Published on 12, July, 2020
Notable adverse childhood experience (ACE) trauma — especially when its effect is amplified by an accompanying autism spectrum disorder (ASD) — suffered by adolescents can readily lead to a substance use disorder. This, of course, can also lead to an adulthood of debilitating self-medicating.
The greater the drug-induced euphoria or escape one attains from its use, the more one wants to repeat the experience; and the more intolerable one finds their sober reality, the more pleasurable that escape should be perceived. By extension, the greater one’s mental pain or trauma while sober, the greater the need for escape from reality, thus the more addictive the euphoric escape-form will likely be.
If the adolescent is also highly sensitive, both the drug-induced euphoria and, conversely, the come-down effect or return to their burdensome reality will be heightened thus making the substance-use more addicting.
As a highly sensitive child, teenager and adult with ASD—an official condition with which I greatly struggled yet of which I was not even aware until I was a half-century old—compounded by a high ACE score, I largely learned this for myself from my own substance (ab)use experience. The self-medicating method I utilized during most of my pre-teen years, however, was eating.
Yet, in many sober ‘neurotypical’ minds such addicts have somehow committed a moral crime. But serious life trauma, notably adverse childhood experiences, is typically behind a substance abuser’s debilitating lead-ball-and-chain self-medicating lifestyle.
Generally, there’s a formidable reason why a person repeatedly consumes and gets heavily hooked on an unregulated often deadly chemical that eventually destroys their life and even that of a loved-one. It all really doesn’t happen out of boredom.
Perhaps not surprising, I have yet to find a blog that dares to delve into (what I call) the very problematic perfect storm of psychological/emotional dysfunction — i.e. a debilitating combination of ASD and significant ACE trauma (and perhaps even high sensitivity) that results in substance abuse.
Also, I strongly feel that not only should all school teachers have received ASD training, but that there should further be an inclusion in standard high school curriculum of a child development course which in part would also teach students about the often-debilitating condition.
It would explain to students how, among other aspects of the condition, people with ASD (including those with higher functioning autism) are often deemed willfully ‘difficult’ and socially incongruent — and mistreated accordingly — when in fact such behavior is really not a choice. Maybe as a result, students with ASD feel compelled to “camouflage,” a term used to describe their pretending to naturally fit in, which is known to cause their already high anxiety and/or depression levels to worsen.
While some other school curriculum is controversial (e.g. SOGI, especially in rural residential settings), it nonetheless was implemented. The same attitude and policy should be applied to teaching high school students about ASD, the developing mind and, especially, how to enable a child’s mind to develop properly.
It makes sense, and not just because I'm a big Chomsky fan.
The problems you describe are often of no fault of the individuals involved but of the centralisation of education by governments which as you suggest are political.
The thing is from a parental view, they make no sense whatsoever. A one-size-fits-all approach to education is by any logical mind, absurd, even without taking into consideration of any pupils with ' special needs ' or assistance.
Take the current ' trend ' of test, test, test system which we were assured, would bring us all up to speed with the rest of the world, competing economies etc etc and put us No1 in education. Well, that was a total failure that was in every aspect, not to mention the stupidity of it. The middle-classes running around, paying private tutors, moving house to the ' best areas ' of education of the highest ' league tables '. For what ? So that little Johnny could go on to do work experience for free to some ' prestigious ' or ' sought after ' profession or career and then possibly be rejected ? Great for estate agents and private schools but not education in my opinion.
The thing is , there is no ' system ' of education that is worth following. Encouraging children to memorize information presented to them in order to pass tests and then forget that information the day after the test, is not an education. Here is a quote from a wise man ;
“What does it mean to be truly educated?I think I can do no better about answering the question of what it means to be truly educated than to go back to some of the classic views on the subject. For example the views expressed by the founder of the modern higher education system, Wilhelm von Humboldt, leading humanist, a figure of the enlightenment who wrote extensively on education and human development and argued, I think, kind of very plausibly, that the core principle and requirement of a fulfilled human being is the ability to inquire and create constructively independently without external controls.To move to a modern counterpart, a leading physicist who talked right here [at MIT], used to tell his classes it's not important what we cover in the class, it's important what you discover.To be truly educated from this point of view means to be in a position to inquire and to create on the basis of the resources available to you which you've come to appreciate and comprehend. To know where to look, to know how to formulate serious questions, to question a standard doctrine if that's appropriate, to find your own way, to shape the questions that are worth pursuing, and to develop the path to pursue them. That means knowing, understanding many things but also, much more important than what you have stored in your mind, to know where to look, how to look, how to question, how to challenge, how to proceed independently, to deal with the challenges that the world presents to you and that you develop in the course of your self education and inquiry and investigations, in cooperation and solidarity with others.That's what an educational system should cultivate from kindergarten to graduate school, and in the best cases sometimes does, and that leads to people who are, at least by my standards, well educated.”― Noam Chomsky
In 2017, when I asked a teachers federation official over the phone whether there is any child development curriculum taught in any of B.C.’s school districts, he immediately replied there is not. When I asked the reason for its absence and whether it may be due to the subject matter being too controversial, he replied with a simple “Yes”. This strongly suggests there were/are philosophical thus political obstacles to teaching students such crucial life skills as nourishingly parenting one’s child’s developing mind.
Such curriculum (which might also include content on autism spectrum disorder) would enable our young people to understand (even if just the basics) how the child's mind develops. Therefore, they could understand how (with curriculum examples of the various formal parenting methods) a seemingly minute yet consequential flaw in rearing and/or environment, perhaps something commonly practiced/experienced, can have lasting negative effects on the child’s sponge-like brain/mind.
Like I stated in an earlier post, while such curriculum can sound invasive, especially to parents distrustful of the public education system, I really believe it’s in our future generations’ best interests.
I, too, find that I'm rather doggedly determined when I set my mind to a goal, including the cessation of self-medicating.
Interesting, i’ve noticed this kind of issue in myself, and also have asd and what i consider to be a higher ace score (8). I fortunatly am able to break out of bad habits for the most part as well, but its why i try to stay away from drugs mostly. I might have a temporary period of a week or so with in a year where i drink more than i would like in order to self medicate, but then i surprise myself and somehow am okay again for like the next year or so. I surprise myself with my resilience and stubborn determination sometimes
Frank Sterle Jr. said:“The future of any society depends on its ability to foster the health and well-being of the next generation.
Wish someone would tell the people running the country and the opposition this !!!
That essentially is what it comes down to — proactive measures in order to avoid having to later reactively treat (often with tranquilizing medication) potentially life-long symptoms of child neglect/abuse.
Also, mental health-care needs to generate as much societal concern as does physical health, even though psychological illness/dysfunction typically is not immediately visually observable. ....
A 2007 study (“The Science of Early Childhood Development”) formally discovered what should have been the obvious: “The future of any society depends on its ability to foster the health and well-being of the next generation. Stated simply, today’s children will become tomorrow’s citizens, workers, and parents. When we invest wisely in children and families, the next generation will pay that back through a lifetime of productivity and responsible citizenship. When we fail to provide children with what they need to build a strong foundation for healthy and productive lives, we put our future prosperity and security at risk …
“All aspects of adult human capital, from work force skills to cooperative and lawful behavior, build on capacities that are developed during childhood, beginning at birth … The basic principles of neuroscience and the process of human skill formation indicate that early intervention for the most vulnerable children will generate the greatest payback.”
While I appreciate the study’s initiative, it’s still for me a disappointing revelation as to our collective humanity when the report’s author feels compelled to repeatedly refer to living, breathing and often enough suffering human beings as a well-returning 'investment' and 'human capital' in an attempt to convince money-minded society that it’s in our own best fiscal interest to fund early-life programs that result in lowered incidence of unhealthy, dysfunctional child development.
Absolutely ! I agree. Ideally, there could/should be a two-pronged approach and what you're advocating could be implemented towards the end of Secondary/High School.
However, for that to be most effective, it is absolutely paramount that early intervention/assistance in Primary School be the number one priority. We need a much more pro-active and efficient system of getting classroom assistance at the earliest opportunity at this critical stage of brain development.
After all, if someone's head was split open with blood rushing out, there would be no delay in getting them help ASAP. Likewise, there should be no delay in providing classroom assistance to any child who clearly needs it. Failure to do so at this stage could have a devastating impact on the remainder of the child's education and lead to mental health issues, addictions or even criminality later in life or for life. And as you say, will cost the taxpayer a lot more in the long-run.
Class sizes also average about 30 students in Canada, and teachers often complain via news-media about frequently getting overwhelmed. ...
Sadly, due to the common OIIIMOBY mindset (Only If It’s In My Own Back Yard), the prevailing collective attitude, however implicit or subconscious, basically follows: ‘Why should I care — I’m soundly raising my kid?’ or ‘What’s in it for me, the taxpayer, if I support child development education and health programs for the sake of others’ bad parenting?’
Regardless of whether individually we’re doing a great job with our own developing children, however, we all have some degree of vested interest in every child receiving a psychologically sound start in life, considering that communally everyone is exposed (or at least potentially so) to every other parent’s handiwork. And this is from a purely self-serving perspective.
I personally feel that the wellbeing of all children in general — and not just what other parents’ dysfunctional children will cost us as future criminals or costly cases of government care, etcetera — should be of great importance to us all. …
While child development science curriculum may sound invasive, especially to traditionalist parents distrustful of the public education system, I really believe it’s in future generations’ best interests.
That is my honest view.
Yes totally agree most teachers seem to get 1 hour training ,and they are considered experts having to deal with really difficult issues, Just totally under resourced
It could be a good idea at some point in the future but there are perhaps a lot of long-overdue, fundamental improvements needed to lead the way. I don't know about Canada but here in the UK we have large class sizes averaging 30 in many parts of the country, coupled with inadequate support for ASD kids. So if you also have Teachers with inadequate training thrown into the mix, this is actually leading to more trauma for the pupils, parents and teachers. A lot of Primary teachers simply don't know what to do with a child who has different educational needs and in classes of 30, some teachers are overwhelmed and the child may end-up being seen as a hinderance or punished for their behaviors. This is heart-wrenching for parents to witness these failures.
At the moment, Medical Bodies here in the UK are calling for a Nurse to be placed in every school which would be a step in the right direction in early intervention help. I think the educational authorities needs a big shake-up too to ensure every diagnosed child is 100% supported by an appropriately trained teaching assistant.
Who decides what's right and wrong? So many crank theories are promoted by 'educational scientists' that all turn out to be BS.
I was one of those kids completely screwed over by being taught Pitman ITA - well-meaning experiments on children - totally debunked, but millions of messed up kids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initial_Teaching_Alphabet
It could be transitional, and it would not have to teach students their parents aren’t rearing them correctly. Rather, it would focus on the science behind how a healthy mind develops and, by extension, what is likely or certain to hinder a child’s mind from properly developing.
If we’re to avoid the dreadedly invasive conventional reactive means of intervention—that of governmental forced removal of children from dysfunctional/abusive home environments—maybe we then should be willing to try an unconventional proactive means of preventing some future dysfunctional/abusive family situations. Child development science curriculum might be one way.
It’s certain to be argued that infant-expecting adults can easily enough access the parenting experience and advice of other parents in hard-copy and Internet literature, not to mention arranged group settings. However, such information may in itself be in error or misrelated/misinterpreted and therefore is understandably not as beneficial as knowing the actual child development science behind why the said parental practice would or would not be the wisest example to follow.
By not teaching child development science to high school students, to me it’s as though societally we’re implying that anyone can comfortably enough go forth with unconditionally bearing children with whatever minute amount, if any at all, of such vital knowledge they happen to have acquired over time.
Many people, including child development academics, would say that we owe our future generations of children this much, especially considering the very troubled world into which they never asked to enter.
The theory sounds good but in practice when would you start.
You would be teaching a significant number of kids that there parents are not doing it right ,
I don't think society would cope with this ,you maybe could bring it in, in small increments.
I understand and appreciate what you are saying; and you sound passionate about it.
As for me, when it comes to students learning neural diversity, I doubt it will be seriously discussed by school-curriculum decision-makers any time soon. Nonetheless, I'm hoping that will change within the next decade.
I'd also like to see secondary-high-school child-development science curriculum implemented, which ideally would include some psychology and neurodiversity lessons, albeit not overly complicated. It would be course material, however, considerably more detailed than what's already covered by the current basic home-economics (etcetera) classes, which typically is diaper changing, baby feeding and so forth.
I believe the latter do not suffice, especially in contemporary times.
General society perceives thus treats human procreative rights as though we’ll somehow, in blind anticipation, be innately inclined to sufficiently understand and appropriately nurture our children’s naturally developing minds and needs. I find that mentality — however widely practiced — wrong and needing re-evaluation, however unlikely that will ever happen.
I wonder how many instances there have been wherein immense long-term suffering by children of dysfunctional rearing might have been prevented had the parent(s) received, as high school students, some crucial parenting or child development education by way of mandatory curriculum? After all, dysfunctional and/or abusive parents, for example, may not have had the chance to be anything else due to their lack of such education and their own dysfunctional/abusive rearing as children.
For decades, I have strongly felt that a psychologically and emotionally sound (as well as a physically healthy) future should be all children’s foremost right—especially considering the very troubled world into which they never asked to enter—and therefore child development science should be learned long before the average person has their first child.
I believe Canada also has an education system formulated many decades ago.
Thank you. Yes.
Thats what makes me so angry .All the hurt and death i have seen ,it is so unnecessary .
And then s==t piles on s==t and it is even harder to escape ,no help
There was a teacher shortage in the 90's and the gov put financial incentives in place to promote teaching ,i think alot of people went into it for the wrong reasons. They are now in positions of power eg headteachers ,etc .
i have met so many who are so obviously in it for the money.
Teaching should be and is a vocation. [ There are good teachers ,but they end up having to fight the others and many just leave ]
At my local secondary school the headteacher tried to have all children go to a Military preparatory school [boot camp],
but parents objected to much .
A ONE DAY COURSE DOES NOT MAKE YOU AN EXPERT . why is it every social worker ,teacher, school nurse, etc have a family member who is autistic [ so they totally understand ]
Remarkably, the UK education system is still stuck in the dark ages and we are still largely operating a system formulated from the 1944 Education Act.
Welcome to this forum, you're new here