In my last post, I talked about the sea change in how society is viewing mental health and how prevalent these issues are. I decided to revisit this topic because of articles that were recently sent my way, as well as the experiences of two close friends who are dealing with significant anxiety issues with their university-aged children – both of whom are what I would consider to be great kids and high achievers. Finally, I recently met with a most interesting parent of Appleby alumni. Raised by immigrant parents in a tough part of Toronto, he has gone on build an extraordinary business empire that stretches across 32 countries. Among other subjects, we discussed the challenges of raising children in times and places of affluence, and how to provide enough “real life” difficult experiences outside of “the bubble.”
The first piece sent my way (in this case by my wife Alison) was a Reuters article about a paper authored by Suniya S. Luthar, professor of psychology and education at Columbia University: “I Can, Therefore I Must: Fragility in the Upper Middle Class.” The article outlines the reality of increasing polarization of educational investment and experiences in American society as the wealthy pay more to ensure premium education (i.e. independent school education and high-end private universities.) In part, this is happening because of parents are compelled to prepare their children for the more competitive and flatter world in which they will live. Especially in times of fiscal restraint, the gap between haves (those who can afford premium education) and have-nots seems to be widening. And while the study is clearly American (like most things, Canada does not have the same degree of polarization,) her title is typically Canadian in its labeling of the “Upper Middle Class.” Rich, poor, or somewhere in between, we all seem to prefer to be considered in the middle class spectrum.
On the surface Dr. Luthar’s conclusions seem shockingly counter-intuitive – that children growing up in privileged, affluent environments are very much an “at risk” group. She states, “We happened to find that substance use, depression and anxiety, particularly among the girls, were much higher than among inner-city kids.” She then goes on to say, ““What we are finding again and again, in upper-middle-class school districts, is the proportion who are struggling are significantly higher than in normative samples,” she said. “Upper-middle-class kids are an at-risk group.”
I know many people who fear that there is a culture of victimization that seems to be growing as individuals who do not achieve what they want, or covet, or feel they deserve, chalk it up to some inherent systemic unfairness with a giant target on their particular backs. The “at risk” stamp is sometimes seen as a desirable attribute. However, in my experience, while the shoe may fit some, the vast majority of people in at risk categories do not in any way reflect this view. Moreover, it doesn’t take much life experience to realize that, due to family, economic realities, genetics, the geography of birth, and plain bad luck, there are many, many people have to climb a steeper hill that the average person. It’s just hard to imagine that the affluent have treadmills with a steeper incline that those with fewer economic advantages.
But here is Dr. Luthar’s premise, which has been supported by the evidence of her study: In a world where families invest more and more in their children – sports programs, travel, camps, coaching, tutoring, and yes … independent school education – there is an almost limitless range of opportunities for children. But with those opportunities come huge demands and expectations for performance and fulfillment. Her study describes a world in which the opportunities, and therefore the demands, for upper-middle-class children can be overwhelming. The inability to fulfill these demands can be psychologically crippling. I am sure that this is further compounded in families with a legacy of high achievers – where the base expectation for “success” means performing in the top percentile or better. Kids who perform in the average range may feel (or be seen) as failures.
“It is an endless cycle, starting from kindergarten,” Dr. Luthar said. “The difficulty is that you have these enrichment activities. It is almost as if, if you have the opportunity, you must avail yourself of it. The pressure is enormous.”
Educators see many examples of this. In some cases these sometimes unattainable expectations are self-defined by students. In other cases, parents lay down the expectations (I have been amazed at circumstances where parents’ demands far exceed any level of performance that they themselves attained at the same age.) And in other cases, while parents may never say a thing and, indeed, may deliberately NOT set an unrealistically high bar, their children may infer all sorts of expectations that set them up for misery.
Over the last few decades, many of the senior people in education I know, especially at the secondary and university levels, have recognized a significant upward swing in both anxiety and depression. I have a number of good friends who have served in university counseling roles such as Deans of Students, Chaplains, and advisors. They all talk about how much pressure these kids feel that they are under.
Of course, as parents, we also want to ensure that our children aren’t lazily floating through life. We want to them to take advantage of the gifts that they have been given. But where is the right line?
A great gift in life, especially for teenagers – is a trio of traits: a) to feel that you belong, b) to be self-aware, and c) to be comfortable in your own skin.
So, what does that mean for us at Appleby? And what about education generally? In my next post, I’m going to outline some thoughts on how we can empower kids to develop these traits and to help them cope when times may not be so good.
As always, I would be delighted to hear your comments and thoughts. (ivannostrand@appleby.on.ca)
No comments:
Post a Comment