We are aware that Language and Communication skills stretch beyond simple words, phrases and a handshake. Also, we explored some research in the field of speech communication that focused on some issues.
Nature vs. Nurture : Language and Communication ability is innate at birth; it is shared from a baby’s first cry, to a parent’s hugs and “oooohhs and ahs.” If a child is denied social experience with others, can communication skills be developed in children beyond the childhood years?
After viewing the research documentary, The Wild Child (Nova 2006), discuss the research on Genie, Victor or both. Who benefitted from the research and how? Did the children (Genie and Victor) gain anything from these studies? What about the psychologists who were involved?
· Why would a project like this be referred to a Forbidden Experiment?
· What did you think was the motivation for the Researchers?
· Why was the research stopped in each case? How did you perceive the reasoning of the researchers?
· What were the final results for Genie and/or Victor? Was this is the best possible scenario for either of them? What would have been better?
· This documentary provided much troubling information. What did you find most disturbing?
Because of the many factors involved for this topic, I will permit longer responses, if you wish. Please keep your responses between 75-200 words.
I feel the gain from these experiments were for both the researchers as well as the two children. Everyone was able to learn something whether it was a few words for the children or ways to teach for the researchers.
ReplyDeleteI don’t understand why the experiment would be called forbidden. Maybe because there were so many tests and they were only children?
I think motivation was to see if these children could actually learn a language even if they were isolated for so long.
In Genie’s case, funds were short so the research had to stop because they did not have the funds to continue and there wasn’t enough progress to feel a need for more funds.
The movie pointed out the belief in a "certain point" where there was no hope for the person deprived. I agree with this in the extent that we may be able to teach them a little, but we cannot teach them fully. This experiment should be forbidden because I would never like to hear of a child being that deprived in my lifetime. It should not be forbidden in the case of the child, if this happens to be their case. I think that science and researchers should not be the ones involved in raising these children, I think it should be a parent, or guardian who is will to commit themselves to that child as though it was his or her own. I think the initial motive for the researchers was the desire to help. I think they saw the money that came in, it helped to fuel some greed. I think that the research was stopped because it has to get frustrating, and it would start to feel as progress has slowed or stopped. Sadly, the final results for Genie and Victor were that they were once deprived of were ripped away again. In some cases, I think that may have been harder than not having the attention at all.
ReplyDeleteThe most disturbing part for me was the reality check that there are parents out there, even today, who are depriving thier children of the love, affection, and happiness they deserve. No child asks to be born to a life that way. It is also disturbing to know that no one knew about these children. No family members reported it, no neighbor, no friends. At some point, someone must have known of these children, and no one asked any questions which may have helped them earlier in life.
Although I do not agree with the project being called a forbidden research I can see why some people do. Any research that is done with children people find to be wrong. I feel that the researchers were so curious and driven to figure out if people could learn late in life that they were willing to do whatever it took to figure this out. What really upset me was when David Wriggler became Genie's foster parent for four years, developed a terrific relationship with her, and then forced her to move on to her next foster home. I am not sure if what was done was right or not. On one hand Genie may have no communication skills if the researchers were not there to teach her but on the other hand, turning her into a study was not allowing her to have a normal childhood either. I agree with Shannon (above) about the most disturbing part being that no one noticed this. How was there a child out there that never attended school and no one knew about her or questioned her parents?
ReplyDeleteI found this documentary very disturbing. I can understand scientists wanting, even feeling the necessity, to study these individuals. However, I believe too much emphasis was placed on science and not enough on the intense care these individuals needed. I found the parents behavior toward Genie most disturbing. It is difficult to believe parents, who are supposed to be loving and caring, could treat their offspring in such a disgusting, revolting manner.
ReplyDeleteThis project was referred to as a forbidden experiment because it would be unethical and immoral to purposely isolate and mistreat a child just for the sake of experimentation. I do believe the original motivation of the scientists in Genie’s case was to care for her. However, there is a large difference between science and nurturing. The research stopped when the funding was lost. The only individual that really “lost” in this situation was Genie. She was placed in the social services system, moved around from one set of foster-parents to another and even placed with her mother for a time. This placed Genie, an emotionally fragile person, back into the same house where she was severely abused.
I do not know what would have been best for Genie. However, I truly hope this type of experiment will never take place again.
In the documentary “The Wild Child” I feel that both the researchers and the child benefitted from the experiment, because the child was able to learn more and have some freedom from when she lived with her parents, and the researchers were able to find out if someone can be taught at the first stages of a baby at an older age. This experiment could have been referred to as the Forbidden Experiment because maybe some researchers didn’t want the general public to know that there is a child out there like this and most would disagree with the extent of what was going on with the child. The motivation for the researchers with this was the child. I think they wanted to see if they could teach this child to walk, run, play, read, and talk. The reasoning why the case was stopped because they felt like nothing else could be done and funding was cut. I think the reasoning of the researchers was about the money and not the reasoning for the child. The final results for the child were to send Genie back to her mother, and when that didn’t work she was put in foster homes for the rest of her life. It was not the best result for Genie because she was abused and she kept moving from different foster homes. I feel as though the Dr.’s that were working with her and had a relationship with her should have tried to keep her in their home. What was disturbing about the documentary was Genie being found tied to a “potty chair” for most her child life, and having her be with people she grew to love, then to having her go back to her mother which didn’t last long, then to have to live in abusive foster homes throughout her life.
ReplyDeleteFor a little while both Genie and Victor benefited. They had the care and attention of other human beings which was something they had not had much of in their time in isolation. The children did learn to communicate with others whether it was words or sign language. The psychologists gained worldwide attention from the studies they did on these children. Once the funding ran out for Genie, the study ended as well. She became an inconvenience and was again lost in the system which put her back into isolation for the second time in her life. A project like this is called a “forbidden experiment,” because the testing they did was not really to help the individual but to gain knowledge and the person was not really considered a person they are considered lab rats and experimental material. There is no care or concern for their well-being. The motivation being a “wild child” could be taught to function in society and can they still be taught after being in isolation for so long. Research ended due to funding and the fact they couldn’t get her to put sentences together. She should have been sent to a home that could actually care for her to begin with. The most disturbing part of this is that these children were given care and attention while it benefited others and they were dropped once there was no more benefit for the doctors. How can you spend this much time with someone and not form a loving bond and then toss them back to the street?
ReplyDeleteI think that the research that was done on Genie started off great but started to decline after some years. Both Genie and Victor benefited from the research. Genie was capable of learning some things but not to its full extent and Victor was also learning things but was not able to learn them to there full extent. The children did gain some things from the research. Genie learned some sign language and was able to say words and knew what they meant, and Victor also learned what some words mean and the name of different objects. The psychologists gained newer information about a child that was denied social experience with others. A project like this would be referred to as a Forbidden Experiment because the patient was forbidden social experiences with others. I think that the motivation for the researchers was finding out if a child that was denied social experience with others is capable of developing communication skills. The research was stopped during Genies case because the research was not going anywhere. She was not learning anything new. The case was stopped during Victor’s case because the researcher did not want to continue. The reasoning that I found disturbing about the researchers was that they could have used more patience with Genie. The final results of Genie’s case was that she went to different foster homes and ended up in an Adult care facility. This was not the best scenario for Genie. She should not have gone to different foster homes. She needed to be with someone that would care for her, teach her new things and have a lot of patience. What I found most disturbing about this case was that Genie ended up in an Adult care facility.
ReplyDeleteSara Hilton
ReplyDeleteThere are many reasons why the project involving in “Genie” was referred to as the Forbidden Experiment. The main issue was the fact that they were experimenting on a child. Genie was only 12-14 years old when she was taken from her home where she was held in her bedroom and placed under the care of the scientists. The scientists each had different points to prove to help prove their scientific stand point. There were many theory’s scientist where either trying to prove or disprove with Genie. One scientist wanted to prove that after children hit puberty if language wasn’t all ready learned it would be impossible to completely learn a language. Another point scientists where fighting with was Genie born with a mental retardation or did she become that way because of the abuse she experienced. With the abuse other scientists wanted to prove that if a child is abused so long what the statistics would look like. But the main topic researches and scientists battled with was could a wild child like Vector or Genie be rehabilitated enough to rejoin society and succeed. Research with both Vector and Genie ultimately stopped when scientists where no longer provided with money for research because statistics and research showed that it was highly unlikely that the Wild Children could not be placed back into society. Personally I found the research interesting, but I don’t believe they did it with the children’s best intentions involved. The researchers seemed more concerned about the statics and outcomes of each experiment rather than the heart of the wild child. With the case of Vector he was never brought into society like the movie had suggested. He was put in a hospital ward after research was over and died at the age forty. For Genie it was a lot worse. She was sent back to life with her psycho mom/grandmother that she was originally taken away from because “only the husband did the abuse.” Then to make matters worse she was then foster care where she was abused more. I believe they finally took her back to the deaf hospital and she was placed in homes like that. We do now know if she is alive or dead as of date. I would say Vector was better off then Genie because he wasn’t abused. To make Genie’s situation better they should not have put her back with her mom/grandmother or put her in foster homes. She should have been placed somewhere where she had access to help she needed, with someone who understood the situation and knew how to take care of her. There was a lot of disturbing facts in the experiment. Like the fact that someone would even abuse a child in the first place. But the thing I find most horrible was the fact that the researcher took Genie in as his own child. Let her live with his family made millions off her. Then when the grants stopped kicked her out. That’s the most appalling information. I don’t know if research on children shouldn’t be done. But there should definitely be limitations and ethics involved. That is my view on the Wild Children, Genie and Vector.
In the movie Wild Child (Nova 2006), I think that the children, Victor and Genie did benefit for a short period of time with this research because they were shown attention and love and also compassion. The psychologists main thing to gain was mainly notoriety or just the fascination of being able to see these children and if they could really improve. They cared more about their own professional careers and themselves mainly, than the affect on the children. This experiment could be referred to as a forbidden experiment in many ways because for one thing in Genie’s case the child was living with the researcher and was put under extensive pressure to learn to communicate. The motivation for the researchers was mainly the prestige, the money, and wanting to see how the children would react. I don’t see how the scientists had the best interests of the children in mind while wanting to conduct the experiments. The research stopped because for Victor he was let go, probably because he progress was slow, and Etaire was tired of the research, and in Genie’s case, her project was dropped because it lost funding and after that the Riggler’s no longer wanted to take care of her. I thought the reasoning of the scientists was cruel and selfish because their focus was on themselves and what they wanted and not on Genie or Victor. The final result for Victor was that he died in his early forties and was abandoned. Genie she went on from different foster homes was abused, is now living in California in an Adult care institution. It was not a good solution for either of them they should have been seriously cared for by people and probably could have continued to improve instead of being tossed aside when research money ran out or when the researchers were tired. The most disturbing part for me was the fact that because the funding ran out and the fact that they just got tired of taking care of Genie meant that they could just give her up and let her go back into the social service system and all of that work and progress that she made was not continued and in the end it seemed that it was all for nothing. People gave up on Genie and that is probably why she is in an adult care facility today and people also gave up on Victor as well.
ReplyDeleteIn the film 'Wild Child' by NOVA there were many thing I found disturbing.
ReplyDeleteIf the researchers wanted to test the nature vs. nuture why didn't they place Victor or Genie in a family setting. The ugly truth is that none of them were interested in anything but gaining possible money and fame that would come if they were able to succeed.
The most distrubing to me was the fact that with Genie the same mistake of taking the child into a researcher/therapists home was repeated. Only for her it was even worse because she was shown what she had missed out on and then had it ripped away because there was no longer a movtive to keep her as part of the child. I do wonder how often any of the young researchers think back and and wonder if they had only let her be part of a family.....?
The film "Wild Child" is a forbidden experiment produced by NOVA. I found that this film is very disturbingly cruel.Anyone in the right state of mind knows that humans cannot be isolated and live like animals. God created human beings to be different from animals. He created human in his image. One of our trait that makes humans different from animal is our intellect and emotions. I could only think of one reason why researchers would want to use humans for experiment, to prove that humans and animals are related. It's about time that researchers put a stop to this research because it is unthinkable and disturbing.Researchers also prove that through Genie's research that ,after all, humans have the ability to learn and communicate with other humans.
ReplyDeleteI think everyone involved benefitted from the research, the psychologist, Genie and Victor. Genie and Victor where given the attention they so badly needed. They also were taught skills to help them communicate with others. The psychologists were able to research and study the behavior of a child kept from society for so long and then brought into society not knowing how to communicate.
ReplyDeleteI do believe the children gain a lot from these studies. They were giving lots of attention which was something neither had. Both were being loved like children should be. And they were taught things, like how to sign so they would communicate with others.
The psychologists who were involved gained knowledge on what happens to a child if they are not introduced to their surroundings and other people from birth. They also learned first-hand how they must take baby steps with someone who is kept from society.
Maybe the project was referred to as a forbidden experiment because everyone has rights, even a child who cannot communicate. And being that the children could not communicate who was standing up for them?
I think the motivation for the research was to help the children learn and to become part of society. Also to see if a child kept locked up for so long can catch up to where they should be and live a normal life.
I believe the research stopped in Genie case because the funding was cut and she did not seem to be learning anything new. With Victor, his care giver/researcher did not want to continue. I think the researchers for Genie were upset when the funding was cut. I believe that they would have continued if the money was there for the research.
After the research ended for both children the final results were not good. Victor ended up in a hospital ward where he stayed until he died. Genie first went back with her mother but her mother did not want her. She then went from foster family to foster family where she was abused more until she was placed in an adult care institution. I do not believe this was the best possible scenario for either of them. They could have been placed in a home for children with disabilities, where they would have continued to learn how to communicate and maybe take care of themselves.
The most disturbing thing about this documentary is the fact that there are people who would treat a child or anyone of any age like they did in the documentary. There are many childless people who would give anything to have a child. If they did not want the responsibility of taking care of their child then give the child up. Even a child with a disability can and should have a family to love and take care of them.
If a child is isolated for a lengthy amount of time, they do not learn the socialization skills needed to communicate with the world. They do not know how to act, talk, or feel around other people so they will remain isolated. We as adults need to teach our children how to interact with others. I feel that both Genie and the psychologist benefited from this experiment, because Genie learned to socialize and communicate with others even if it wasn’t exactly how most people do it, and the psychologist gained fame or recognition. I believe the project was referred to the forbidden experiment, because even though it seemed people were helping the children they were also mentally hurting them. I feel the only reason the researchers did this experiment was for the money. The research stopped as soon as they ran out of money. In the end Genie was bounced around from home to home due to the fact she was abused and moved, abused and moved. This was not the best scenario, she was tortured her whole life. The most disturbing part was she was taken in, grew attached and thrown away because the money stopped coming in.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that a child who is kept from socialization from early on in life can develop communication skills beyond childhood years. I believe that a child needs the nurturing of their parents in order to function. In the research documentary “The Wild Child” I believe that both Gene and the Researchers both benefited from the research. It benefited, Gene in the way that she was taken out of an abusive situation. It benefited the Researches I believe by the money they received. The children did gain some from these studies; they received attention for a time. The researchers received important data. A project like this probably is called The Forbidden Experiment for the reason that they were playing with the children’s lives. They stopped the experiments I believe because they could not provide any more results therefor the money ran out. My perception of the researchers is that they used the children for their own purposes and did not have any concern for the children. Gene ended up in foster home after foster home due to abuse. She finally ended up in a home. What I found most disturbing was how the researchers just threw away Gene after the money ran out.
ReplyDeleteI found this movie to be both sad and potentially insightful for future advancements in treating children in such situations. NOVA was trying to provide information about nature vs. nurture. If a child is neglected and not socialized or even talked to for any significant amount of time, it brutally harms their progression if life. Children need stimulation for many different sources as well as the simple touch and love of another human. Genie did not recieve any attention, which caused her to be mentally ill. I think that taking her in and teaching her how good life can be was a great thing, and wish that it did not end for her. It was a sad outcome for so much work, time and effort put in by many medical professionals just because there was no more funding for the project to continue.
ReplyDeleteI found this documentary very disturbing. I can understand scientists wanting, even feeling the necessity, to study these individuals. However, I believe too much emphasis was placed on science and not enough on the intense care these individuals needed. I found the parents behavior toward Genie most disturbing. It is difficult to believe parents, who are supposed to be loving and caring, could treat their offspring in such a disgusting, revolting manner.
ReplyDelete