Consent - Psychology And Child Development: Fill & Download for Free

Meet Bobby Shafan, David Kellman, and Eddy Galland.(image: Newsday LLC via L.A. Times)If you think you’re seeing triple, you are not wrong. The boys are triplets - but not just any triplets. The trio were separated at birth by the Louise Wise Adoption Agency in New York City. Each boy went to their respective parents, but through questioning, the boys found they were part of a psychological study carried out by Dr. Peter Neubauer and his Child Development Center.The boys were born as quadruplets in 1961 to an unwed teenage mother.The fourth brother died during childbirth, but the other three were put up for adoption. Under the guidance of a psychiatrist, Dr. Peter Neubauer, the boys were to be placed with separate families.But not just any families.With the help of Louise Wise Adoption Agency, the researchers carefully selected the families. Each family had different parenting styles and socioeconomic backgrounds. The boys’ adoptive parents had adopted children a few years before they adopted the boys so the agency had information on each of them.The parents were unaware the boys were triplets that had been separated, though they found it odd that researchers came to their house each year to measure the children’s development. The agency passed it off as a study measuring adoptive children’s growth.It wasn’t until a strange “happenstance” that the boys met each other.Bobby was mistaken for Eddy on their college campus by some friends. Through some questioning Bobby found that Eddy had the same birth date and was adopted through Louse Wise Adoption Agency.The boys were awestruck they found each other, but they were in for another surprise:A newspaper did an article about the separated twins. A guy named David saw their newspaper article and realized he looked just like Bobby and Eddy. David soon realized that he was their triplet based on the date of birth and adoption agency name.(source: NY Times)At first the three were inseparable. They went through a honeymoon phase much like a new couple. They even opened their own restaurant together.But soon their differences got the best of them. The entire situation became overwhelming. The triplets started arguing and not getting along.Each of the boys also suffered mental health issues. Unfortunately, Eddy could not overcome his. He committed suicide in 1995.(image: Forbes)Many question the ethics and motives of Neubauer’s study.People question the scientific value of the study as they have never published the data. In fact, there are over 11,000 pages of data yet Neubauer sealed the data until 2065.The exact motive of the study is unknown, but the study is to study the “nature-nurture” effect.No parents consented to the study nor were they informed their family was part of the study.David, Eddy, and Bobby were not alone in the study.Neubauer and Louise Wise Adoption Agency also separated several other twins at birth. Some have been subjects of documentaries and news articles.Many have reunited through DNA testing, but there is no knowing exactly how many twins were in the study.Twin sisters, Michele Mordkoff and Allison Kanter who were also part of Neubauer’s twin study. (image: CNN)Because Neubauer sealed the records, no one knows exactly what is in them. After a bunch of pushing, David and Bobby could see the parts about them. But even then, the research was heavily censored to protect identities of other participants.We will probably have to wait until 2065 to know what the records say. Dr. Peter Neubauer is dead and no one can seem to unseal the records housed at Yale University.To learn more about the triplets and Dr. Peter Neubauer’s studies, watch Three Identical Strangers, a documentary outlining the studies.Sources:Five things you may not know about 'Three Identical Strangers'The surreal, sad story behind the acclaimed new doc 'Three Identical Strangers'Address the ethical violations that led to 'Three Identical Strangers' - STATThree Identical Strangers: the bizarre tale of triplets separated at birthThree Identical Strangers - WikipediaTwins reunite after watching CNN film 'Three Identical Strangers'

The history of children in the United States began with an understanding when they were born that they would be raised to be upstanding citizens and contribute to the family’s welfare. There was no law preventing child labor or limiting the work week to 40 hours. As soon as children could contribute by doing chores, or finding work outside the home, they did. Boys worked outside the home. Girls in middle and lower class families did housework and were sometimes sent out to help neighbors.Two of the anthropologically telling phrases related to children back then, in the 1930s-1950s included:Spare the rod and spoil the childChildren should be seen and not heardChildren before the 1950s were not understood psychologically — developmental psychology was in its infancy. Children then were not considered to have rights, and needs based on their developing psychology were not understood.So parents were the center of a child’s world and parents had the right to determine everything in a child’s life. Because those times were not times when women had equal rights, the father was the de facto and de jure head of the household.Patriarchy was at its zenith, then. And a father who drank alcohol and/or who physically beat his child for discipline was privileged and protected by social norms. His drinking was not discussed by his family. It was shameful for them to tell the world anything related to family life.Social controls like shame hid domestic violence, alcoholism, rape, and child abuse by silencing its victims. Women who were alcoholics were more shamed than alcoholic men. Women served their husbands by caring for the home and family.Women could not legally be raped by their husbands because it was reasoned that their consent was implied due to marriage, a holdover from the time women were treated as chattel owned first by their fathers and then by their husbands.Women in the 1950s did not qualify for credit on their own without their husband’s consent, and were socially nonconforming if they elected to have a career rather than a family (consider the socially controlling aspects of the terms “spinster” and “old maid” versus “bachelor.”). We cannot see an aspect of society like child abuse without considering its context.Child abuse — negligent or willful mistreatment of a child resulting in psychological and/or physical harm — seemed more commonplace and acceptable then because the social controls to remain silent and not to discuss family matters were greater; and, the psychology of children was not studied, developed as a discipline, considered, or understood as it is today (2018).

Lots of good answers regarding the moral and ethical implications. My answer will concentrate on one thing:Pregnancy is hugely dangerous!This is not true only in the past or developing countries, but also in the best hospitals with the best medical staff.I'm not an Obstetrician, but my best friend is in training at a high risk maternity hospital and I've worked for four months as a doctor in a low risk maternity ward. Here's what we've both seen:- Post-partum haemorrhageExcessive bleeding (usually from the uterus) after birth is a very real risk. Despite rarely working on the birth suite, I've personally rushed a woman to theatre with a midwife's arm up her vagina trying to stem the bleeding. She was unconscious from exsanguination. This is not an unusual occurrence and is the leading cause of direct maternal death in Australia (and probably other developed countries).Image: Nursing CarePlan- ThromboembolismDuring pregnancy and for a time afterwards you are at increased risk of clots forming in your blood vessels. When these clots break away and lodge in your lungs, they can kill you. I've personally treated five people for this (and these are low-risk, healthy women with no risk factors aside from being pregnant), and my friend has seen one woman in her 20s, otherwise well, die from it.Image: Coviden- Hypertensive disordersHigh blood pressure during pregnancy is phenomenally dangerous. It affects your liver and other organs, can cause seizures and death. You don't muck around with this kind of blood pressure. For some, it just requires tablets for a while (pregnancy-induced hypertension). For others, it's horrific. Our ICU has seen its share of (pre-)eclampsia, and one of our midwives died recently after giving birth from this. She was in her 20s and otherwise healthy. And now she’s dead.Image: preeclampsia.org- Emergency C-sectionsThis is major surgery, with risks like infection, wound break-down, excessive bleeding, bladder and bowel injury (I’ve seen them all), a long recovery time and increased risk for subsequent pregnancies and deliveries.This happens around three times a day in a small, low risk unit and is usually due to things like obstruction of labour, foetal distress, or, as the below image shows, antepartum (before birth) haemorrhage (bleeding).Image: Doctorstock- Third and Fourth degree tearsVaginal delivery isn't always smooth sailing, with risk of significant tearing from the vagina, through the perineum and sometimes to and through the anus. As you can imagine, there is subsequently a high risk of wound break-down, infection, faecal incontinence and all the lovely things that go with that.Image: Gynaeonline- Peri/post-partum depression and psychosisThis is horribly scary and sad and happens all too often. It can culminate in years of stress for both partners and child, or, if they're not that lucky, death of the woman and/or her child through murder/suicide.I have recently been involved in the care of a woman with intense, new-onset antenatal psychosis. Horrible and scary for everyone involved.Image: Psychology TodayThe above is not even taking into consideration the normal effects of pregnancy. The morning sickness and sometimes hyperemesis (it’s like super-vomiting), the stretching and tearing, the having your abdominal organs relocated into your thoracic cavity, the subsequent shortness of breath, the swelling, the fatigue, the inability to eat certain foods and advised abstinence from alcohol.Pregnancy is neither simple nor safe, and no one but the woman experiencing it should be making the decision regarding its continuation early on, because it is her life and body on the line.The man may have contributed 50% of the genetic material, but he doesn't even come close to the contribution of his body as compared with hers.No one else gets to put another individual through such a risky ordeal against their will, so why should it be so with pregnancy?