Yates. Chapter 3
<< Enfant Terrible >>

A number of years ago the children who presented themselves to the child psychiatrist were anxious, striving, depressed, or neurotic. They were enjoyable to treat because they usually got better. The children who lied, stole, or refused to work were handled routinely — by priests, a switch at school, or parents who were not loath to make their feelings an important influence in the life of the child. Those parents sometimes felt helpless and guilty, too, but somehow the child shared in their culpability so that they were miserable together.

We still see neurotic children, albeit in lesser numbers. But there are different children in the waiting room now, stomping Play-Doh in the rug. These are the "enfants terribles." They are crafty and well aware of their parents' weaknesses and their therapist's limitations. Reared with copious love and minimal responsibility, they expect everything and are furious when denied anything. Parental ulcers, high blood pressure, and depression are met with disdain. These self-indulgent autocrats control the family and insist on being the center of attention. Well-stuffed, protected, and regularly immunized, they claim eternal nurturance. Life is an umbilical cord attached to an endless reservoir of vanilla pudding. When faced with adversity they push, plead, whine, and screech; or they tearfully complain, "You never told me." Undisciplined, with scant social skills, they are disliked by peers and neighbors. When angered they attack a smaller sibling, twist the cat's tail, or accuse their mother of lack of love.

Seen as immature in kindergarten, they are labeled "hyperactive" in second grade and are eventually referred to the psychiatrist simply because the teacher can't stand them. Unfortunately, standard therapy techniques make them worse. The permissive approach, which provides a plethora of toys and encourages infantile behavior, is a recapitulation of their lives. The newest approach is the "positively based behavior modification program." Parents avoid noticing horrid behavior and reward the good. This yields excellent results with anxious, guilty children but scarcely touches these young despots. The psychiatrist can only help the parents develop firmness and common sense. Responsibility is best learned in the home.

The parents are an uncomfortable lot, who endure their progeny as if they were a crown of thorns on the cross of parenthood. They try so hard they make a mess of things. They ask me if children may be affected by food additives, hypoglycemia, or separation anxiety. Their offspring are seeds in the desert which, with love, will sprout and flower. I am the expensive gardener who will magically transform the monsters into marigolds. In fact, children, like flowers, can wilt from too much care.

The first of these children I clearly recall was a small sturdy eighteen-month-old name Angel. He had the knack of turning blue by holding his breath. His mother hovered over him and attempted to divert his attention as he pulled over wastebaskets and skillfully emptied drawers. When she placed him on the couch for a nap, he kicked at her face, twisted, screamed, and clawed at her dress. Finally, like a chameleon, he changed from pink to purple. Mother quickly picked him up.

Another "enfant terrible" was a pert self-possessed young lady of four. She was piloted to my pediatric waiting room by an exhausted father. He soon lost himself in Field and Stream, while she systematically demolished books, toys, and less aggressive children. After several such encounters, I removed crayons, scissors, and all breakable objects from the waiting area. On her next visit she circulated aimlessly about looking for any sharp or gooey object. There was none. She spent a few minutes perusing the large lighted tank of tropical fish. She methodically collected every ash tray in the room, dumped them together, and, standing on a table, unloaded her collection on the fish. Father glanced up from his magazine, groaned, and took her to wash her hands. On their return, she glanced about to see if the toys had reappeared, then settled against Daddy, sucking her fist with legs widespread and her free hand massaging beneath her panties.

After infancy the raw, untutored sex drive is no more agreeable to the observer than any other neglected drive. The glutton who devours all within reach is but slightly better off than a joyless, picky eater. Given parental courage and fortitude, the "enfant terrible" is easier to ameliorate than the listless, constricted youngster. By adolescence, both extremes are quite recalcitrant to any treatment.

How do parents tolerate such extraordinary behavior? They feel battered and hopelessly impotent. They are a fountain of love and an endless supply of Band-aids. They assume that children would be pleasant if free of conflicts and pressures. Therefore they eliminate all possible stress and alleviate every anxiety.

Henry

Henry was the youngest of two children born to a part-time psychology student in a small university town. His recently divorced mother pedaled a bicycle barefoot to my office. She looked as if she hadn't eaten for days. Jason, her outspoken redheaded seven-year-old, was perched behind her on the bicycle. Strapped to her weary body was a large, ungainly lump of flesh. One hand picked at her shirt while the other was plunged decisively in his mouth. Three-and-one-half-year old Henry distrustfully surveyed his environment.

Once seated in my office, the mother presented Jason as my patient. Jason had been resentful of Henry ever since he was weaned at the time of Henry's birth. Now Jason thought he should be allowed to visit his father whenever he wished, regardless of the time of day or his mother's other commitments. If she refused, he walked the three miles by himself, without even announcing his departure. To avoid problems, the mother permitted Jason to remain at his father's. Just as abruptly, Jason walked home.

While the mother talked, Henry remained strapped to her body, forcing her to sit uncomfortably on the edge of the chair. He fussed and poked his fingers in the crevice of her blouse. Apologetically, the mother explained that she had fed him only two hours before. She unbuttoned her blouse in spite of my reassurance that I didn't mind if he cried. With the speed of a snake, he seized the tiny breast and annihilated it with his mouth. Almost immediately, his eyes turned up, and still sucking, he sank into slumber.

The mother talked about Henry as he sucked. He was heavy, awkward to carry, and predictably vociferous. She had developed many strategies to outmaneuver him. She would nurse him to sleep immediately before leaving to buy groceries. Then she wrapped him tightly about her body so he would not have access to her breast. With a full stomach, and rocked by the pedaling of the bicycle, he slept all the way to town. Once in the store he soon awoke, struggling against his bindings. To avoid criticism, she placed Henry in the cart and attempted to distract him with a toy. Undaunted, he stood precariously on the seat of the shopping cart, emitted piercing shrieks, and snatched at his mother's shirt. His screams became muffled grunts as she clasped him to her chest, burying his body in her coat. She fled down the aisles, snatching what groceries she could with one hand. Once she hid in a mop closet to suckle her master.

Henry didn't play with other children. He didn't dress himself and only showed a superficial interest in toys. Henry was not retarded; in fact he was a tactical genius who quickly overwhelmed the opposition and established control. He was also a highly erotic child who eagerly sought and achieved sensual gratification. But Henry's behavior was living proof that love is not enough. The child in our culture who still nurses at the age of three or four is rarely trained in any respect. These are demanding, powerful, angry, and distressfully large children. An old medical school joke tells of a mother who was seen suckling a sturdy six-year-old girl in the waiting room of a county pediatric outpatient clinic. The doctor observed this and asked the mother why she was still nursing such a large child. The mother replied, "I can't stop — every time I try she throws rocks at me."

These children are assertive, uninhibited, and erotically responsive, and each of these traits can contribute to later sexual competence. Yet the sexual response is relatively unimportant. These children are selfish in every sphere. Relationships are predicated on how much they can get, with total disregard for the feelings of others. This hedonism is not only objectionable, but it precludes any true reciprocity. Fortunately, children do respond to sensible limits and even minimal effective guidance. Sexual responsibility can be taught just as are other kinds of responsibility. For instance, the child of four can be expected not to grab food from other plates or to masturbate openly on a cable car. Our expectations change as the child grows. It is appropriate for a four-month-old infant to squall if suddenly denied the breast, but totally inappropriate for three-year-old Henry.

This attention to training mustn't be so early or so one-sided that pleasure itself is damaged. Before training ever begins we need to permit and encourage the child toward a full range of eroticism, even though sex is experienced in an entirely self-indulgent manner. Before the child can begin to direct the sex drive constructively, he must associate it with pleasure, or he will have no motivation to channel it constructively at all. Our prime time for sex without responsibility is in infancy, under age one. Times of relatively low emphasis on responsibility are the preschool years and the early stages of adolescence. These periods allow additional expansion and elaboration of erotic pleasure, even while the child gradually becomes accountable.

With other drives, we routinely encourage pleasure while we teach. For instance, we urge children to savor the aroma of hot turkey and the taste of freshly baked brownies. At the same time we help them to use a fork properly, and to ask for the blessing. We may intentionally lose a game of slapjack to impart the thrill of effective assertion, yet instruct the child not to slap younger children. We impart little enthusiasm about sex, nor do we condone children's natural eagerness. Yet we do lay down a host of "don'ts" and "not nows." Thus we restrict sex without ever having developed its basic enjoyment. How can we expect children to enjoy sex without experiencing it? Once pleasure is firmly rooted, training can begin.

>>