Posted on 07/31/2005 10:11:30 AM PDT by tryon1ja
Washington - As a first-grader, Garrett Nash blurted out answers before his teacher called on him. He tickled a student sitting next to him and sometimes bolted out of lines. One cold day, he left school without his winter coat.
Michelle Nash thought her son's behaviour was typical for a child adjusting to a full day of classes, but school officials suspected he had a hyperactivity disorder. They recommended giving him Ritalin, a stimulant used to treat children with that problem. She refused. "I just said I'm not going to do it," said Nash, 40. "And their response was, "You know, it's against the law for you to deny a child medication." That's no longer the case. As of July 1, schools no longer have the upper hand in deciding whether children should be given Ritalin or other controlled substances. A new federal law tilts that power to parents, barring states and schools from keeping students out of class in cases when parents disagree with a recommendation to medicate a child. The law is provoking an emotional debate over the proper role of teachers and other school employees in trying to help children they believe are troubled. And it is taking effect amid growing concern over the exploding use of Ritalin, the brand name for methylphenidate. Production of that drug has nearly doubled in the United States since 2000, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration. Meical professionals are on both sides of the issue. Lance Clawson, a child psychiatrist from Cabin John, Md., said the new law could make teachers fearful of communicating legitimate concerns to parents. Because teachers see so many children everyday, they are best equipped to identify abnormal behavior, he said. "If you tie the hands of the schools, they lose the right to advocate for the child," Clawson said. But Karen Effrem, a former pediatrician who testified before Congress on the issue two years ago, said that children are often incorrectly diagnosed. Sometimes, she sid the problem is simply that they are watching too much television, eating a poor diet or are bored. She said the legislation does nothing to keep teachers from speaking out.
I know what you mean. I read the articles about "warning signs" for ADHD and when they talk about two or three year olds being "easily distracted," or "frustrated," I just roll my eyes. What two year old isn't? It seems to me that based on the surveys I've seen, every child is either ADHD or autistic. There's nothing in between.
I do believe there are some children who have legitimate ADHD or autistic disorders, but I believe it's a far lower number than the children being treated for it. What really bothers me, as well, is that these teachers not only don't know my child as well as I do, but what medical background do they have? What degrees do they hold? I'll match my educational background against theirs any day. Teachers are supposed to be educators, not doctors, and ADHD is a medical problem, not an educational one. The educational issues are a side effect, I'd say. So the crux of the problem seems to me to be that ADHD is seen as an educational problem, not a medical one, and hence "educators" are trying to do the work of doctors. Seems to me they get pretty darn close to practicing medicine without a license in some cases.
Exactly right!
Ha! At the same time I was brawling over my son, I was also brawling separate battles for my other children. ALL OF IT SIMULTANEOUS. One daughter who consistently scored in the 98% percentile on LSAT's was demoted a grade -- so she could be a "peer teacher". I stopped that one really fast. Their explanation to me? She was obviously teacher material, and they wished to begin her future job "tracking" training process now. My daughter didn't want to be a teacher. It didn't matter to the educrats. Of course, CA due the illegal immigrant situation AND THE JUVENILE CRIME AT SCHOOL SITUATION has been in perpetual need of teachers.
Ergo, obviously, the "district" was thinking ahead, according to their own psychologic analysis machinery.
This is a crock. In CA, when minorities act up in classrooms -- it's not called "abnormal" -- it's a called a "cultural thang". Normal? What the heck is normal? I witnessed out of control students of every background imaginable -- they weren't called "abnormal" -- OH NO! CA Education simply used their bad behaviors to establish MORE SPECIAL ED agenda and mandatory funding. It was never called "abnormal".
I think they call them "at risk" kids here. I do not that the schools have a lot of special programs for at risk kids. At risk kids also get to do a lot more things than NORMAL kids do here in Michigan.
You are right. They do.
Then there's the downside of being categorized "at risk". There was a list in CA in the early 90s: If your parents smoked (even if it was outside); if there were guns in the house. Oh yes... these qualified in CA as "at risk children". I got called into a situation in Oakland -- a mother being investigated by CPS, based upon what her child described at school (in a "questionnaire") as being in the refrigerator at home. I calmed her down, got her connected with groups who could help her defend herself from bureacratic drive-by attack. She fit the "profile" as devised by the school leviathan -- she was a single mom (to 4 children) and black. She was a good mom, in fact. (And who screams that Profiling is WRONG?) ahem.. anyway.
Once the school system had a parent by the short-hairs, it didn't just stop there.. it worsened. Parents were not informed of their rights. Mock "hearings" were set-up by the Schools. And many parents got "rolled". They didn't know they could end the madness. They didn't know that they could fight city hall.
How did you respond to the situation?
Yep. And you aren't being paranoid. That stuff does go down. So does identity theft. It's all real. Except for those who haven't had it happen. Or think it only happens to "losers" or the "unlucky".
On the survey, it was thrown in the trash. Our daughter said I have to fill this out or flunk. She was told if the school had any problems with not turning it in, have them call us. It was never mentioned by the school. The real scary thing is that everyone of the other students filled it out and turned it in.
See, this is what many parents do not know; so much of the "crap" that comes home looking official? For parents to fill-out, etc.? IS NOT REQUIRED. It's simply shoved at the parent, and the parent assumes it's perforce and necessary documentation. Once they sign on to this stuff; it legally ties them to rules and curriculum and practices, most parents would NOT BE FOR. Instead, there's these legal docs "covering .. vague.. legalese.. like... terms..." and the parents pray their child or themselves won't get "ensnared into some ugly".
In point: you did right on the survey thing; you did good. Just after the mid-90s, in a town near mine.. a mom told me that her highschool daughter had to perform an ESSAY, discussing her family members -- and how they were racists. No, I'm not kidding. It was an ESSAY for the student to do. The students were supposed to interview family members; or just compose their own essay on what they thought of their relations "views" on race.
I learned the hard way -- I just didn't do it; or simply demanded answers. I got labelled a "problem parent"; but who cares but them. Not me. The problem was theirs, IMHO. I was merely being polite in pointing out that they were foisting big brother-ism on me, and I wasn't buyin it. That's when the mass retaliation came -- after I did these things. Unlike then, when I was going through it, there are now wonderful organizations to help parents whose hands and children are caught in the "student ensnarement program".
Sex ed. My eldest daughter tried pub ed again. Fifth grade. Sex ed: I was the only parent who went and reviewed the sex-ed curriculum, suggested changes, and the school did make those changes. However, I observed that for the 5th graders, there were SEVEN (7) different sex-ed curriculums available for use throughout the State -- all tied to district economics and demographics. The low-income schools had the most heinous, rudest, nastiest sex-ed curriculum. And in some cases, these districts never bothered to even inform a parent when sex-ed was being taught. You know why? The parents signed off on that by first week of school on one of those forms sent home for parents to sign (and didn't know what they were actually agreeing to). Those forms could possibly even cover murder, rape, pedophilia, etc. -- as they are so VAGUELY worded. Let me pose here in counter: the usual lefty slogan for conservative parents to know use:
Question authority. Overturn the popular paradigm.! :)
BUT! I must also add here something which should also be addressed -- frivolous lawsuits against schools and districts. These cases have encouraged these forms to be used. To protect the teachers and the districts, and ultimately, the taxpayer.
So, I can see reasonability in understanding another "why" of these forms -- not just the usual lefty agenda ones.
Parents frivously suing schools opened the door wide open for students and educators, alike, to being abused and misused. And lefty agenda and their lawyers, crept right on in.
You are in school to learn academic subjects. Reading, History, Writing, Math, English. If for any reason you are asked ANYTHING about your personal life, simply reply: N/A. And my children practiced writing "N/A". As a back-up, I taught my children that if they were asked to respond to ANYTHING INVOLVING THEIR HOME LIFE, THEIR PERSONAL LIVES, and the "N/A" was challenged, they were to simply tell the teacher or principle -- "to call my mom!" It worked.
I learned about all the different "surveys" and "talks" going on within pub ed between "facilitators" and "students". My two older students (then, second & 4th grade), wrote "N/A" on those surveys. Nothing ever came of it. They handed those empy forms back to the teacher. However, I learned years later that there was a paper with the note: "Do not Let Mrs Alia into the Classroom!" was in each of my children's files. Many years after that, in reviewing my children's files, that note had disappeared.
Enough was enough. I haven't even gone into the horror I found calling itself Pub Ed and how it was inflicting upon my children -- I homeschooled them, thereafter. I'd had it. They weren't getting an education -- there was no math or science. Spelling was "not being corrected". Inventive spelling was the practice, there was cooperative learning, and race-based math. I just happened to have my older children entering pub ed -- when it was at its worst.
But just as we tell our children not to talk to strangers, go with strangers.. I taught my children that they are being taught by strangers: And that they were not to do or comply with anything they felt personally uncomfortable with. And for them to request the teachers/principal call me.
I was trying to teach my children *real life* principles. And I did.
"You know, it's against the law for you to deny a child medication."
You know, it's against the law to practice medicine without a licence!!!!!
You know, you're just guessing. You can't "PROVE" my child has this condition, and you can't "PROVE" your prescription is SAFE & EFFECTIVE!!!!
Alia, I don't have children yet. So I can't really give an opinion on this topic. However, your comments opened my eyes in regard to the public education system.
I was lucky to have 95 percent of my teachers as worthy educators. But I fear times have changed and this state of medication seems to be the new panacea for every molly-coddled teacher that doesn't want to make time or individual effort according to a student's needs.
These forms you bring up...this is the first time I'm hearing of them. It will be down the line (6-7 years?) until the information I've just processed will become relevant to me, but I won't forget it. I'll be sure to keep my eyes on what I'm signing, and if in doubt, to CALL OUR ATTORNEY!
Sometimes, you will be able to meet a teacher or dean or principle who still has sufficient freedom to be able to tell you exactly why the form, and what it covers.
But again, remember -- in the 70s and 80s.. there were folks who saw schools and districts as "deep pockets".
I'll never forget my own eye popper: I think it was the late 70s. CA. Two kids burglarizing a school. They decided to go in through the skylights (sunroofs). One kid fell, got hurt. His parents SUED the school... AND WON. I recall it was a $350K settlement; which in this day and time is chump change... but it was a LOT of money then. Schools then had to protect themselves from liability. If they aren't being hassled for race or "sex" discrimination, then there's all the adds on: No "teen homosexual club", etc. So, now there's all these forms.
And YES, sign nothing unless you have a reasonable assurance of understanding what you are signing. Remember too -- you can write on the form your OWN conditions/exclusions... get a copy of that for your files. Enjoy your life.
Walk carefully but not fearfully.
Ever notice that a huge percentage of the kids they want to drug are boys? Boys are boys, and they're a handful. Teachers used to know that. (Of course, they also used to be able to wash their little mouths out with soap on occasion, but we can't do that anymore now, can we?)
The standards in schools got changed, effectively, in the early 90s. Certain "feminists" (Carol Gilligan et al) averred that girls were being short-changed in schools. They further averred that pub ed catered to boys in tests and other matters. (Insert Title 9 agenda, here).
One of the things that got changed? Fewer recesses; more "talking" time. Girls tend to be more verbal; boys more physical. As the schools cut down on recesses and necessary time for the physical boys to burn off steam, more boys began acting up in class.
And we've now seen the solutions offered: drug 'em. But! As feminism and modern corporate America began pushing more "activity" programming (Disney channel, dancing, phys-ed) stuff via TV and popular MSM print -- more girls began becoming physically active. Therefore, IMHO; the parity in stats. But there's also another angle here: Even boys who get into trouble for acting out in class -- are at least getting negative attention. What do little girls crave too? Attention.
Then there's the "who's a victim" playbook at play: Boys on Drugs have a "condition" -- meaning they are "more special than average". In peer-driven classrooms, this ups the ante, IME, for how to "get special attention.
There are fine teachers and administrators caught alive in this horrid web. Having to operate by "district policy" whether they like it or not.
I saw the "Ritalin" line at an elementary school once, here in Lansing. It reminded me of junkies lined up outside of a methadone clinic.
The schools are failing, period.
I'm a bit late on this thread, I don't usually hit Bloggers. What grade was your daughter in when she was given the survey?
Ladies, you might find this interesting, in a "I'm going to go hug my kids now" kind of way.
When you first attend "Kindergarten Roundup" with your oldest child, you will be handed a mountain of forms to fill out. Most of them are completely unnecessary; a few of them will be downright out-of-bounds, and some of them are the standard medical information yadda yaddas. I think the reason the schools innundate parents with paperwork, especially first-time parents, is two-fold: First, if they hand you the standard stack, a lot of parents will simply sit down and fill 'em out willy-nilly, without ever thinking about how necessary the information is, or how it will be used; second, the school administrators want you to be overwhelmed. That's not just me wearing tinfoil--I've had teachers admit this to me. By making a parent feel unprepared, they instantly have the upper hand. Never let 'em have it. Your kids. You're the boss.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.