Thread by @suzannezeedyk

Why is it sometimes hard for members of professional groups to see how ordinary practices can be harmful to children?
A THREAD that looks back on history for some help.
Why did I want to write it? Well, t @BPSOfficial call for a ban on isolation rooms has sparked disagreement.

2. Many of you will have heard me talk about James Robertson's work in hospitals in 1950s. He was concerned about t common, ordinary policies that separated young children frm parents. He was so concerned, he made a film to help ppl see. Here's t trailer.

3. It was ordinary, accepted practice to restrict children from seeing parents until 'visiting times', which were often only on a Saturday. Children cried intensely for their parents. Eventually they would stop. The staff saw 'settling'. Robertson saw 'emotional deterioration'.

4. We are horrified now at this idea: Young childrn wouldn't be able to hv their parents stay in hospital, where they would be alone in an unfamiliar environment full of scarily dressed strangers whilst they were in pain. Well, in 1950s, t medical profession cdn't see a problem.

5. Some people at t time cd see. Robertson ws one of them. So ws Bowlby. And so was Spence. Here's an excerpt from Spence's 1947 lecture: "Night comes on, but there is no bedtime story, no last moment of intimacy, no friendly cuddle before sleep. The nurse is too busy for that."

6. T passage I've just quoted comes frm a historical reflectn published 2012 by two Dutch academics who hv traced t early period of attachment science. It traces the story of activism & resistance in med profession to seeing children's emotional needs. researchgate.net/publication/24…

7. My purpose in ths thread is to demonstrate how hard it can be for some members of a systm to get curious & see anew how ordinary practices can cause harm. Take these views: "Parents were seen as ignorant noisy intruders who criticised t staff & disturbed t quiet of the ward."

8. So...parents were deemed 'bad', which made it okay to discount their views. The children could be classed as 'bad', too. Here's a story of a nurse threatening to "smack" a 7-yr-old child & to "remove his teddy bear" if he didn't stop asking for his mother.

9. Read that passage again. There ws a big debate going on. Some medics accused t mother (who told that story) of "lying". Some discredited her as being "a socialist". Others, like t editors of @TheLancet, endorsed her view &called for "kindness, comfort & attention" for childrn.

10. I tell t story of 1950s hospitals a lot. I do that because we hv forgottn t debate. We hv forgotten t "missionary zeal" needed by Robertson&others to change practices of t day. "By training & tradition, doctors&nurses had never learned to take t viewpoint of t child&parents."

11. If you want to read more about this history, here's a great book written by James & Joyce Robertson. You can watch the whole of their hospital film (and other films by them), by ordering it from Concord Films. robertsonfilms.info/separation_and…

12. But here's my point in ths thread: The debate going on right now about whether children are 'bad' is a modern day version of an old debate abt children's needs. The entry of @BPSOfficial into isolation booths is like the @TheLancet in 1950s hospitals. bps.org.uk/news-and-polic…

13. The 'Behaviour Tsar' for England's schools has published a piece today in @tes that echoes the arguments of 1950s doctors: "Our wards will be unsafe" is very like "Banning isolation rooms will make classrooms unsafe". tes.com/news/behaviour…

14. Many people (professionals & parents) are shocked this is a debate at all. So was Robertson in his day. That's why he made his film. But it was so alarming to the medical system that he had to stop showing it for awhile. "The film slandered paediatrics."

15. Perhaps if we can see today's debate about isolation rooms through a historic lens, it will help us make more/new sense of it. That lens might calm the confusion & dismay that some people are expressing as they watch this debate unfold. #FierceCuriosity will help.

16. I open myself up to risk in saying all of this aloud. Twitter is a rambunctious playground. I may find that critics move in to disagree. I decided to say all this out loud anyway. You know why?... Because...

17. It matters. It matters that we adults see how we can damage children thru ordinary normal policies. Even whilst I am typing ths thread, responses are rolling in abt hospital policies damaging childrn FOR LIFE. Here's @sophiacol: "My friend's dad..."

https://twitter.com/sophiacol/status/1453786966097645569?s=20

18. I've written about hospitals before. Here's a reaction to my 2015 piece: “I found this painful to read, as I was a child in an isolation ward for 6 weeks for scarlet fever. It was terrible for us, and for my mother, who could hardly talk about it.” suzannezeedyk.com/we-need-to-fin…

19. IT MATTERS that we see children's pain. IT MATTERS that we be BRAVE and talk about it. IT MATTERS that we understand no change happens simply through 'progress'.
Change happens because some people envision a particular kind of world and they work to bring it into being.

20/end. I thank all of you who work toward a world based in connection. I like knowing I am one member of a big choir singing such a song.

@Dr_Pam_Jarvis @realdcameron @margl43 @petergates3 @grahamchatterl2 @Graham_Goulden @DirectorVRU @john_jonart @JohnCarnochan @mannajon @CharlotteHerx @JANEOROURKE @janehmul @SimonPartridge @paulinescott222 @pauldixtweets @_LisaCherry @TheBabyExpert @KeeganSmith_Law @NeilMackay

@kdenvir @KevinNeary12 @braininsights @briancar1983 @childinmind @eperryinsights @RevEDMcC @FJRMonifieth @JuneOSullivan @Prev_Justice @kymscott5 @UpstartScot @GiveTimeScot @KeepEYsUnique @MarcusRashford @cisweb @AberlourCCT @BrownOpal58 @gerrydiamond71 @JKnussen @bainsfordht