Darby Saxbe, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences

Parenting makes the heart grow fonder, and the brain grow … smaller? Several studies have revealed that the brain loses volume across the transition to parenthood. But researchers like me are still figuring out what these changes mean for parents.

In a new study that looked at brain change in first-time fathers, my colleagues and I found that brain volume loss was linked with more engagement in parenting but also more sleep problems and mental health symptoms. These results might point to a cost of caregiving, traditionally shouldered by women but increasingly borne by men also.

Brain changes for mom come with new baby

Caring for an infant demands new motivations and skills, so it is no surprise that it might also sculpt the brain. Research in rodents first identified remodeling of both the structure and function of the brain during pregnancy and parenthood. A new body of research is unearthing similar effects in human parents, too.

In a pair of studies, researchers recruited first-time mothers for a brain scan that occurred before they became pregnant and then scanned them again a few months after birth. Gray matter – the layer of brain tissue that contains neuronal cell bodies – shrank in the mothers but not in a comparison group of women who did not become mothers.

Although a shrinking brain sounds bad, researchers theorized that this more streamlined brain could be adaptive, helping process social information more efficiently and therefore facilitating sensitive caregiving. In keeping with this hypothesis, studies have linked maternal brain changes with women's degree of attachment to infants and with their responses to images of their infants. Women who lost more gray matter volume also appeared more bonded with their babies.

New dads' brains change, too

Most studies of the parental brain have focused on women, but emerging evidence suggests that similar brain changes might occur in new fathers, too. My collaborators and I had previously identified brain volume loss in men transitioning to fatherhood, in similar parts of the brain that changed in mothers.

Before you picture the shrunken-head guy from the movie “Beetlejuice,” keep in mind that these changes were subtle. Fathers showed smaller, less statistically significant brain changes than mothers.

Dads vary in how invested they are in caring for the baby, so as a next step, we wanted to know how men's brain changes across the transition to fatherhood map onto their experiences of new parenthood.

To test this question, we looked more closely at 38 men we scanned in California before and after their baby's birth. During pregnancy and again at three, six and 12 months postpartum, we asked the fathers how they were feeling about their infants and how well they were sleeping. We also asked about their symptoms of depression, anxiety or other mental health problems.

As before, we saw significant prenatal-to-postpartum brain differences across the entire cortex, the outermost layer of the brain that carries out many higher-order functions, such as language, memory, problem-solving and decision-making. On average, men in our sample lost about 1% of their gray matter volume across the transition to parenthood.

Consistent with the research on mothers, men's brain volume reductions did indeed seem to track with their parenting. If men told us during pregnancy that they wanted to take more time off from work after the birth, and felt more bonded to their unborn child, they subsequently lost more gray matter volume, especially in the frontal and parietal lobes – parts of the brain involved in executive functioning and sensorimotor processing, respectively.

Greater volume loss also emerged among fathers who told us that they spent more time with their infants at three months postpartum, took more pleasure in interacting with their infants and experienced less parenting stress. Taken together, our results dovetailed with the prior studies of mothers and suggested that more motivated, hands-on fathers lost more gray matter volume across their transition to parenthood.

The plot thickened when we looked at mental health and sleep quality. Men who lost more brain volume also reported greater depression, anxiety, general psychological distress and worse sleep at both six and 12 months after birth. These results held up when we controlled for the same measures during pregnancy.

This finding provides a clue to a possible direction of causality: Rather than prenatal sleep problems or psychological distress predicting greater brain change, we found instead that fathers' gray matter volume loss preceded their postpartum sleep problems and mental health, above the effect of their well-being before birth.

Parenting comes with highs and lows

Importantly, this research is preliminary: We had a small sample of fathers who were willing to participate in our intensive research study. These results need to be replicated in larger and more representative groups of fathers.

Still, as one of the first longitudinal studies of male brain changes across the transition to first-time parenthood, our findings illustrate that perinatal brain changes may reflect both adaptation and vulnerability. The very same changes linked with fathers' greater investment in caregiving also seemed to heighten their risk of sleep trouble and mental health problems.

As any new parent will tell you, caring for an infant is a challenge. Becoming a parent forces a realignment of life priorities and can bring magic and meaning to everyday life. But parenting can also be dull, repetitive, lonely and draining.

Perhaps our findings in fathers point to a cost of caregiving, a burden that has long been familiar to mothers but may be increasingly shared by men as fathers step up their participation in hands-on parenting.

The take-home message here is not that men should stop caring for children. A slew of research suggests that children with involved fathers do better across the board: academically, economically and emotionally. And fathers themselves report that parenthood makes their lives richer and more meaningful.

Instead, results like these support public health priorities that invest in fathers – and parents in general – through policies that reduce stress for new parents in the first months after birth, such as paid leave and workplace efforts to normalize leave-taking among men.

Darby Saxbe, Professor of Psychology, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Peter Swire, Georgia Institute of Technology

What would you do if you had to vote in Congress on a crucial national security program, when you also knew that the FBI had systematically ignored privacy safeguards in the program for years? That was the choice that Congress faced in April, when it ultimately decided to reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA.

Section 702 originally became law in 2008, when a great deal of previously “foreign” surveillance had shifted to the United States. In the old days, the National Security Agency carried out its communications surveillance overseas, such as keeping an eye on China or the Soviet Union. By 2008, however, the most important national security surveillance was often obtained within the U.S., such as when emails came through the United States as part of internet traffic.

Section 702 addressed this mix of foreign and domestic data gathering. Under court-approved procedures, it allows the government to gather communications, but only where the target of the surveillance is a foreign person who is outside of the U.S. Although no court approval is needed when the NSA intercepts communications overseas, Section 702 requires court-approved safeguards when the information gathering occurs in the U.S.

Privacy violations

NSA surveillance triggered headlines in 2013 when the revelations by former agency contractor Edward Snowden showed that the amount and type of government surveillance had grown far beyond what even experts realized after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. I was honored to be named by President Barack Obama to a special Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies in 2013 to propose surveillance reforms. Our report was one of the sources for the USA Freedom Act of 2015, the biggest set of privacy reforms for surveillance since FISA was created in 1978.

Even after these reforms, however, two types of problems cast doubt on how the FBI in particular was using its FISA authorities. First, the FBI was not following the procedures required by the courts for accessing information about Americans in the Section 702 databases. As a result, the FBI conducted over 3 million searches of Americans' email and other records in 2021. After a public furor and changed policies, that number dropped to 119,383 in 2022.

Second, during the 2016 campaign, the FBI began an investigation into whether people associated with the Trump campaign were coordinating activities with the government of Russia, as part of what became known as the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. Although the Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz found “no evidence that the FBI consulted” with any political officials in opening its investigation, he found significant violations in FISA applications. These included submitting legal documents to judges with allegations that the FBI knew were incorrect. Horowitz also found that the incident highlighted the weakness of existing rules against a politically motivated investigation.

Renewal debate

The FISA 702 authority was set to expire at the end of 2023, but Congress extended the authority until April 19, 2024. Perhaps the biggest controversy was whether access to Americans' data in the 702 databases should be available only with a warrant issued by a judge, upon showing probable cause. Privacy advocates argued that such a warrant requirement would protect Americans' constitutional rights, while the government said the requirement would be unworkable in practice.

The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, an independent executive branch agency that makes nonbinding recommendations about privacy and civil liberties aspects of national security, split 3-2 in favor of requiring such a warrant.

In the House of Representatives, the motion to require a warrant resulted in a tie vote, falling short of the simple majority it needed to pass. The House eventually did reauthorize the FISA 702 program, by a vote of 273-14, but only for two years rather than the longer period sought by the administration. Soon after, as the deadline approached, the Senate approved the same law, 60-34.

Although the warrant requirement did not pass, the law included reforms that supporters said would address the flaws in the FBI's previous actions. House Speaker Mike Johnson published a list of 56 key reforms to make FISA more protective of privacy. Some of the reforms created new safeguards to limit the FBI's ability to query the 702 databases about Americans. Others created new rules to trigger congressional and senior administration scrutiny for sensitive investigations such as those affecting political officials.

Renewal fight, Round 2

Privacy advocates, however, have been far from satisfied with the new amendments to FISA. For instance, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, the Brennan Center for Justice and FreedomWorks issued a paper stating: “Making 56 ineffective tweaks to a fundamentally broken law is not reforming it.”

These sharply conflicting viewpoints put members of Congress into a difficult spot. Many felt that the FBI deserved stricter measures to hold it accountable for its serious legal violations. I share that concern. On the other hand, I have had the opportunity during the presidential review group process to learn how Section 702 is used to protect the national security of our country. In a statistic I find credible, 60% of the president's daily intelligence briefings in 2023 contained Section 702 information reported by the NSA.

The result, for now, is that Section 702 is due to expire in April 2026. Congress will once again confront a genuinely difficult challenge: how to protect U.S. national security while also upholding Americans' privacy and the rule of law.

Peter Swire, Professor of Law and Ethics, Georgia Institute of Technology

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Erik Olstad, University of California, Davis

Across much of the United States, spring is in full force. With warmer weather, people are taking their furry family members out on longer walks and spending more time outside. Alongside blooming flowers and trees, your pet might run into a small, unassuming grass seed pod known as a foxtail. Despite the cute name, foxtails can pose a major threat to your pet's health.

I am a veterinarian in California's Central Valley, and foxtails are a daily issue where I work, especially during the spring and summer months.

What exactly are foxtails?

A foxtail isn't a specific plant. It is a type of grass seed pod that resembles a fox's tail. Multiple species of grass can create this type of seed pod, and foxtails are found across much of the United States. Regions of the western U.S., especially California, have the most foxtails.

The outside of the foxtail is covered in small sticky hairs designed to stick to things. You can feel them yourself if you pull a foxtail off a plant. Rub your fingers against the seed one way, and then the other, and you'll feel that one direction is smooth and the other direction is sticky.

Foxtails aren't a big deal for people, as we don't have a lot of hair and tend to remove things that are itchy or painful, but it's a different story for pets.

A segment of the foxtail pod sticks to an animal's fur, where it's carried around until it eventually drops off and grows into grass. This sticky feature is great for the grass, as it helps spread the seeds around, but it also results in foxtail segments getting stuck to pets.

Once on the cat or dog, a segment of a foxtail can burrow into the skin, get stuck in the eyes, creep into ears, be inhaled into the nose, or even make its way into the lungs.

The health dangers of foxtails

The most common place where foxtails will burrow into a pet is the skin, especially in between dogs' toes. A foxtail embedded into the skin can cause irritation, redness, pain and infection. As the foxtail gets deeper into the skin, it brings harmful bacteria with it and creates a path of infection known as a draining tract.

If a foxtail makes it into a dog's or a cat's ear, the pet will likely start shaking its head back and forth – it might look like it has an ear infection. The embedded foxtail can cause discomfort and sometimes infection.

A foxtail can stick to a pet's eye tissues, especially in cats, and migrate around the outer portions of the eye or behind the third eyelid, which is the protective tissue near the inner corner of their eye. This will cause discharge from the eye and discomfort and may scratch the eye's surface.

One of the most serious locations for a foxtail is in the lungs. Dogs may inhale foxtails while running through fields and breathing hard. The foxtail can sometimes get stuck in the nose, which will cause the pet to sneeze and look uncomfortable. Occasionally, a piece of a foxtail makes its way into the lungs, which can result in severe infection, trauma and even death. Surgery and hospitalization are almost always required in these cases.

Foxtail symptoms

Pet owners can learn what symptoms to look out for in order to make sure their pet gets prompt care if they end up with a foxtail embedded somewhere.

If you see your dog or cat chewing on their paws, this might indicate that a foxtail has ended up in between the toes. Their paws may swell or grow red. If you see even a small pimplelike swelling in between your pet's toes, they may have a foxtail stuck in their paw.

If your pet is frequently shaking its head, this can indicate that a foxtail made its way into the ear canal. Drainage or discharge from the eye can indicate that foxtail may have made its way around the eye. Sneezing or pawing at the nose can mean the foxtail may have made its way into the nose. Foxtails in the ear canal, eyes or nose will need to be removed by a veterinarian.

Coughing or hacking might mean a foxtail has made it to the tissues around the throat or the tonsils, or even deeper into the lungs. Each one of these symptoms requires care from a veterinarian, as they can grow serious if left untreated.

Preventing foxtail risks

Foxtails are everywhere in the environment, but there are some preventive steps pet owners can take to minimize the risks to their pets.

If you have foxtails in your yard, you can remove them. Sometimes you can get rid of foxtails permanently, but this isn't always easy, as grasses are particularly good at reproducing and growing quickly.

Some locations have very few foxtails, while others have lots. Bring your pet to areas with fewer foxtails, if possible.

Some companies make mesh nets that can cover a dog's head to prevent exposure to the ears, nose, eyes and mouth. Pet boots can prevent foxtails from getting stuck in their paws.

Grooming your pet regularly may help catch foxtails before they burrow into the skin. Removing mats and unkempt fur can also help reduce the risk. If you get your pet examined at the vet at least once a year, the veterinarian may be able to find foxtails during these checkups before they escalate into a larger problem.

Foxtails are part of living in the United States. But a few simple steps can help keep pets safe while they enjoy the outdoors.

Erik Olstad, Health Sciences Assistant Professor of Clinical Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.