I studied animal behaviour (among other things). Fascinating topic.
You raised an interesting point about blame. We do, I feel, tend to look for who to blame whenever something goes wrong. It's a habit we get into and our kids pick it up from us. But a harder lesson to learn (and a more difficult one for our kids to learn) is that sometimes it's not about blame. Sometimes bad things happen to good people and nobody is to blame.
THis was discussed on Aussie radio on Tuesday afternoon. There is a case here of a 12 year old girl who got pregnant. The case is a bit confusing, there is conflicting information, but the media are (various members of them) screaming for the blood of our childrens protective services people. The view is - someone is to blame for tihs girl getting pregnant.
A similar story, an email we were sent a couple of days ago - our former government Foreign Minister Alecander Downer has written an article about how people get into trouble in foreign countries and then scream that the government isn't doing enough to rescue them. Downer's point is that governments shouldn't be responsible, when they have done everything they could to protect people in the first plce. People who go to a country despite warnings in place, who then scream for help when the warnings bear fruit - the government will help but not because they HAVE to.
Again, I repeat - sometimes it's not about blame, or personal responsibility. Sometimes bad things just happen.
Of course, in cases of shaken baby, where there is clearly someone who has done the deed and someone who has suffered - that is different. But we do need to learn to keep looking beyond because sometimes it's not about blame. Or sometimes, the blame can go deeper and wider. If we are too simplistic, we can miss this and end up allowing a problem to perpetuate.
I remember reading a lot of books as a kid, especially books about girls in boarding school etc. In a lot of those books there were bullies described, both other children and adults, and the physical interactions were described. I remember reading in a number of different books where an adult shook a child until their teeth rattled. Back then this was considered - not acceptable, perhaps, since it wasn't the good guys doing this - tolerable, possible, almost normal. The damage it could do was not fully recognised back then.
A story I remember my mother telling me:
My eldest sister loved babies and children but when growing up also lacked confidence. In this story I think my sister must have been about ten years old. There was a baby - it could have been one of my siblings, it could have been acousin or a friend. My sister wanted to hold the baby and my mother let her. Then while holding the baby, my sister began to have a panic attack. "I'm scared I'll drop the baby and hurt her," she worried.
Instead ofrushing in to grab the baby, my mother said to her, "Put the baby on the floor. Then walk away. The baby can't fall, from the floor. She will be safe. It's OK. Always remember, you can always put the baby on the floor and leave the room. It's much better than taking any risks with a baby."
When we later had our own kids and at times felt overwhelmed our mother would say to us, "If you're not coping and you feel yourself losing control, put the baby down in her cot or on the floor, and walk away. Leave the room, leave the house if necessary. Even if the baby is crying, walk away if you're not coping. It's better to do this, than risk harming the baby."
She was wise ahead of her time, my mother.
There was an Aussie TV film starring Jackie Weaver called "Do I have to Kill My CHild?"
It was made in 1980, Jackie did a brilliant job. Previously known for sexpot roles, or comedy - she played a very vulnerable and inexperienced mother asking for help.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0217365/
I remember reading an interview with her during the making of this film - in one scene she had to yell at the baby to shut up. She hated doing it. When they filmed it with a real baby, Jackie yelled and the baby began to cry. Immediately the actress/mother instinct kicked in, she dropped out of character, burst into tears and rushed to pick up and comfort the baby.
The director kept that bit in, because although Jackie hadn't intended it, she had shown the dichotomy of the maternal confusions. In a lot of shaken baby cases, the mother doesn't mean to cause harm. In this story, the mother knew she wasn't coping but couldn't get anyone to listen to her, to help her keep her baby safe.
Jackie herself was a single mother in her teens.
I found the review on the movie page interesting. I wish I could get a copy of the film, it was really good. But I'd have to contact the film archives and I think I would need to be a member of a film club for that.
Interestingly, I noted the involvement of Ann Deveson in the movie. Screenplay plus producer, I think. Ann Deveson lost a son to schizophrenia. She's a journalist and writer of note, now an activist for mental health services. So no wonder the film was well-written and well-made.
Marg