Parents as Teachers Urges Parents to Enroll Their Children in Breastfeeding Study
This article describes neuroscience research that seeks to explain an observed correlation between breastfeeding and higher child IQ scores. What caught my eye was the fact that a Parents as Teachers program in North Carolina helps recruit subjects for the study. Here, a Parents as Teachers educator expresses her approval:
“It’s very interesting and has a lot of validity,” said Marcie Petty, an educator with Parents as Teachers whose office is in Cheatham’s lab. “It makes you think about what your children eat and what they’re taking in.”
Encouraging participation in medical studies goes beyond Parents as Teachers’ mission of promoting good parenting practices. It’s entirely possible to be conscious of what your children are eating without signing them up for research.
I see two problems with Parents as Teachers recruiting subjects for studies. First, parents may not understand the difference between enrolling in a study and the other activities that Parents as Teachers promotes. Playing and reading helps their children learn; research helps scientists do their jobs. Parents may feel pressured into joining studies that won’t benefit their children one way or the other. They also might feel guilty if they go against the educator’s recommendation to enroll their children in research.
Second, as you know if you’ve read the comments to my last post on breastfeeding, people disagree about the effects of breast milk. Some researchers think breastfeeding is crucial for children’s health; others dispute its importance. No one study can put this question to rest. If Parents as Teachers educators tell parents that a study is valid and that it’s a good idea to participate in it, that could be viewed as an endorsement of the study’s findings.
I’ve never heard of a Missouri Parents as Teachers program suggesting that children join research studies. And, although Parents as Teachers programs are connected by a national organization, they’re run individually by local people, so the fact that a program in another state did something is no indication that it will happen here. Still, people need to know about what the program does in other places, and to consider whether those aspects should be replicated in Missouri or avoided. Any publicly funded programs that go to people’s homes and endorse specific activities need to be closely scrutinized — and that includes Parents as Teachers.
A Parents as Teachers post we can completely agree on!
I guess we also agreed that Parents as Teachers should receive the same budget cuts as other programs in tight budget times, instead of being protected for whatever reason.
In our own experience, we have never had our Missouri Parents as Teachers rep ask us to participate in a study. I guess it would be ok with me if they merely handed out a flyer about such things as part of the packets of information you get most meetings. Anything beyond that would be improper, as you discussed.
Comment by David Stokes — February 23, 2010 @ 12:40 p.m.
That makes absolutely no sense. Your argument is:
1. PAT should stick to their core mission of promoting good parenting services.
2. Promoting research that evaluates the testable hypotheses of what might constitute good parenting is not promotion of good parenting services. This is an absurd conclusion.
I can think of several reasons why participating in studies can be immediately beneficial to parents:
1. where parents and children are directly compensated for their time.
2. Access to scientific or medical evaluations as part of a study that parents might otherwise have to pay out of pocket on.
3. where contact with researchers enables parents to become more aware of good parenting techniques or at the very least the methods used to comparatively evaluate outcomes. Your argument that this isn’t necessary dodges the fundamental argument that interface determines behavior and that participation in research studies is a good way to decrease the marginal costs of each step in the process of becoming a better parent.
Your evaluation of parents feeling ‘pressured’ or ‘guilty’ seems to be pure speculation and I challenge you to document any cases where that might have happened. In any case there is no coercive behavior that is implied in the article you cite.
Comment by Eapen Thampy — February 23, 2010 @ 1:49 p.m.
Not to mention the greater aggregate benefits of conclusive research on whether or not breastfeeding or any other parenting technique is a superior option. Being able to support their programs with data is precisely why it is appropriate for Parents as Teachers should promote participation in valuable research at times and places where researchers are looking for subjects.
Comment by Eapen Thampy — February 23, 2010 @ 1:56 p.m.
“Promoting research that evaluates the testable hypotheses of what might constitute good parenting is not promotion of good parenting services. This is an absurd conclusion.”
Well, no. One activity is the promotion of research, the other is the promotion of conclusions. They’re two different things. It may or may not be a good idea for the same organization to undertake both.
“Your evaluation of parents feeling ‘pressured’ or ‘guilty’ seems to be pure speculation”
What gave it away? The “may” or the “might”?
Comment by Eric D. Dixon — February 23, 2010 @ 2:40 p.m.
there’s no coherent standard here that says it is a specifically bad idea for PAT to ask participants if they are interested in participating in a research study that might yield immediately useful data relevant to the policies and parenting ideas that PAT promotes and utilizes. There is no reason why it’s inappropriate for an organization to promote participation in research immediately relevant to its mission.
And it’s absurd to think that these kinds of voluntary organizations coerce parents in any way.
Comment by Eapen Thampy — February 23, 2010 @ 8:15 p.m.