E D I T O R I A L

Of Voks and M m

e has been described as the male model for H the nineties: “Testosterone may course through his body, but he’s affectionate and nurturing. He cuddles with his mate and rarely ogles another female. He even does his fair share of the child rear- ing. . . .” (Touchette, 1994). Who is he? The prairie vole-a mouselike rodent whose life-style has made scientific news.

Prairie voles have a social structure unique among mammals, which mimics the family values espoused by humans. Voles have monogamous relationships and live in two-parent families, in which both partners spend equal time caring for the children. The kids live at home until ready to form their own unions. Prairie voles have a strict incest taboo, and sexual activity among family members is rare (Touchette, 1994).

Two hormones have been linked to the vole’s en- during monogamy and nurturing parental behavior, namely oxytocin and vasopressin. Oxytocin is well- known to perinatal nurses for its use in stimulating contractions, inducing labor, and triggering the let- down response. Vasopressin acts on vascular smooth muscle cells by constricting vessels and thereby af- fecting blood pressure. In the prairie vole, however, oxytocin and vasopressin have been found to regulate both mating and parenting behaviors (Insel & Sha- piro, 1992; Wang, Ferris, & De Vries, 1994).

Is there a biologic basis for these social behaviors in humans as well? Researchers would caution correctly that any human behavior has many influ- ences; mating and parenting are unlikely to be simply neurochemical. Scientists would tell us that the find- ings on the voles cannot be generalized to humans. We are, after all, different from voles.

Although it is reckless to speculate, the findings do capture the imagination. A colleague once con- fided that her husband complained about baby-sitting

while she worked. “When it’s your own children,” she retorted, “it’s not called baby-sitting, it’s called parent- ing.” Perhaps her mate doesn’t have the right chemi- cal profile for parenting. Could there be a pharmaco- logic intervention to promote his nurturing behavior?

Deborah Barnes (1994), editorializing in The Journal of NIH Research, wondered tongue in cheek whether a premarital screening test should be devel- oped to ascertain a prospective mate’s propensity to be monogamous or polygamous. Because the neuro- biologic marker for the vole’s monogamous behavior is the distribution of vasopressin receptors in the brain, Barnes hopes a human screening procedure will not require a brain biopsy!

It is fun to speculate about the voles, but perinatal nurses work with humans. We work with mothers and fathers whose behavior is determined by a complex set of social, cognitive, emotional, and economic fac- tors. We work with families, which are more complex than their individual members. In reality, there are no foolproof screening tests for marriage, no biologic in- dicators for positive parenting, and no pharmacologic fixes for broken families. Instead, nurses must rely as we always have on the tools of our trade-health pro- motion, illness prevention, comfort, caring, support, and education.

Karen B. Haller, RN, PhD Editor

References

Barnes, D. M. (1994). Sex: The final frontier. The Journal of NIH Research, G( I) , 10.

Insel, T. R., & Shapiro, L. E. (1992). Oxytocin receptor dis- tribution reflects social organization in monogamous and polygamous voles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 89, 5981.

Touchette, L. (1994). Vole mates: Vasopressin keeps the home fires burning. The Journal of NIH Research, G(l) , 41-46.

Wang, Z. , Ferris, C. F., & De Vries, G. J. (1994). The role of septa1 vasopressin innervation in paternal behavior in prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 91, 400.

208 J O G N N Volume 23 Number 3