When we first had M assessed for giftedness and personality style, we were told that there is a genetic pre-determined range for IQ. This makes sense to me, but my husband and I each pointed to the other one as the responsible parent for this. The expert in question told us that statistically people marry within 5 IQ points of their own, as well, making it even more hereditary. She cited studies on kids who were adopted, and believes they indicate that environment affects individual aptitudes, but when that environment is left behind (graduation, for example), individuals tend to drift right back into that genetic range.
I have not done a lot of scientific studies. There are plenty of them out there, of course. I have read some of them, but my style is a bit different. Part of the reason I started this blog is that when we entered this world of awareness of giftedness and related topics, I found an abundance of scholarly, intellectual material available, but very little emotional commentary on it. As our greatest injuries around the topic of giftedness have come from other families with highly gifted individuals present, I decided to put a blog out there, and at least be able to record my emotional journey, in case it was helpful to another parent starting a similar journey & feeling as out of place and confused as I did. Here's the message I want people to hear. You are not alone. You do not need to have the answers. Your children will be fine. You will make mistakes. Your children will still be fine.
Along those lines, I am inclined to believe that giftedness is hereditary, even though I've seen many who are recognizing one child as highly gifted and a biological sibling to that child who is considered neuro-typical. Is this possible? Probably. Like I said, I'm not a scientist. However, I think there is a lot more to people than we understand, and there may be a separate factor involved that makes the kids seem different, yet they may still both be gifted.
Here's a very recent example that has encouraged this idea in my mind. I shared recently that M was presenting one vision abnormality, so we had her assessed and found multiple abnormalities in her vision. Throughout that process, they asked if there was any family history of it. We repeatedly said no. One grandmother told us a bit later that she had done eye exercises as a child. Huh? That's both an argument for and against the genetic predisposition of neurology, possibly ;). Today, I learned that the grandfather on the other side also had similar eye exercises as a child and now relies on one eye almost completely. Neither my husband or I had any idea about these things, and it might have been helpful to know.
Both grandparents were under the impression that their eye issues were muscular in nature. I'm sure the doctors believed that, as well. More recent research indicates that it's the neurological controls of vision that creates the dysfunctions in vision. That's another generational difference. Specialists in their 40s now did not have the benefit of the same treatments when they were growing up. Both of the grandparents had forgotten large parts of the treatment, as they were done as children, so further erosion of information within the family. I just think it's interesting to think about. Our brains are fascinating things. I studied some very specific neurological approaches to things as the result of a previous job, but am hearing now that similar treatments and approaches are being used to treat a variety of challenges in children (and adults).
There's another thing I wonder in all of this. Why is it so easy for people to consider hereditary disposition for neurological diseases, like MS, but deny the hereditary disposition for neurological differences like giftedness? Maybe it's the same false assumptions and competitive/defensive reactions in people around the concept of "smart."
Hope you're having a lovely summer day, and having an intellectual banquet that is to your taste.
No comments:
Post a Comment