Anyone know if its legal for sch to insist on adhd medication

kingfisherblue

My son has Down's Syndrome and a long list of other conditions. Admittedly he does not have ADHD, autism, or any behavioural problems. He does, however, use a wheelchair, wear nappies, have severe speech problems, have feeding difficulties, take several medications every day, and has lots of other care needs apart from these.

When his year 6 residential came around, I knew that his overnight needs meant that it was unlikely that he could attend. In addition, as he is known to choke sometimes, I was worried that this could happen and nobody be awake to help him.

Instead of sleeping over, I took my son each morning and collected him each evening. His teacher showered him and made sure he had a clean nappy and pyjamas whilst the other children were on a walk. That meant that I could drive him home and pop him straight into bed after his medications. This worked really well for us. The residential was about 45 minutes drive from our home, but to me, it was worth the extra effort, as my son was able to join in with his classmates in many activities. He loved going home at night and waving to the children as they returned from their walk, but equally he loved returning in the morning and joining them for breakfast.

I know it isn't an option for everybody, but perhaps it is something the OP could consider as her husband drives? I would see this as a reasonable adjustment to accommodate a child's needs, whilst considering the needs of the remainder of the class.

shegirl

kingfisherblue wrote: »

My son has Down's Syndrome and a long list of other conditions. Admittedly he does not have ADHD, autism, or any behavioural problems. He does, however, use a wheelchair, wear nappies, have severe speech problems, have feeding difficulties, take several medications every day, and has lots of other care needs apart from these.

When his year 6 residential came around, I knew that his overnight needs meant that it was unlikely that he could attend. In addition, as he is known to choke sometimes, I was worried that this could happen and nobody be awake to help him.

Instead of sleeping over, I took my son each morning and collected him each evening. His teacher showered him and made sure he had a clean nappy and pyjamas whilst the other children were on a walk. That meant that I could drive him home and pop him straight into bed after his medications. This worked really well for us. The residential was about 45 minutes drive from our home, but to me, it was worth the extra effort, as my son was able to join in with his classmates in many activities. He loved going home at night and waving to the children as they returned from their walk, but equally he loved returning in the morning and joining them for breakfast.

I know it isn't an option for everybody, but perhaps it is something the OP could consider as her husband drives? I would see this as a reasonable adjustment to accommodate a child's needs, whilst considering the needs of the remainder of the class.

That really made me smile

rpc

kingfisherblue wrote: »

My son has Down's Syndrome and a long list of other conditions. <snip>

Why can I only thank this post once?????

nlj1520

I work for the Challenging Behaviour Foundation and have an adult son with autism, learning difficulties and behaviour which challenges. My philosophy (and that of the CBF) is that you medicate a CONDITION, not a behaviour. It sounds to me as though the school are seeking to do the latter.
As the OP found on her successful trip away, if people support her son appropriately and the environment is adjusted there is no need for medication.
Unless he has been formally diagnosed with ADHD (and my understanding is that that requires an EEG) then the teachers are taking too much upon themselves to try to insist he is medicated. I am sure their reasons are good (in the interests of safety), but nonetheless it is not their professional role to diagnose and prescribe. That is what doctors are for.
My son is medicated for extreme anxiety, but it is that condition that is medicated, not the behaviour that it leads to. So the dose is as low as possible. enough to make his life bearable, but we still have occasions where stress overwhelms him as it would in a neurotypical person.
IT sounds to me as though the school is seeking to medicate behaviour (and taking away the props that help your son shows a complete lack of understanding of behaviour management in my opinion) and that is no better than using a chemical cosh!

shegirl

nlj1520 wrote: »

I work for the Challenging Behaviour Foundation and have an adult son with autism, learning difficulties and behaviour which challenges. My philosophy (and that of the CBF) is that you medicate a CONDITION, not a behaviour. It sounds to me as though the school are seeking to do the latter.
As the OP found on her successful trip away, if people support her son appropriately and the environment is adjusted there is no need for medication.
Unless he has been formally diagnosed with ADHD (and my understanding is that that requires an EEG) then the teachers are taking too much upon themselves to try to insist he is medicated. I am sure their reasons are good (in the interests of safety), but nonetheless it is not their professional role to diagnose and prescribe. That is what doctors are for.
My son is medicated for extreme anxiety, but it is that condition that is medicated, not the behaviour that it leads to. So the dose is as low as possible. enough to make his life bearable, but we still have occasions where stress overwhelms him as it would in a neurotypical person.
IT sounds to me as though the school is seeking to medicate behaviour (and taking away the props that help your son shows a complete lack of understanding of behaviour management in my opinion) and that is no better than using a chemical cosh!

I think the thing is schools see the medication is prescribed,everyone seems to think that a second dose would help and that the normal should be continued so they say,well actually it should and we need that in place.

I know it can be wrong,at times,I know ds last school refused to have him in unless he'd had his meds (severe autistic,challenging behaviour etc) but he didn't really need it at that point and hadn't even been prescribed any! (they were useless though) so I didn't tell them....

But please don't try that op,slightly different!

This lad is not at a special school so resources are very different,so I can see why they are refusing take him unless he is medicated.They likely won't have the staff,possibly training,etc to deal with it while away or probably even the resources to put extra things in place without detracting from everything else.

I'd imagine that is quite likely an issue for them,but their acceptance to take him if medicated shows they must really see a difference in his ability to cope and concentrate.

peachyprice

nlj1520 wrote: »

As the OP found on her successful trip away, if people support her son appropriately and the environment is adjusted there is no need for medication.

The school cannot be expected to give the same level of attention to OP's son as she was able to on her trip. On a whole year, yr6 residential trip the teacher to pupil ratio is minimal. 2-4 teachers between 30-60 children. Which one of those teachers is going to give OP's son 1-1 attention? And who is supposed to look after the other 14 children in that teachers care whilst she deals with an unmedicated child in meltdown?

It's a totally different situation from school, where there are safe places, extra staff available to sit with a distressed child and a parent who can get there quickly if necessary.

tom9980

One solution is for the OP to go on the trip. This is what tends to happen at my wife's school.

bluenoseam

While I disagree with the notion they should enforce medication on anyone, I also disagree with the notion that one child should disrupt ANYONES education. The school are asking that a medical professional's advice be followed, that's the key thing here a certified medical professional believes a second dose of medication would improve the situation. I'm not saying the childs opinion then becomes redundant, but the school then has to look at it subjectively and they will almost always take the view of a qualified professional to be the one they'll accept.

From an outside point of view I wonder how much of this is being brought on by the snowball effect. Think about the other kids in his class, if he's disrupting their education how are they going to feel? Another way to look at it, if they do something "bad" they catch grief for it, if another child does something bad it's a "condition" - for 10/11 year olds that's not going to wash long. There's a chance they'll have complained to their parental units at which point those parental units will then complain to the school & they have to look into it. That would certainly change their mind on allowing OP's son to go on a residential week away, particularly if he's prone to - and I use the OP's own terminology - meltdowns. That's a fairly big risk to take into account & one which if numerous parents are complaining, bam you have yourself a situation whereby it's the no longer an acceptable risk.

You say he hasn't hit anyone at school YET, that one little three letter word is a difficulty as well, he hasn't done it yet, but there's a risk it could happen. That's a very fine line for schools to walk and ultimately while your son will be punished for it, when it happens it won't be your sons name in the press - it will be the school. There's a fine line between integration & the need for specialist attention and the school's trying to walk it, I think you're just being a little reluctant to accept the difficulty of their position.

pollypenny

Egypt191 wrote: »

ADHD was never invented, it just wasn't recognised until relatively recently.

Yes, I know, I was being cynical.


While there undoubtably are children with real problems, I do feel that the diagnosis is too readily made: possibly before all other aspects of the child's life have been explored.

I may have been unlucky in my teaching experience, but those pupils with ADHD have had either parents who don't get up with them in the morning, a very poor diet or, most frequently, bedrooms full of televisions and DVD players, which they watch until all hours. Sometimes all three!

On the other hand, the excellent decorator I know, who was a loud, hyper-lively boy in class, very hard to manage, probably has ADHD. No such diagnosis in the 80s,

valk_scot

Our school had a policy for residentials which said that in the case of any disruptive behaviour at the residential that could potentially endanger or severely disrupt other children the child concerned would have to leave at once and it was the responsibility of the parent to come and collect them. As the residential takes place a three hour drive from here even I paused at this point, showed the clause to my perfectly normally behaved DD and said "Do you understand this? Good." before I signed the acceptance and permission document.


Two other children were in fact required to leave on that particular trip, in one case because the child was so disruptive in the dormitory over the first two nights that the other children could not sleep. Three other children were not allowed to attend at all by the school as their behaviour in class had been so poor they were regarded as too disruptive to take along. The school has to take a firm line with behaviour on residentals for the good of everyone and it's also, in DD's school certainly, not seen as an automatic right to be allowed to go but rather as a privilege that has to be earned.


I would point all of this out to your son and then tell him it's up to him...he can take his medication and be allowed on the trip or refuse to take it and stay at home. He's old enough to be taking some responsibility for himself and his behaviour, condition or no condition. As he grows up he's going to find that there's less and less leeway allowed to him if he refuses to cooperate with the T's and C's of life in general. Which is not fair from his point of view of course, nor your's as a parent, but we all have to make concessions to get along with each other in groups, it can't all be about the needs and wants of a single individual.