Self-mutilationandgiftedchildren.docVIP

Self-Mutilation and Gifted Children Tracy L. Cross About 20 years ago, I came to believe that while there are many similarities in the development of current students and those from previous generations, there are also significant differences in the experiences of every generation of students. More primal than cohort-based experiences of any group are the lived experiences of the individual. Added to this recipe of difference are the historical ingredients that change over time. For example, growing up at a time of war or peace makes a difference in lived experience. Growing up when advanced technology is manifest in a 4-function calculator or current day lap top computers makes a difference in lived experience. Growing up when cultural appearance and social mores are transmitted primarily in one’s home or through the media makes a difference in lived experience. Growing up when communication among youth is primarily between 2 friends in close proximity by telephone, or among 2 people of different ages who communicate through the computer from locations in different states or even different countries makes a difference in lived experience. Growing up when Americans believed that torture was wholly unacceptable, or at a time when the value of and support for the use of torture is actually touted by a sizable number of Americans, makes a difference in lived experience. Consequently, when one attempts to understand behavior, it must be considered in context. An example of contemporary behaviors that are relatively different from those of previous generations is the growth in frequency of many forms of self-mutilation. Some examples include cutting, scratching, picking at scabs or cuts, ingesting toxic materials, and pinching that causes bruising. The term “mutilation” sometimes reflects the intergenerational bias that comes from differing values perspectives. In other words, the term “self-mutilation” is sometimes perceived as quite offensive by the younger cohort grou