Did you miss me?
Sorry for being MIA, but we are back in action. In part one of this topic we saw in a longitudinal study that perhaps resiliency may very well have a lot to do with something innate rather than a learned behavior. In part two of this topic we will learn that, that thinking may not be so true.
Everything that children do, they learn it from somewhere, children or even adults for the most part don't make behaviors up. It is well documented that children really bring true meaning to "monkey see, monkey do" idea. In regards to mental health that remains true as well. Those of whom that are victims of domestic violence are at high risk to become batterers themselves. According to Strengthenoursisters.org, "Boys who witness domestic violence are more likely to batter their female partners as adults than boys raised in nonviolent homes. Of the children who witness domestic abuse, 60% of the boys eventually become batterers." Again "monkey see, monkey do".
In regards to resiliency, I read a journal article by Dr. Steven J. Condly entitled, Resilience in Children: A Review of Literature with Implications For Education. The articles' main theme is about how to understand a child and how resiliency reflects how well they do in school. He writes referencing Norman Garmezy who was the leader in the field of resiliency, lists three factors that may lead to resiliency "(1)native intelligence and temperament...(2)family and degree of support...(3)external support from persons and institutions outside the individual and family." It appears that according to Condly and Garmezy resiliency may not only be innate but heavily on external and environmental factors that help foster resiliency.
Score: Nature-1, Nurture-1
Bottom line: It's a tie. It's a tie because much like everything in life there is not one way to do things to be successful there are specific ways that will facilitate an outcome, but you could get to that outcome in many ways.
Have a Wacky Wednesday!!YES