Analysis: the Black Balloon - Case Study Example

?Case analysis: the Black Balloon Introduction How difficult is it to cope with an unexpected challenge? Would adjusting to a new responsibility prove tiring and difficult? Is it possible to take complete responsibility of an individual who cannot take care of his own self? These are some of the questions that seek to highlight the enormous challenges faced by the character, Thomas Mollison, in the move titled ‘The Black Balloon’. This case analysis focuses on a number of aspects and issues pertaining to Thomas’ character. In addition to portraying some of the difficulties witnessed by Thomas, the study utilizes several psychosocial aspects from the movie to explain relevant developmental issues. In this context, the study uses information from numerous peer-reviewed articles that were published in the recent past on related subjects. Background of the movie The movie portrays an unconventional and harrowing depiction of an average Australian family comprising two sons. The elder one among the two, Charlie Mollison, suffers from severe autism in addition to an acute for of attention deficit hyperactivity. The story begins when the family shifts to Sydney with the younger son, Thomas, trying to fit into the local community. Meanwhile, his mother becomes pregnant and has to take rest, which implies that she cannot take independent care of Charlie. The responsibility now lies with Thomas to take care of his elder brother, which soon proves to be one of the biggest challenges in his life (Ebert 2010, p. 97). The movie’s director, Elissa Down, says that she drew inspiration for the film from her own experiences during childhood having grown up with two brothers who suffered from autism. In fact, Elissa depicted her younger brother in the character of the autistic Charlie as someone who was often quite and communicated mostly by way of signs. When calm, Charlie is known to be cheerful and cuddly and expresses himself through wheezing grunts. However, he tends to get agitated easily, which induce him into making loud and disgruntled noises with disturbing intensity. In fact, he tends to throw unimaginable tantrums and often resorts to agitated behavior when in a disturbed state. As a result, the film tends to project Charlie’s complex and difficult personality that is exacerbated by his autistic disability (Ebert 2010, p. 97-100). Nevertheless, the focus of this case study is the character of Thomas, the younger brother. While he loves his brother, his growing complexity and unruly behavior makes him feel embarrassed on several occasions. In fact, he grows into a shy adolescent who has trouble taking swimming lessons at his new school and is unable to remain afloat during classes on lifesaving (Ebert 2010, p. 99). In fact, his embarrassment for Charlie evolves to such an extent that he tried to conceal him from sight when an attractive young girl named ‘Jackie Masters’ approaches him. Character Analysis: Thomas Thomas Mollison is a shy 15-year old kid who has initial issues with adjusting to a new environment. As a new kid at school, he takes some time to accommodate himself, as everything is very different than what he was used to earlier. Besides being embarrassed by his brother’s autistic behavior, Thomas is also bullied by the people around him. He witnesses frequent quarrels with neighbors who complain of the extreme noise level and threaten to call the cops. However, not many realize that there was a person with autism living in the house. Thomas is also angered at this apathy among his neighbors who do not seem to understand the difficulty in living with autistic person, especially with a baby expected in the next few months. Thomas’ disgust and embarrassment towards his brother were feelings that appear to have evolved over time. Incidents such as the one where Thomas had to run after his fleeing brother in his underwear, only to find him reliving himself in a stranger’s toilet, must have made him very angry and resentful. Charlie also threw many tantrums at the local supermarket causing other people to stare at both brothers. In fact, he had to be dragged out from the store amidst violent screams much to the dismay of his brother. In one of the most repellent cases, Thomas finds Charlie smearing his feces on himself and on the floor carpet. The thought of cleaning this mess makes Thomas feel entrapped in his brother’s weird world, which he resents to the core. Thomas was also cut off from Charlie by the latter’s actions such as masturbating in front of their mother or running away with her tampon in his mouth. Charlie would also spit at people to everyone’s surprise, which proved to be another major reason for Thomas’s embarrassment and discomfort. Perhaps the most important factor that enhanced Thomas’ discomfort was the way in which his parents reacted in response to Charlie’s behavior. There was simply no room for more drama in the Mollisons’ home and Charlie was taking away all the attention from his parents. Despite his disruptive behavior, Charlie’s parents were unconditional in their support for him and always preached to Thomas that one must take care of one’s own. Thomas further felt aggravated even before his girlfriend, Jackie, on account of Charlie’s actions and longed for his brother to be normal just so he could have a normal relationship with everyone. Thomas is also annoyed by the fact that his parents resorted to using sing language to communicate with Charlie and often treated him like a baby. Thomas is also entrusted with the task of taking Charlie on the bus, which adds further to his discontent. Jackie plays a pivotal role in helping Thomas through this grueling challenge by helping him understand that Charlie’s actions were not intentional and that he would always behave in ways considered abnormal. Jackie goes beyond providing simple moral support by taking care of Charlie and standing up against those who tried to bully him. She gradually convinces Thomas and makes him realize that Charlie would continue to act in this peculiar way and that there was nothing that anyone could do about it. Influences of other Characters The movie offers a nerve wrenching insight into a modern household that deals with psychosocial issues like autism. Despite being pregnant, the boys’ mother, Maggie, does not want to rest as recommended by her doctors in order to take care of Charlie. When she eventually had to go to the hospital to give birth, the father, Simon Mollison, wrongly assumes that the Thomas could take care of his brother. In contrast, Charlie becomes hyperactive and wreaks havoc on Thomas while their parents were away. Besides projecting the wild behavior of autistic Charlie, the movie successfully portrays the blooming love between Thomas and Jackie filled with strains of innocence and tenderness. Nevertheless, the primary element in the move is the character of the mother. The character of Maggie can be regarded as the most complex individual in the story who displays strong courage and dedication in bringing up her elder son. By way of sheer determination, Maggie has been able to overcome chaos and disarray through most part of Charlie’s life (Lloyd & Hastings 2009). In this context, the surge in Charlie’s disoriented behavior, during the absence of his mother, signifies the lack of control and experience on the part of Thomas besides highlighting the determination necessary to take care of such individuals. Psychosocial perspectives in the movie According to Volkmar (2001, p. 25), people suffering from Autism tend to keep to themselves and remain cut off from others. In the movie, Charlie is known to be an emotional character, although he likes to be so on his own terms. Growing up must have been difficult for Thomas with another disabled sibling at home. Constant attention for Charlie must have meant that Thomas was unable to derive the full attention of his mother over the years and must have felt abandoned during this period. Achenbach (2005, p. 65-68) notes that it is tough to be a sibling of someone who has special needs. While there is no doubt that Thomas loved his brother and would protect him in all circumstances, it is also apparent that he grew frustrated with frequent embarrassments. Perry (2005, p. 109) says that in a family like the Mollisons, the child with special needs requires extensive parental care. As he grew up, Thomas must have wanted his parents to care and worry for him just as they did for Charlie. Jordan (2001, p. 154-156) introduced another argument by saying that siblings of children with special needs feel like they have to maintain a tighter oversight over their personality (Mandelco et al. 2003). While Charlie threw constant tantrums and would yell annoyingly, he could still get away with it unpunished since he did not have much control over his own self. Thomas, on the other hand, could not resort to such behavior and was expected to maintain control over his feelings like other normal children. Such stricter control within the home environment can also be another important factor that adds up to this frustration. As a result, Chakrabarti (2005) believes that living and negotiating through daily life in Thomas’ case turned into a complex web of several emotions. Several studies have been undertaken previously to understand the effects of having children with special needs in a family. Many of these studies focus on the impact of disabled children on their siblings whereby the conclusions are largely based on specific cases and are not based extensively on any objective frameworks. Some studies such as those by Cooper, Morrison (2006) have utilized control groups in understanding effects on siblings and have identified a number of interesting conclusions. Primarily, the findings indicate that families such as the Mollisons have a number of problems to deal with. Ignoring even a single element in this scenario is capable enough to exaggerate the role of the disabled child as a major cause in these problems. Secondly, most of these studies tend to collectively focus on multiple forms of autism and may therefore be partially appropriate in some cases. Volkers (2007, p. 153-155) observes that parents often worry that their children (normal) may be at a risk of developing complexities due to the presence of autistic siblings around them, which often induced numerous behavioral issues in the normal child. In the case of the Black Balloon, Thomas did indeed have some behavioral issues although there is no indication to suggest that his parents were particularly worried about the effects of Charlie’s behavior on him. Studies by Trevartehen (2008) on children with disabilities like Down’s syndrome, Cerebral Palsy and Spina Bifida have noted many behavioral issues among siblings, which were deteriorating rapidly in the absence of proper care. He further found that as many as 60% of the siblings themselves suffered from learning difficulties. However, it is not very clear if such difficulties are genetically related to the disabled child or whether they are induced from the stress of having to live with an impaired child. In the case of Thomas, he had clearly evolved into a shy individual owing to his perceived embarrassments and also due to a constant feeling of being overshadowed by his sibling within his family (Baldridge, Eddleston & Veiga 2006). This may also suggest that Thomas was at the far end of his brother’s condition, which means that he was also susceptible to some of the problems exhibited by Charlie. In the case of the Mollisons, this certainly seems to be the case especially when Charlie came under the supervision of his brother. However, there is no indication to suggest whether any genetic factors were influential in Thomas’ mental state and his perception of Charlie. The question of whether Thomas’ behavior was influenced by environmental or genetic factors is therefore unclear. Thomas also shows certain tendencies of fear and guilt as though he may have been responsible for Charlie’s mental condition in some way. Siegel (2006, p. 56) specifies several fears among such siblings, which eventually affect their very own behavior. While Thomas clearly felt being treated unfairly by his parents, he was able to understand his mistakes and see reason in Charlie’s situation with the help of his girlfriend. As evident in Thomas’s case, Brill (2001, p. 87) finds that siblings do not like to be given more household tasks let alone take care of their impaired siblings for longer periods of time. Besides the effort and attention that one needed to spend upon Charlie, Thomas was also not happy with this responsibility, as he was aware of Charlie’s tantrums. Altiere & Kludge (2009) add that most of this work is normally handled by the mother in the family. As a result, the normal sibling does not have a clue of the amount of effort that it takes to bring up a disabled child. Once such responsibilities fall unto them, the enormity of the task and the patience necessary to handle it effectively has an eventual toll on the normal sibling. This clearly was the situation in Thomas’ case. Based on the Childhood theory proposed by Sigmund Freud, it appears that Thomas has successfully passed through the oral and anal stages of psychosexual activity. It is however evident that Thomas had issued during the latency stage when he entered school and became more involved at determining hobbies, interests and peer relationships (Barkway 2009, p. 6). The constant influence of his brother seems to have affected his intellectual pursuits, which eventually limited his social interactions. As a result, he was low on self-confidence and self-esteem besides having problems in expressing himself effectively. His problems were only resolved during the subsequent genital stage wherein he started to care about the welfare of others with help from his girlfriend. Thus, it was a while before he transformed into a warm and caring person. Thomas’s growing frustration towards his brother and his eventual outbursts can be explained by Jean Piaget’s theory on the cognitive development of children. According to him, cognitive development occurs through the assimilation and accommodation of schemas as perceived by the child. Here, schemas refer to sections of knowledge that help us categorize and understand the world around us (Barkway 2009, p. 24). In the case of Thomas, his schema on Charlie was constantly building up into a negative image. As he experienced more of his tantrums, Thomas assimilated his actions to contribute to this schema. As the years passed by, Thomas’ attitude and mental perception of his brother grew stronger although a different side of him continued to love him. Thomas’s behavior can also be explained through Erikson’s psychosocial stage theory. At each stage identified by this theory, the main criterion is the successful development of an ego identity. If the stage is handled inadequately, the individual may emerge with varying degrees of role confusion. It appears that Thomas’ issues began during psychosocial stage 4 (Industry versus Inferiority). During this stage, children feel a sense of pride and confidence upon being encouraged by their parents for their achievements (2009, p. 44). Thomas’s parents were too pre-occupied with Charlie, which implies they could not devote much time to motivate his skills. Similar experiences with peers and teachers must have instilled doubts in his ability, which turned him into a shy introvert. Mesibov (2004, p. 168) has introduced another psychological elements in such households and believes that the presence of a sibling introduced added stress on the part of the normal child. The latter may feel the need to work harder and over-achieve in order to compensate for the limitations of their affected siblings. Thomas was bound by such a condition and was always under constant compulsion to provide emotional support to his parents or attend to the needs of his ailing brother. Unsurprisingly, these events generated enormous hostility and resentment for his brother although he managed to adjust and adapt well to the greatest extent possible. However, his feelings of shame and embarrassment are more visible unlike conclusions made by researchers like Symon (2001), who say that social contracts among siblings under such situations remain strong and largely unaffected. McGrath (2006) believes it is possible that Thomas’ parents may have assumed that any resentment or conflict would be resolvable and that Thomas was mature enough to understand his brother’s condition (Gray 2006). According to Brill (2001, p. 84), the risks of frustration and difficulties to siblings tend to be greatest among smaller families. The risks tend to be higher especially among siblings who have a smaller age gap and in families with just two children. The major reason provided for this tendency is that larger families have more capacity in sharing the burden, which can help accommodate for any deficiencies in parental attention (Lin et al. 2011). Moreover, more family members implies parents have a better support structure to help them overcome the sorrow of having an impaired child at home as they can find happiness in the normal growth of other children in the family. Besides fulfilling all these aspects, Thomas was also younger than Charlie and therefore had to miss out on some of the parental care that would normally have been accorded to him. Once again, the risks of fallout among siblings tend to be higher as the age gap reduces. Schopler (2003, p. 159) further states that the problems tend to be exacerbated when the normal sibling happens to be male since they are inexperienced and under-equipped at normal chores within the house. Based on these arguments, it is evident that Thomas was indeed influenced by all these characteristics, which subsequently forced him to act with hostility against his brother during the initial part of the story. Conclusion The preceding sections have highlighted some of the key psychosocial factors that played a key role in shaping the attitude, thinking and behavior of Thomas Mollison with respect to his impaired brother, Charlie. The analysis has depended on numerous conclusions from previous studies to draw comparisons and information on the film’s various characters and examined the ways in which these affected Thomas. In addition to being frustrated by his brother’s tantrums, it appears that Thomas was also influenced by the greater care his brother was receiving at home. It is possible that a growing hostile nature in Thomas could have been genetic in nature given his sibling’s antics, although this is not verifiable within the context of a movie. It also seems that Thomas was not prepared either mentally or physically to take care of his brother. The whole episode of his mother requiring rest seemed like a major responsibility had been thrust on him without a moment’s notice. In the end, Thomas was successful in fulfilling his duties as a brother and empathizes with his skewed world with the help of his girlfriend. References Achenbach, T 2005, Child Behavior Checklist For Ages 1 ? - 5, University of Vermont. Altiere, M & Kludge, S 2009, Searching for acceptance: Challenges encountered while raising a child with autism, Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 142-152. Baldridge, D Eddleston, K & Veiga, J 2006, Saying no to being uprooted: The impact of family and gender on willingness to relocate, p. 131-149. Barkway, P 2009, Psychology for health professionals, Elsevier Australia, Sydney. Brill, T 2001, Keys to parenting the child with autism, Barron's Educational Series, London. Chakrabarti, S 2005, Pervasive developmental disorders in preschool children: confirmation of high prevalence. American Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 151, p. 1217-1225. Cooper, S, Morrison, J 2006, Improving the health of people with intellectual disabilities: outcomes of a health screening programme after 1 year, Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 45(3), 651-656. Gray, D 2006, Coping over time: the parents of children with autism, Journal of intellectual Disability Research, volume 50, part 12, December, pp 970-976. Jordan, R 2001, Initiating and developing communication in individuals with ASDs, Society for Austism Awareness, Chicago. Lin, L, Orsmond, G, Coster, W, & Cohn, E 2011, Families of adolescents and adults with autism spectrum disorders in Taiwan: The role of social support and coping in family adaptation and maternal well-being, Electronic journal of Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, vol. & no. unknown, (online Science Direct) Lloyd T & Hastings RP, 2009, Parental locus of control and psychological well-being in mothers of children with intellectual disability, Journal of Intellectual & developed Disability, Vol.34, No.2, pp.104-115, viewed 3 May 2011, (Informa healthcare). Mandleco, B, Olsen, S, Dyches, T, & Marshall, E 2003, The Relationship between Family and Sibling Functioning in Families: Raising a Child with a Disability, Journal of Family Nursing, vol.9, no.4, p.365-396, (online Science Direct) McGrath, P 2006, Psychosocial Issues in Childhood Autism Rehabilitation: A Review, Viewed 27th Sepbember, 2011, Mesibov, G 2004, The Effects of autism on the family, Springer, New York. Perry, A 2005, TRE-ADD Autism Knowledge Quiz. Thistletown Regional Centre for Children and Adolescents, Routledge, London. Schopler, E 2003, Autism in adolescents and adults, Springer, New York. Siegel, B 2006, The world of the autistic child: understanding and treating autistic spectrum disorders, University of California. Symon, JB 2001, Parent education for autism: Issues in providing services at a distance. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, Vol. 5, p. 172-186. Trevartehen, C 2008, Children with autism: diagnosis and interventions to meet their needs, Jessica Kingsley Publishers, Chicago. Volkers, H 2007, What You Should Know about Autism Spectrum Disorders, Cranendonck Coaching, London. Volkmar, FR 2001, Children with Autism: A Parent’s Guide, Woodbine House, New York. Ebert, R 2010, Movie Yearbook, Andrews McMeel Publishing, New York. Read More