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

DaveTheMus

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2014/01/08/adhd-is-a-fake-disorder-claims-neurologist-turned-author/

There is some debate as to whether ADHD actually exists.......lazy teacher? Doubt it. Lazy Doctor? Probably.........

dibuzz

Having had a son who slept for 2 hours a night as a baby and didn't sleep through the night till he was 12 I know exactly what you mean Jojo and GobbledyGook. When he was old enough to come down and quietly put a video on I still woke up but was able to at least lie in bed and if I was lucky I fell asleep for another hour.
Luckily my son had no other needs, just didn't sleep but with 3 other kids to look after as well the TV was often my saviour.

GobbledyGook

DaveTheMus wrote: »

http://www.collective-evolution.com/2014/01/08/adhd-is-a-fake-disorder-claims-neurologist-turned-author/

There is some debate as to whether ADHD actually exists.......lazy teacher? Doubt it. Lazy Doctor? Probably.........

Lazy teachers exist as much as lazy doctors, lazy accountants and any other area of life where you get humans. Maybe not in this case, but perhaps. It does happen sometimes.

valk_scot

The last few posts make me wonder...if a child who only sleeps three or four hours a night goes on a residential, how does everyone manage? He/she obviously can't share a dorm with other kids as they'll be disturbed and have too little sleep, they can't share with a teacher, there usually won't be single room provision for kids and who would supervise them after they'd woken up at 4am or whatever? The sheer logistics of just managing the child's sleeping hours must be very daunting for schools and who is to say there's only that one child who has special needs per trip?


It's bad enough taking so called normal children on these trips tbh, we've had one child that had to be fetched home by his parents because he refused to eat any of the very wide range of food supplied, he would only eat chips and Frubes at home, apparently. One child turned up at an outwards bound weekend with only heeled shoes and mini skirts, she said she didn't like wearing trousers and didn't own any. Children that wouldn't follow a simple face washing and teeth brushing routine without someone standing over them or know how to keep track of their own clothes or possessions or follow simple instructions like "Fetch your jacket, shoes and daypack, go to the toilet and be at the bus in ten minutes." I repeat, these are so called normal kids at the age 10-12 age bracket with no actual heath problems or special needs but they still need a fairly high level of supervision from their teachers because that's what they're used to at home. Faced with up to half the class just being generally clueless or lazy or too dependant on adults for day to day chivvying the two supervising teachers for a class of 20+ are already run ragged and flat out, they just don't have the capacity to deal with any extra needs. And they need to eat, sleep and go to the loo themselves sometimes, don't forget!


I'm not a teacher btw but I have accompanied several cub/scout groups, I go because my DD needs female supervision on overnight trips still and if there's no female scout leader available they need to co-op a female parent helper. That's her "special" need! No point in ranting about it or demanding that the organisation fix this, there's just not the resources available and all leaders are volunteers. So I've done my disclosure and just go along as an extra pair of hands. My DD tries to ignore me, she hates me being there but often it's that or not go. I can't be arsed with it either most of the time either btw, I'd rather have a child free weekend at home rather than sleep in a tiny tent and have my hair in rats tails for three days. Sometimes though both children and parents have to be prepared to make some compromises.

pollypenny

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

What do you do with a kid that doesn't sleep more than a few hours at a time, or wakes up at a sparrow's fart and then will be on the go constantly for the next twenty hours if you need 6-7 yourself to function?

You find whatever you can that will keep them calm, peaceful and not in danger. For a lot of kids (and adults), that means getting them used to background noise which will hopefully mask any sound they would normally wake up to, something that keeps them still long enough to fall asleep or will keep them occupied for as long as possible.

I still remember the sinking feeling every morning when I had to get up to go to the loo - I knew my (non ADD/ADHD) daughter's eyes would snap open and that was it for the day. Once she was old enough to quietly watch videos and be safe, my life got so much better - because I had a chance to doze or at least just lie there and rest for another hour or so.

I don't sleep much myself. Never have done (other than when pregnant, then it was 12 hours and even then it wasn't ever enough), but I still needed more than her; after settling her down for the night, because my difficulty is actually going to sleep in the first place, I could still be awake when she'd had all she needed for the night, and if I'm woken up when I'm actually sleeping deeply, I'm dizzy to the point of falling over, nauseous and good for nothing.


Some people find having a TV or radio on helps calm their mind so they can sleep; a lot of people with anxiety, for example. Those people were probably similar as kids.



There's no glamour in being a martyr. A realistic parent goes for what works - and if providing a kid with a TV and DVD player in their bedroom makes it possible for parents to work, drive safely, get up and walk to school, look after the other children, then that's good enough.

If you add in a genuine condition (which as I remember it, was known as hyperactivity in the late 70s, early 80s - it was one of the things bandied around about me as a kid) - then what else can a mere mortal be expected to do?

Yes, I agree with you. What do you do with a child who hardly sleeps etcetera?

However, my point is that the diagnosis seems to be made too readily without investigating other causes.

There are undoubtably children who genuinely suffer from ADHD, but there are others for whom it's a convenient tag.

And I have experienced 'hyperactive' pupils, as I said. The first who had that diagnosis told me that his mum said he could do whatever he liked now and no one could tell him off. This was the mum who couldn't get her backside out of bed in the morning to give him breakfast or help him organise his bag for school.

securityguy

pollypenny wrote: »

And I have experienced 'hyperactive' pupils, as I said. The first who had that diagnosis told me that his mum said he could do whatever he liked now and no one could tell him off. This was the mum who couldn't get her backside out of bed in the morning to give him breakfast or help him organise his bag for school.

Indeed. The problem is that as soon as you raise your eyebrows at the shocking parenting sat behind some of the children claimed to "have ADHD", "be on the spectrum", "have sensory issues" (the fashionable diagnosis du jour) or whatever, and the ludicrous pandering that some schools then see fit to engage in, you're accused of claiming that these issues don't exist at all. Hence everyone !!!!!foots around the issue, and children with actual treatable problems are lumped in with children whose problem is that their parents are idiots.

http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/2009/12/05/tourettes-turrets-tourects/

Indie_Kid

pollypenny wrote: »

And I have experienced 'hyperactive' pupils, as I said. The first who had that diagnosis told me that his mum said he could do whatever he liked now and no one could tell him off.

I have a cousin like this. He claims he can do whatever and because of his "condition" his parents can't chuck him out, according to the council. This is despite the fact that he's attacked his mother who had the police invovled. He had an argument with his mother and his father had to sit in his car for 3 hours so he didn't go in and hit him. It seems as though his parents have allowed him to get away with everything for years, claiming he has ADHD (my mum doesn't think he does) and can't help it.

Indeed. The problem is that as soon as you raise your eyebrows at the shocking parenting sat behind some of the children claimed to "have ADHD", "be on the spectrum", "have sensory issues" (the fashionable diagnosis du jour) or whatever, and the ludicrous pandering that some schools then see fit to engage in, you're accused of claiming that these issues don't exist at all. Hence everyone !!!!!foots around the issue, and children with actual treatable problems are lumped in with children whose problem is that their parents are idiots.

I wanted to go back to college in September last year. Amongst other things, I have Autism and various sensory issues. I was told (baring in mind I have an official diagnosis and the audiology report to prove it) I can't possibly have Autism and as for my sensory issues, well, I'll just have to suffer and I can't walk out the classroom without telling someone - I can't talk during sensory overload. If I want to go toilet, I don't have to say anything. Apparently, I just have anxiety - something no-one has ever diagnosed me with. Needless to say, I never bothered to apply there.

GobbledyGook

pollypenny wrote: »

Yes, I agree with you. What do you do with a child who hardly sleeps etcetera?

However, my point is that the diagnosis seems to be made too readily without investigating other causes.

There are undoubtably children who genuinely suffer from ADHD, but there are others for whom it's a convenient tag.

And I have experienced 'hyperactive' pupils, as I said. The first who had that diagnosis told me that his mum said he could do whatever he liked now and no one could tell him off. This was the mum who couldn't get her backside out of bed in the morning to give him breakfast or help him organise his bag for school.

The pendulum has completely swung the other way now though imo.

If you have a child with problems that cannot be seen with the naked eye you are treated with scepticism and wariness because there is a perception that people are merely looking to cover up and excuse bad behaviour.

It's yet another thing where the small minority who are 'at it' have made life considerably harder for the majority who have to fight tooth and nail to get their child the support they need.

Most parents I've ever met with children with Autism or ADD or ADHD have had to fight tooth and nail because the assumption of lazy parenting or doing something wrong is made long before anyone sticks a label on any child.

In my experience getting a diagnosis of anything for a child is like getting blood from a stone so I really don't understand where the belief that it's easy to get that diagnosis comes from.

Any child who is troubled enough to actually get an appointment with the psychologist in these times of cutbacks, let alone be prescribed medication (and the lunchtime dose is something that many, many, many schools would not like as dealing with a child's medication is a form filling nightmare!) is obviously a child who has actual issues rather than a lazy parent or lazy medic looking for an easy label.

Also it's important to remember that poor parents can also have children with issues. I recently had an issue with my daughter and another child and (imo) her parents do not help massively, but that doesn't change the fact the child has problems. It's not always as simple as good parents = do all the right things and poor parents = do all the wrong things. You also have to remember that by the time a child starts school a parent has potentially had 5 years of the issues - you try sleep deprivation for 5 years and see if cutting a few corners here and there is still such an awful thing.

nlj1520

I'm also concerned that someone who works for an organisation such as the Challenging Behaviour Foundation would take such a position without asking more questions - you are leaping to a frightening conclusion there.[/QUOTE]

I am not reaching any conclusions.....I said 'it sounds to me as though......' As I was well aware I do not know the full situation or indeed the OP's son. I simply expressed a concern (born from experience) that in some cases environmental changes can be made that make the use of medication unnecessary. As the drugs used to medicate ADHD are brain altering (they stimulate the brain waves in the frontal lobes of the brain) I believe (not know) that they should be used only after other alternatives have been tried. But I would be the first to admit each individual is different as is each situation. And maybe a teaching assistant supporting the OP's son has been tried, or maybe he school couldn't get funding for it.

I am especially sorry that you thought I tried to make it 'about me', I was just trying to illustrate a point and apologise if it came across in a way I didn't intend.

penguingirl

I don't really want to get involved in what is obviously an emotive and difficult relationship between the OP/school/medics, but just wanted to clarify OP do you mean psychiatrist instead of psychologist when you see talking about prescribing? I know it can get confusing as there so many professionals in teams, but psychiatrist have a medical background and then specialise in psychiatry. Psychologists (typically educational or clinical in this sort of setting) have professional doctorates but aren't medically trained so wouldn't prescribe (and are generally considered to be more critical of solely medical approaches).