- The Washington Times - Saturday, October 7, 2006

There is something parents of teenagers sometimes say when faced with the reckless, thoughtless and self-absorbed behavior of their offspring.

It’s perhaps not the kindest thing we could say, but it turns out it’s entirely true.

What we say is: “For crying out loud, why don’t you use your brain?”

We pose this rhetorical question when our teens drive cars that have illuminated low-fuel warnings until the engine dies on the roadside or when they leave expensive miniature electronic devices in the pockets of bluejeans headed for the washer.

We ask this question when our teens succumb to peer pressure or lead a group of friends into a dangerous situation. We always ask it when the police are involved.

And of course, it’s the only thing to say when teens open their mouths and utter the unkind and insensitive — yet routine — comments for which adolescents are well known, such as, “You’re such a jerk,” “You’re a moron” and “I hate you” (a comment made all the more hurtful by the sound of a slamming door).

Well, it turns out “Why don’t you use your brain?” isn’t just a belittling, sarcastic, frustrated expression of parental indignation.

Separate studies by researchers at the National Institutes of Health and the University College London prove what parents have known for generations. Teens don’t use their brains.

Apparently, the part of the brain that inhibits risky behavior may not be fully developed until age 25. This explains the pricing of auto insurance.

In addition to lacking the brainpower to assess risk and act accordingly, the region of the brain associated with higher-level thinking — empathy, guilt and understanding the motivation of others — is underused by teenagers. Instead, teens rely on the posterior area of the brain — the part involved with perceiving and imagining actions.

So there it is. All this time, we’ve been asking our teens “Why don’t you use your brain?” and the answer they have been giving us — “Um … I don’t know” — turns out to be true.

Research is good, and I want to be an enlightened parent, so I’m glad to know what I reasonably should expect from my children in each developmental stage. In fact, this has been my M.O. in parenting — find out what’s considered “normal” (give or take) and then set my expectations accordingly.

I learned this strategy early in my parenting career. Katie, my oldest, was about 2 years old when my aunt came for a visit. A social worker and mother of four, she was one of my role models and mentors in parenting. I was always eager to hear Aunt Mary’s advice.

She watched Katie wandering around our back yard, eating dirt and sticking mulch in her ears (OK, I’m exaggerating about the mulch), and she said something I never forgot: “A 2-year-old should behave a lot like a well-trained golden retriever. She should feed herself, nap frequently and come when she’s called.”

Katie didn’t come when she was called, so my aunt’s insight gave me something to work on.

The point is, understanding what you can reasonably expect from a child is a good way to set your standards for appropriate behavior.

But this leaves me with a bit of a dilemma.

On the one hand, current research shows adolescents aren’t intentionally cruel to each other, rude to their parents and unable to control their impulsive (read: stupid) urges but instead haven’t developed the gray matter to think of more acceptable forms of communication and behavior.

On the other hand, am I the only one who thinks this might be a bit of a cop-out?

It seems brain research may turn out to be the perfect excuse when teens insult and exclude each other or when they deface school property or respond disrespectfully to teachers and other adults.

As the findings of this research are applied, will a lack of brain maturity become the all-purpose excuse that permits bullying and vandalism? Will this discovery keep teens out of detention hall — or worse, prohibit school administrators from applying discipline to enforce standards of conduct?

Can’t you just hear some high school senior’s attorney arguing in court, “But your Honor, my client must graduate with his class. It’s not his fault his brain has yet to develop the capacity to understand it was inappropriate to shout obscenities at his chemistry teacher while using a blowtorch to explore the combustive properties of nitroglycerin.”

If you think this isn’t coming, you don’t read the paper much.

Neuroscience or not, I still think the age of reason comes at about 7. This is the age when I expect my children to understand that it’s rude to be rude, it’s unkind to be unkind, and it’s dangerous to be dangerous.

I have to admit, however, that learning about the developing brain of teenagers gives me hope. (This probably is why the parents of young adults keep reassuring me that things get better.)

In the meantime, I’m going to keep requiring that the teens around my house use what brain they have — or expect to answer that ridiculous question we parents can’t help but ask.

Columnist Marybeth Hicks, a wife of 19 years and mother of four children, lives in the Midwest. She uses her column to share her perspective on issues and experiences that shape families nationwide. Visit her Web site (www.mary bethhicks.com) or send e-mail to [email protected] comcast.net.

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide