Discourse Analysis Final

Alex Grealish
English 102
Discourse Analysis

My experiences at babysteps have been very eye opening. My first day there my group member and I sat in the circle of mothers, and the church volunteer and discussed topics every mother should know. Spoiling your children was the topic of the day. Funny topic to be discussing in a group centered on low-income families with children ranging from unborn to toddlers, it worked though. The women brought up different situations within their own childhoods growing up, as some stroked their stomachs that carried their unborn children or stood up and swayed trying to ease the babies cradled in their arms. The mothers shared being spoiled by their absent fathers who only stopped by once every few months bearing gifts for forgiveness, where as others were told they couldn’t have gifts at all, that they needed to learn to work for what they wanted. These women all came together in the end, you can be spoiled with one thing and that is love. But not all of them had that in their lives. This session got me thinking. What are the behavioral effects and factors of children being raised in low-income families?
Looking at the mental health side as a factor, a study preformed on kids from 9 to 10 differencing in only their socioeconomic status using an electroencephalography helped to answer my question. An electroencephalography which "uses electrodes on the scalp and held in place by a cap to measure underlying brain activity" showed that these children from low-income families "have detectable differences in the response of their prefrontal cortex, the part of the brain that is critical for problem solving and creativity" then those who come from high socioeconomic incomes (University of California – Berkeley, 2008). The kids were to watch pictures on a screen and press a button in response to a change or realization of what it was they saw. The information gathered was a dramatic difference in those from low-income families. These results showed them that those from a low income have lower responses rates. Scientist’ believe this frontal lobe activity could have direct connections to behavioral differences with the kids as well. The outcomes of these children were frighteningly similar to those responses of "people who have had a portion of their frontal lobe destroyed by a stroke" (University of California – Berkeley, 2008). These 9 to 10 year old had troubles with behavioral control that the prefrontal cortex, or the area affected, is involved in regulating. It is believed that stress and environmental conditions are to blame for these problems. Being raised in “impoverished environments” limit the children from having as many reading tools, and learning activities for their brains to fully develop in these very important years of their lives (University of California – Berkeley, 2008).
The article is very unbiased. It mentions the facts and restates multiple times that the results don't apply to every situation. I don't believe it's it trying to sway my opinion one way or another. It wants to just give out the information found and try and help the children, and people affected. I believe it connects very well with what babysteps. The healthy growth of children is important to everyone there and this article helps show people ways these kids are affected and how to learn to fix the problem or stop it entirely.
An article written by Mike Broemmel talks about the "long-term negative effects" (Broemmel, 1) that children face growing up in low-income housing, the environmental factor of children’s behaviors. The limited educational opportunities they face living in such areas can then lead to employment difficulties as they move on. The health issues that children face is another problem. These people don't have the adequate amount of money to bring their kids to the doctor as often as needed. It is mentioned by Broemmel that the “cheap lead paints used in this housing if not treated efficiently and promptly can lead to long-term issues”. The last factor he brings up and the one I feel most closely connects with my question is that of the exposure to crime. The areas low-income housing are located in can bring about dangerous people and opportunities such as gangs and crime. Being surrounded and raised in environments that have such a negative influence can affect the behaviors of children. There is a lot of pressure to give in to the bad around them and do the wrong things. They have to adapt to their surroundings, and this can be done so in such a way that changes them for the worse.
I feel this article has much to do with babysteps in that the families in the programs cannot always afford the best neighborhoods. On such low incomes it’s hard to be picky and there are more important things such as food and shelter that come before location. These children are then more likely to be surrounded by these toxic environments and more susceptible to giving in to the bad behaviors they see. I don't think this article is being bias. There isn't any opinion stated, just facts and possibilities. The author’s ideas extended from mine when she states that these effects "follow children throughout their lives" (Broemmel, 1). This statement can definitely apply to the behavioral aspect of the children in these situations.
A study on the “Behavior problems of preschool children from low-income families” where authors Qi, and Kaiser, studied almost 3,000 preschool children and their problems with behavior, studied children from many areas of low-income such as community childcare centers, behavior clinics, and hospitals serving mainly low-income neighborhoods (Duncan, 4). They found that, "children from behavior clinics (Keenan & Watschlag, 2000) and children with adolescent mothers who were at risk for substance abuse (Elden, 1999) had (higher) rates of problem behavior" (Kaiser, 11). These issues are of much importance to the parents because, “preschoolers with early emergent behavior problems are likely to evince serious behavioral problems” (Duncan, 1).
A write up on negative behavior side effects of children in homes using on welfare using food stamps focused on the nutritional side of these effects. Wu finds that not only can the children’s self esteem issues with their experienced “food hardships” or insecurities lead to their poor behavior but factors such as “a minimal nutritional diet, race, birth order, mom’s education, and home cognitive stimulation score” (Wu, 2&5). Because these parents are not always able to purchase the adequate food needed for the development of their growing children the stress of this and that they get from meeting “working environments” can be picked up by the children themselves further changing their behaviors.
Eric Jensen brings up the theory that “behavior stems from a combination of genes and environment” (Jensen, 2). Creating a mnemonic devise, EACH, Emotional and Social Challenges, Acute and Chronic Stressors, Cognitive Lag, and, Health and Safety, Jensen show the most popular risk factors associated with the behavior of children being raised in low-income societies. These behavioral changes caused by their surrounding factors can then lead to other troubles in their lives and later to problems in relationships, such as “loneliness, aggression, isolation, and deviance in their peer relationships” (Jensen, 12).
The common factors of behavior issues among children raised in low-comes families derive from, both the people and environments they are surrounded in. Whether it be the lack in resources of the environment as the study University of California Berkely concluded, the housing and surrounding city Broemmel describes or lake of nutritional health as mentioned by Wu. These all play a role in the attitudes and behaviors of the children that can effect them from now and until the rest of their lives and the results of the electroencephalography test physically show. My hope is that with all the information and studies being conducted about this subject we can catch onto the side effects well before it does permanent damage to the children.


Works Cited-
Broemmel, Mike. “Long-Term Effects of Public Housing on Children” Livestrong.com.
Alden, Anton 23 August 2010. 20 February 2011.
Duncan, Brooks-Gunn & Klevanov, “Behavior problems of preschool children from
low-income families: review of the literature.” 1994; Stormont, 2002. 23 February 2011.
Jensen, Eric. “Teaching with Poverty in Mind: How Poverty Affects Behavior and Academic Performance” ASCD. 2009.
University of California - Berkeley. "Poor Children's Brain Activity Resembles That Of
Stroke Victims, EEG Shows." ScienceDaily 6 December 2008. 1 March 2011
Wu, Liyun. “Does Welfare Help or Hurt Children’s Socio-Emotional Well-being?: A
Regression Discontinuity Analysis of Food Stamps Recipients” Social Work and Economics. 20 September 2010.