It Takes a Village by Hillary Rodham Clinton

Dawson of the University of Washington, the prime period for emotional development appears to be between eight and eighteen months, when babies are forming their first strong attachments. As with cognitive development, the window of change extends to adolescence and beyond, although it narrows over time. But children who have stockpiled painful experiences, through abuse, neglect, or exposure to violence, may have difficulty enlisting the rational brain to override the pressure to display destructive and antisocial reactions later in life.
    The answer to Goleman’s essential question—“How can we bring intelligence to our emotions—and civility to our streets and caring to our communal life?”—appears to be that, difficult as it may be, it is never too late to teach the elements of emotional intelligence. The structure imposed by the responsibilities of work and the enlightened assistance of concerned people in the prison system and at the governor’s mansion helped those onetime murderers I knew in Arkansas to achieve a greater understanding of and control over their feelings and behavior.
    A number of schools around the country are incorporating the teaching of empathy and self-discipline—what social theorist Amitai Etzioni calls “character education”—into their curricula. In New Haven, Connecticut, a social development approach is integrated into every public school child’s daily routine. Children learn techniques for developing and enhancing social skills, identifying and managing emotions like anger, and solving problems creatively. The program appears to raise achievement scores and grades as well as to improve behavior.
    Â 
    W E ARE beginning to act—albeit slowly—on the evidence biology and psychology provide to us. But practice lags far behind research findings. As Dr. Craig Ramey notes, “If we had a comparable level of knowledge with respect to a particular form of cancer or hypertension or some other illness that affected adults, you can be sure we would be acting with great vigor.”
    If, in scientific terms, the twentieth century has been the century of physics, then the twenty-first will surely be the century of biology. Not only are scientists mapping our genetic makeup, but new technologies are letting them peer into living organisms and view our brains in action. The question we must all think about is whether we will put to good use this accumulating knowledge. Can we find ways to communicate it to all parents, so that it can help them to raise their children and to seek out coaching if they need it? Will we give working mothers and fathers enough time to spend feeding their babies’ brains? Will we have the foresight and the political will to provide more and better early education programs for preschoolers, especially those from homes without adequate “brain food”? Will we challenge elementary school students with foreign languages, math, and music to reinforce brain connections early in a child’s life? Given the increasing level of violence and family breakdown we see around us, why wouldn’t we?
    Â 
    I N THE next few chapters I will explore what happens in families during the first few years of children’s lives—the period that we now know is so vital in giving them a solid start. Researchers may differ over how particular experiences influence a child’s development, but no research study I have ever read has disputed that the quality of life within the family constellation strongly affects how well infants and young children will adapt to the circumstances that confront them throughout their lives. On the contrary, the research underscores the critical importance of constructive stimulation during a child’s earliest years.
    But if family life is chaotic, if parents are depressed and unexpressive, or if caregivers change constantly, so that children can rely on no one, their ability to