Sasson Gubbay

Clumsy children: a prognostic study

ABSTRACT. Twenty‐four clumsy children of whom 13 had matched controls were reappraised eight years after their original assessment. The findings indicate that developmental clumsiness generally has a favourable prognosis. Mild and moderate degrees of clumsiness improved to normality, but severe degrees of clumsiness had a less favourable outcome only in regard to motor proficiencies. Clumsiness seemed not to have bearing, either on social class or on the subsequent pursuit of sporting activities. Although there was a lower level of academic achievement in the clumsy children, who also chose careers which were less manually exacting, these observations did not reach statistical significance.

Photoparoxysmal responses in children: their characteristics and clinical correlates

This study evaluates the characteristics of photoparoxysmal responses elicited with intermittent photic stimulation during a routine electroencephalogram in childhood and correlated this with the clinical profile of the child. Photoparoxysmal responses occurred in 8% (21/263) of children where activation was undertaken. Photoparoxysmal responses were often brief and had a variable onset latency. This study suggests increasing the duration of the stimulus train to 10 seconds or more will increase the diagnostic yield. Photoparoxysmal responses very rarely outlasted the stimulus, and self-limited photoparoxysmal responses probably have greater significance than previously attributed to them. They are highly correlated with epilepsy.

Subclinical rhythmic EEG discharge of adults: SREDA in two children

Subclinical rhythmic electroencephalogram (EEG) discharge is an uncommon rhythmic EEG pattern that has been reported to occur in adults. It is thought to be a nonspecific finding with little clinical significance. This article reports this EEG pattern in two children and suggests it be called subclinical rhythmic EEG discharge of adults and children.

AUSTRALIAN TESTS FOR CLUMSINESS

May we congratulate Dr J. M. Court for his excellent and well argued treatise on the ‘use’ of children.’ Although it is hard to agree that by provision of the basic needs of love, usefulness and respect ‘all else will follow’, it is our belief that without these basics, dysfunction is likely to occur and that in current postindustrial developed countries each of these basic needs is under significant threat. There is no doubt that love in infancy is under threat. At its most serious this is evidenced by the increasing recognition of child abuse and neglect which is represented as a significant cause of infant deaths2 Even here there is evidence however, that love is not enough. Few parents, if any, have children with the predetermined desire to abuse or neglect them. It is their unpreparedness for parenting associated with isolation, prior experience of abuse and neglect themselves, and especially a society that increasingly undervalues the usefulness of parenting, that sets the environment necessary for failure of the burgeoning of love, and the tendency to child abuse. Although Dr Court rightly points out the decreased value attached to fatherhood engendered by the industrial revolution, it is the role of the mother that has been most severely denigrated in recent times. An unfortunate side effect of the overdue emancipation of women has been the increasing definition of a woman’s worth in terms of her education and employment. A cursory review of the wedding notices in each Sunday’s New York Times reveals this with most notices including a record of achievements such as: ‘Ms D, who is 25 years old.. ., graduated from Princeton University, as did her husband. Until recently she was a researcher in Newsweek. Her father is a partner in the Philadelphia law firm of D. B. & R. Her mother is an attorney.’ Where the bride or groom’s mother does not have a paying job, she is not mentioned in the notice at all! As long as we continue to equate personal value with monetary value of employment, the usefulness of parenting will continue to be seriously undervalued, and the full-time parent will continue to be cast as a second class citizen. How often do you, on asking occupation, hear the statement ‘I’m just a mother’? How reassuring to the continued well being of our children would it be to hear a male, on asked what he did, to announce ‘I am a parent, and I work during the day as a lawyer/doctor etc.’? The sense of use and respect which Dr Court argues is necessary for a healthy transition to adulthood is also absolutely essential to the parents of those children. If we are to avoid a situation where children must be sent to alternative care to allow parents to maintain their own sense of worth, we must, as paediatricians, actively advocate for the role of parent, recognizing the great difficulties entailed in successful achievement of this role. Congratulations, Dr Court! You have opened up an essential area for debate in paediatrics at a time when reassessment of the whole nature of parenting and childhood is essential.