Fight or flight (ForF) is the ultimate biological dichotomy. When threatened we choose between engaging in the confrontation or running from the situation.
There’s plenty of online reference for ForF if you want to study this concept in depth. Briefly, in a very deep part of the human brain – the part that is most similar to animal brains – brain cells (neurons) fire in response to threat.
The ForF neurons are basic to survival as threat means threat to life. This essay is an explanation of ForF and what this innate neurological response means in early child development.
ForF as a dichotomy is an incomplete picture of its effects. Smack dab in the middle of the two responses is the decision moment for which direction to go.
In some people the decision moment extends to a longer time. They are frozen in the face of danger. The frozen moments or freezing in the face of danger might be fatal for some. Moviemakers take advantage of this concept by scripting who will win and who will be struck-down. The winners in movies are not frozen for moments and they move extraordinarily faster with the use of technology in moviemaking.
Alternatively and outside of scripted conflict, some people might, in those frozen moments, allow the cortex to take over – to give the brain a chance to analyze the situation and make a plan, explore the environment for tools or options, call for help.
Taking a moment to think through a situation, keeping thinkers alive, is likely a learned behavior. The winners in the movies represent people who have trained to react quickly under threatening circumstances. Frozen moments might mean you either lose-out by hesitating or survive through thinking.
Having identified a middle point between two ends, think of the ForF response as a continuum. Imagine a horizontal line:
fight _____________decision point_______________flight
The continuum model for ForF is substantiated if more behaviors are identified between two of the three points. The continuum model of ForF also requires a broad definition of threat.
Threat may not be just to a person’s life or survival, but to their sense of well-being. Giving credence to threats-to-well-being also presupposes that the ForF neurons are engaged with less-than survival threat.
Do you ever feel threatened, having a physical response, while in your mind you are certain that you will not die from the threat? Many people report physical responses to situations that are not life threatening. Likely, those physical responses involve the firing of ForF neurons.
A threat to well-being could be a person. Can you think of people that you avoid? What happens when you are unexpectedly in the presence of someone who makes you very uncomfortable, someone who you have learned will threaten your self-image by verbally demeaning you? You could fight or flee in this circumstance. You might extend the decision point to allow the threatening-person to show you a different behavior. In this way, you move along the continuum illustrated above, to the left or right. You talk with the person before fleeing, or before the inevitable fight or disagreeable conversation [argument].
Strictly speaking, ForF is the reflexive response to threat, but with experience, we can learn to extend the decision point in order to allow for a variety of behaviors before fleeing or fighting.
I had my own ForF experience recently. I volunteered to be on a committee at my child’s school [walking into a known jungle, voluntarily]. Also on the committee is a person I know to be difficult to talk with – not that the person is threatening, but this person talks incessantly about herself and her medical problems. Her behavior has consistently been counterproductive to decision-making whenever I have observed her. She requires inordinate amounts of time of the polite people to listen to her.
Her behaviors bother my efficiency-well-being a lot. I did not want to be confronted by this person alone, even on the telephone. I avoided contact with this person, purposely communicated with this person through other people, used email to avoid a real-time conversation with this person.
Then the day came that this person called me on the phone. I had a ForF response. My heart raced, I began sweating, the volume of my voice increased and vibrated with emotion. I felt threatened and I wanted more than anything to flee the situation, or I would have to [verbally] fight. Prior experience told me that fighting would be useless – no clear winner – or essentially a losing proposition.
Fleeing was not winning, but winning was not important, self-preservation, relief from the threat was most important to me. I gave deflective responses to this person’s demanding questions. “Another person has offered to do that part of the committee work. You can discuss your concerns at the next meeting.” In the end, I could only say goodbye and end the conversation. Having run-out of mid-continuum options, I chose flight.
Back to the basis of ForF… Parts of the sensory system feeds into the ForF part of the brain. Specifically, the tactile or touch sensory receptors, and the less-commonly-known vestibular (balance) and proprioception (limb awareness) receptors are the first systems to develop-to-function in babies. These three sensory systems are basic to or underlie learning through the more commonly-known senses – vision and hearing.
The senses of smell (olfactory) and taste (gustatory) are closely related to the survival senses of tactile, vestibular and proprioception. To restate this inexact timeline concept for the development of the senses:
1) The ForF part of the brain functions first and for survival. The ForF part of the brain functions before the cortex or thinking part of the brain. Behavior that results from this part of the nervous system is sometimes called ‘reflexive’ or it happens without thinking.
2) Sensory impulses from the skin (all dermis), from the vestibular receptors in the inner ear, and proprioceptive receptors in the muscles and joints are received into the ForF part of the brain. Most babies are born with predictable responses to touch and movement experienced through carrying in the inner ear, and through movement of the limbs through care by adults. The predictable responses of most babies are functional or serve to help the baby survive.
3) From the ForF part of the brain where sensory signals are received, new nerve impulses are then sent back to the body to cause the predictable survival-promoting responses that most babies show.
Gradually, the sensory-generated nerve impulses begin to go to other parts of the brain before going back to the body for a reflexive response. In this way, the experiences of the baby and the maturation of nervous system contribute to brain development.
Brain development starts with conception and all parts of a person’s brain are affected by inherited genetic potential. If genetic or DNA formation does not support typical development, it is possible that the ForF cells do not function as they should. Also, at any point in early development, some type of injury might interrupt typical neural development causing the ForF cells to not function as they should. Poor nutrition or severe restriction of sensory experience can cause the ForF cells to function improperly.
We can theorize on the behavioral evidence of poorly functioning ForF cells. Perhaps sensations that other people think are normal seem threatening to a person with an over-reactive ForF response.
Infants with diagnoses cry often and with the least provocation. Some young children do not develop the ability to accommodate sensory experiences (typical development) – perhaps their brains fail to connect to the moderating neurons located in the cortex.
Think of the young child who cannot bear for his hair to be cut. He might perceive the haircut as painful, or his neural system is such that his sensory system triggers a fight or flight response when his hair is cut.
A threat to well-being could be a change in environment. Learn about Andy, who had a melt down when he was served rectangular pizza instead of the familiar round.
The children who are hypersensitive to certain sensory experiences could be triggering a ForF response. Along the ForF continuum, each of us has some individual reaction to people or situations – a reaction that has a decision moment and is a result of how our brain is wired or developed from infancy.
Babies and young children learn a lot from their parents’ responses to threat or stress.
The typical brain maturation of new connections from sensory centers to cortical areas is concomitant to infant care provided by parents. Attentive parents report being able to distinguish different cries from their babies. Crying is a primary means for a baby to communicate distress – no matter the source of threat.
Think about what a baby learns when she cries and no comfort comes. Parents should not be concerned about “spoiling” a baby. In the first year, an infant needs to learn security from caring people who bring comfort in times of threat.
Responding quickly and consistently to the cries of an infant promote learning to wait for the response. This may seem counterintuitive, but it is true.
The more certain the baby is of a response, the more potential there is for the baby to wait for the response, for the baby to begin to extend the decision moment.
Hello there..
My son and myself have recently been diagnosed with retained moro reflexes..apparantly i Have at least one other retained reflex and my son 4 major ones in all..
We commenced with a method called brushing a few weeks ago which is meant to help to close on some level this reflex and move it on..as we are both in a very regular state of fight or flight with amplified senses and thus somewhat adrenaline bound..
I have heard since some mixed opinions on the wisdom of this method..through from it having been extremely succesful with some people through to it even being possibly dangerous to stimulate certain reflexes..
This has left me in some confusion..and so I am trying to gather an overview so that I can best move forward with more confidence..
and do the very best I can in the best interests of my little boy..and then myself in my body as the umbrella over him..
I would greatly appreciate it you had a moment to respond with any advice you may have.
With thanks
Sincerely Siobhan O'Leary-Wachs
Posted by: Siobhan | September 17, 2008 at 07:09 AM