A chance to rebuild
With all of the violence and fear wrapped up in 9/11 and the events and threats it has spawned, it is a particular subject to frame for kids. "I think you need to be careful with young children," Brodsky Schur says, highlighting ages five to eight as particularly delicate years—when children register just enough information to be afraid but often lack the deeper knowledge and coping skills to put their reactions into context. She notes it is okay to acknowledge that a horrible event occurred, but "there's a lot about resiliency" to be highlighted, about "people helping one another and rescue efforts" that highlight the positive things that happened in the wake of the attacks, she says.
Age-appropriate play can be particularly useful for putting this message into action, Myers-Walls explains. "If they're concerned about things, what play allows you to do is redo things," she says. If a child is building towers of blocks and knocking them down with planes, it gives adults a chance to refocus energy on the act of rebuilding the towers—and how cooperation can facilitate the process. Stuffed animals, dolls and other toys, likewise, are often how preschool- and elementary-age kids relate stories they have heard. "That is a way children learn to understand things and process them," Myers-Walls says. And as with the blocks, these times of play can be opportunities for adults to join in, highlighting positive alternatives and gently revising misapprehensions of events or concepts. Like much of learning, research has shown that this sort of play is part of "a gradual building of their attitudes and their impressions that will come from multiple interactions," Myers-Walls says.
Recent curriculum work has shown that for older children, the events of and following September 11th can be productively put into historical contexts that highlight examples of resiliency and cooperation, such as the American Revolution or the Great Depression. The complex event and its aftermath can also be further illuminated via discussions of larger themes in social and political history, such as balancing national safety and civil rights—comparing reactions to 9/11 with those following the attack on Pearl Harbor, for example—or the grounds for overseas military interventions—such as the recent U.S. engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan as compared with the U.S.'s position on the League of Nations after World War I. "These themes put a light on it," Brodsky Schur says, giving teachers and even parents a way to integrate such a seemingly unteachable event.
But before adults attempt to teach children about 9/11, it is crucial for them to examine how they themselves feel about it, Myers-Walls notes. Especially if the anniversary is going to be a tough time emotionally for adults, she says, "they need to get themselves together before they deal with the kids. I think it's okay to show emotions," she notes. "But you don't want them to feel like you're out of control—you're the emotional base for your kids."
And although the September 11th attacks—and the events they precipitated—might have been life-altering in many ways for adults, for many kids, they simply might not be worth dwelling on, anniversary or not. For children of military families or those who lost relatives in the attacks, the event is naturally going to have much more of a personal impact and might require closer emotional monitoring. As Myers-Walls notes, however, "most kids, I think, are going to say, 'That's interesting, but I'm going to go play.'"
See what we're tweeting about
6 Comments
Add CommentHow Young Children Learn about Terrorism?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSimple. It's called brainwashing. Just look at the Hitler Youth, the Intifada, the Northern Irish kids, the European skinheads. Do you think Michelle Bachmann has the answer? Rick Perry? Anyone in the public eye in the U.S.?
Here's what terrorism has succeeded in doing. I once arrived [fairly regularly] at the airport 10 minutes before my flight was scheduled to depart. Now, an entire government agency insures that I dawdle in the airport for hours before the flight, and that I DO NOT have three oz. of shampoo. I don't know about you, but none of the kids in my kindergarten class held the belief that any amount of shampoo was the least bit harmful. [unless you drank it] [oh... for those who attended public school in the U.S. recently, this rant is not about shampoo]
TRUTH & CONSPIRACY
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDuring the Clinton era, the long debated truth regarding the bombing of Pearl Harbor was finally established and the issue put to bed; http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=103
The revelation wasn’t that our politicians are capable of public deceit and winning at any cost, it was a confirmation of government policy to hide and hold the truth of decisions and events for apparently an average of 50 years, or until the people who participated in such secret activities are either dead or too old to matter.
Given America’s adeptness at monitoring potential enemies, which was certainly the case with the Japanese (see article), the fact that Pearl Harbor could be successfully attacked without prior warning was considered impossible; and indeed it was.
Opinions at the time and after that conflicted with the official view were called ‘conspiracy theories’ or worse by politicians and the news media. And in the hysterical frenzy that accompanied Roosevelt’s push for war and the usual accompanying hyper-patriotism, those critical of the ‘official line’ were forced to bite their tongue and the matter went away for a while as events in Europe dramatically unfolded.
The lessons learned about such historical ‘state secrets’ considered expedient for the public’s safety and welfare, is that you won’t learn the truth from politicians or the media; and that those who question and suggest alternatives to the official view are always in the minority.
In its aggressive effort to keep potentially volatile information away from the public, the government has new and more challenging antagonists, in the form of Wikileaks, internet hackers and others. We will never know the complete price tag for security efforts to keep sensitive data from being leaked to taxpaying citizens. These new ‘truth foes’ mentioned above haven’t yet leaked hidden data regarding 911 and other sensitive events tied by the governments to terrorists. However, it’s an issue that you can bet is on the minds of among others, our politicians, our redundant security forces and the military.
The next time we read where politicians or the media have decided to use the ‘conspiracy card’ to discredit free-thinking individuals or groups that don’t necessarily blindly believe the official message coming from those who in the past have made a habit of hiding the truth, perhaps we should view this overworked tactic of name-calling for what it might very well be… a conspiracy theory of its own.
(1)My heart goes out to all 9/11 victims & their families. I too have lost someone, a dear friend of 11 years on that terrible day. The only thing more severe than what transpired is the fact that our own government deliberately covered up, or worse, was directly involved in the event itself. This is a belief that is shared by at least 1/3 of the public, (and around half of all New Yorkers) but is vehemently denied by the mainstream media as well as many uninformed citizens. I refuse to believe that primitive cave-dwellers halfway around the world were able to knock down two skyscrapers and penetrate the most heavily defended building in the world in one fell swoop. Don't get me wrong, our leaders can be incompetent but if they were THAT incapable of keeping us safe, then I am truly appalled and far from "proud to be an American".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's been 10 years later and we are NOT safer. Just think of what has taken place since 9/11: prolonged and costly wars on multiple fronts-all part of a fictional "War on Terror" that is said to continue for the next 100 years, the PATRIOT ACT which has created a domestic security police-state that spies on its own citizens, the end of Habeus Corpus & Posse Comitatus, and the overall downgrade of the USA's reputation in the eyes of the global community, just to name a few. Something isn't right, anyone who accepts the "official” story of 9/11 at face value, without doing their own research, needs to have their head examined. You owe it to yourself and your family to learn the facts.
Here are just a few reasons why we need a new, independent investigation of 9/11, one that is NOT conducted by there very same people who seem to be covering it up:
(2)-THREE buildings fell in NY on 9/11, the Twin Towers & WTC Building 7, which was NOT hit by a plane and received minable damage that any similar structure could sustain.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this-Before 9/11, no large steel-framed building had collapsed from a fire, ever. On 9/11, three of them did. The 32 story Windsor Tower in Spain burned for 24 hours in 2005, yet its steel frame didn't collapse.
-Many 1st responders, media, WTC employees, and other eyewitnesses reported bombs going off throughout the buildings before they fell. Some explosions were heard before the planes even hit. Scientists have pointed out that the government has no explanation for the molten steel that was present for 3 weeks after 9/11 and Niels Harrit, a professor of nano-chemistry at the University of Copenhagen, reported finding high-grade nano-thermite in the dust from the buildings.
-The 9/11 Commission doesn't even mention WTC 7. Phillip Zelikow wrote the "official" 9/11 Commission's outline before the Commission was even formed. President Bush refused to release "classified" info to aid the investigation and even refused to speak under oath while meeting with the Commission. The head of the 9/11 Commission, Thomas Kean, even stated that the Commission was set up to fail. Its membership consisted of former politicians. No knowledgeable experts were appointed.
-NORAD, the agency that's supposed to protect our skies, was ordered to stand down by Vice President Dick Cheney. Norman Mineta, former Congressman and Secretary of Transportation, was down in a bunker with Cheney on 9/11. He testified to this but it was not included in the Commission Report either. NORAD also "just happened" to be conducting military drills on 9/11, something that reportedly interfered with intercepting the hijacked planes. The commission's Senior counsel, John Farmer, Jr., wrote that the government made “a decision not to tell the truth about what happened,” and that the NORAD “tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public.”
-Over 1,500 professional architects and engineers demand a new 9/11 investigation. They all unanimously agree that the "official story" doesn't hold weight scientifically and their numbers are growing. Similar groups who demand a real investigation are popping up all over. These include: Firefighters for 9/11 Truth, Pilots for 9/11 Truth, Scholars for 9/11 Truth, Veterans for 9/11 Truth & various groups of 9/11 families. Around 70% of the victim's families questions have not been answered.
(3)To top it off, the 1ST RESPONDERS-those who gave their all to help the victims of 9/11, many of whom are still sick and injured from it today and aren't receiving the benefits they deserve-are not being included in the 10 year 9/11 ceremony. Many of these firemen, medics, police, and servicemen share the same belief: that we’re NOT being told the truth about 9/11. Real Americans keep their government in check and not the other way around. Real Americans aren't afraid to question their government, the same government that has failed them again and again and continues to do so. The truth is, I really don't know what happened on 9/11.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI just know that it isn't what they told us it was.
How convenient that you don't know what really happened. Saves you from speculating about how many people it would have taken and how they have all managed to keep their mouths shut for a decade...because that is what I want to know.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow many bombs? Who put them there? How is it that this is the first time I have EVER heard about bombs going off before the planes hit?
Is the press complicit in this cover up? How many reporters know the "real truth"? And not one of them wants the Pulitzer Prize bad enough to spill the beans?
Your version of the truth doesn't hold up very well to some pretty simple math! Oh...I forgot...you don't have a version of the truth, just knowledge of falsehoods.