs. I mean, any one of these things would have been enough but all of them were obviously intolerable.
Let me be clear that looking back, I can completely understand why my parents were so freaked out. If I had a 14 year old child who was suddenly obsessed with an 18 year old, that would not be a thing I would be okay with. But I want to look at how K and I were basically in love for the next two years. I wouldn't actually stop talking to him until after I was 18 years old. And how I have wondered many times, what could my parents have done that would have changed that? Specifically right now I want to use a couple of examples that I think highlight the kind of thinking Siegel talks about in his book.
In this example, I am about to sneak out with K for the first (of many) times. I'm maintaining all spelling and punctuation. Sorry about that. It seems unfair to change it now.
"It’s 11:00pm and in a half hour K and Ben are going to come pick me up and we’re going somewhere. Oh boy. Yes, it was completely my idea and yes I know I’m insane. I don’t know what’s gotten into me! I dunno. I’m looking forward to tonight in a sense. I’m not sure I’m looking forward to what we’re going to do. See, the mother of Ben’s child has moved in with this guy who has been beating on her. Ben is not exactly happy about that since his child could get hurt. He’s going to talk with him. I just hope I know what I’m doing. Actually I’m fairly positive that I don’t but I’m going through with it anyways. Why? I have absolutely no idea. They’ll be here in 20 minutes. Most of me really wants to go through with this and the rest of me is saying, “Bethany, you are insane!” I’m extremely nervous. Not about going with them so much as getting caught. Which would suck severely. Kim and Amanda (my best friends) are going to kill me. I’ve even considered not telling them. But then they would really kill me. 15 minutes till they get here so I’m gonna get ready to go. I’ll fill you in on details later."
I have always thought it was interesting to read here how I'm very clear that there can and very possibly will be negative consequences, but that it also never seemed to cross my mind to back out. This made a lot more sense to me after our readings from this last week.
My parents, my friends and my youth leaders all tried to get me to stop seeing K. They used a lot of guilt, a lot of religious pressure. Sometimes I would go home from a conversation with a youth leader certain they were right and that I had to break up with him for the sake of my soul (and his own -- the martyr element always worked best with me). But I would need to see him one last time first.... at the end of the week I would write that we had been sneaking out every night that week.
When thinking back about what my parents or other adults in my life could have done differently, I do have some ideas. I was very impressionable, I desperately wanted approval and the whole thing was a very conflicting situation for me to be in. I think that I could have been helped if I had safer places to be. But that leads me to other questions. How much of an adolescent's response has to do with their current situation? I was in a situation that was at least emotionally neglectful, if not abusive. There was a survival component to my life that I am always fascinated by in retrospect because it seems so far from my current life. How much in the way of positive choices can a teenager make without dealing with deeper issues? Is this like Maslov's hierarchy? Do you have to deal with the most pressing issues before you can deal with the "higher up" ones? Or are there ways to help still prune effectively, even in situations with such toxic roots?
