The Other Press _

 

page 10 November 22, 1985

 

Children of the Nuclear Age

_ by Alan Weiss
reprinted from the McGill Daily
Canadian University Press

Children play a significant role in
the imagery of the peace movement.
They look cute holding signs at peace
marches, and mothers and fathers
gather behind signs that read, ‘/Save
~ the world for our children.’’

But there are new questions being
asked on the behalf of children about
nuclear war. Instead of asking that
war be prevented for their future,
psychologists are asking that the
threat of nuclear war be ended for
their present.

Numerous studies by teachers and
psychologists are showing that the
possibility of nuclear annihilation is
harming the psychological develop-
ment of children.

In a poll asking school age children
to describe their future, 70 per cent
~ mentioned nuclear war, without any
prompting from the pollsters. In
another study in California school
children ranked nuclear war next only
- to the death of their parents as their
_ greatest fear.

“What will happen when
they drop the bomb

on our house?”

 

 

Psychologists know that adults have
developed mental defence mechan-
isms that lessen the impact of the
threat of nuclear war on their day to
day existence.

Dr. Christopher Ross is a clinical
_ psychologist in Toronto. He says
adults use many techniques to help
_ themselves cope - denial, depersonali-
- zation, projection and fragmentation.

Unfortunately, young people aren’t
as adept at denying reality.

As Dr. Ross writes, ‘Children’s
feelings lay closer to the surface; they
are more inclined to admit to their
terror. Nor do adult techniques of
_ denial impress them.’

Dr. Sibylle Escalona, Professor of
Psychology at Albert Einstein College
of Medicine in New York, describes
the effect of nuclear threat on person-
ality development:

“The profound uncertainty about
whether or not (wo)mankind has a
forseeable future exerts a corrosive
and malignant influence upon import-
ant developmental processes in nor-
mal and well-functioning children.’

“Growing up in a social environ-
ment that tolerates and ignores the
risk of total destruction by means of
voluntary human action tends to
foster those patterns of personality
functioning that can lead to a sense of
powerlessness and cynical resig-
nation.’’

Nightmares are one way in which

children vent their fears of nuclear
_ war. One report quotes Joan M., age
A?

 

“Sometimes | have dreams and
those are bad. | usually dream that
when a nuclear war happens l|’m
alone... | always envision loud noises,
and a lot of bright light and | just
wake up terrified.’’

Other children have a_ constant
preoccupation with the nuclear poss-

 

By yaw yyy)

yy

me )))

 

 

ibilities. Patricia K., 16 says, ‘‘In a

* way | think it’s like a wound - the way

I’m wasting all this time thinking
about something that really | should-
n’t have to think about. | could be
doing other things with my mind. |
could be ruining my brain with all this
worrying.’’

More lasting effects have been
described by Dr. John Mack of the
Harvard Medical School. He says
there’s been a shift in recent years to
increased preoccupation among young
people with the threat posed by the
arms race. Mack writes that ‘‘the
threat of nuclear annihilation has
penetrated deeply into young people’s
consciousness.”’

Common _ psychological responses
among the young to their perceptions

       

of he nuclear threat include feelings
of lack of control over their own lives,
helplessness, lack of confidence in the
political process, alienation from
adults who would subject them to a
threat of nuclear annihilation, and a
general introversion.

As a result, researchers believe

WY i
qd td. be Pee

ol /

-
Cl NS g iy y

tas

ures a
(ST Mtr

>}
young people are less likely to make
commitments for the future and tend
to seek immediate gratifications and
pleasures.

Christopher Ross explains: ‘’The
threat of nuclear extinction also robs
this growing child of the sense of
permanence which is needed in order
to develop an enduring sense of self.
Why delay gratification and develop
‘ideals’ if the physical future is not
assured?’’

Striving to develop skills and abili-
ties which may contribute to the
future well-being and career is often
subjugated to immediate pleasure
seeking. Drug abuse among the in-
creasingly young, hours spent in
video arcades, and endless MTV

 

DOOD" \ S42

   

anything.”

viewing are cited as means by whic
the young are refusing to ackno
ledge the possibility of the future.
some this appears to be a self-perpe
uating syndrome.

Dr. Escalona writes, ‘’...growing
fully aware that there may be
future, and that the adult world see
unable to combat their threat, cd
render the next generation less we
equipped to avert actual catastroph
than they would be if the same thre
existed in a different social climate.

So what is to be done? First,
must be recognized that young peop
are not at all interested in simp
ignoring the nuclear threat.

When a young child hears Pres
dent Reagan speak of the “‘e
empire,’’ the child conjures up a la
full of Darth Vadars, omnipoten
mysterious, and poised to attack.
her or his parents and teache
neglect to explain the situation
more rational terms than our politic
leaders do, the child will maintain a
likely embellish this distorted pictu
of the ‘enemy’.

Children tend to think of nucle
war on a more personal level than d
adults: ‘‘What will happen when thg
drop the bomb on our house?’’ thé
see on television an arms race whid
they begin to think is unstoppab}
because nobody is either willing
able to put an end to this madnes}
And then. Mommy and Daddy. te
Junior that fighting with little Tom
down the street is wrong and thé
should make up and be friends. Is
any wonder that children may fir
problems in reconciling all of th
contradictory input?

    
   
    
   
   
  
  
    
 
  
  
   
 
   
  
    
   
 
 

 

We can get rid of nuclee
weapons and have
peace and stuff.

 

Parents and teachers must take
upon themselves to explain the fa
of the nuclear threat and the ar
race in ways children can understand
The children must be shown. thi
there are people willing to discuss t
problems at hand and that there a
people and groups trying to put 4
end to the arms race.

In this way the sense of powerles
ness and futility which is tighteni
its grip on the consciousness
today’s youth, dashing into piecg
their dreams of the future, can
pried away and a sense of hope ca
take its rightful place in the lives‘
young people.

And perhaps adults should stop a
listen’ more closely to the you
people. We should listen to t
message of the seven year old g
who said:

‘‘We can get rid of nuclear weapo
and have peace and stuff. Cos if ya
want something bad enough and yd
work at it hard enough, you can ¢