It is no secret that I am not a fan of behavioral meds; especially when it involves kids I have in my home or at school. It's not that I am totally against their use. My father, depending on which doctor you ask, is either schizophrenic or manic depressive. You wouldn't know it. When he is on his medication he is as "normal" as the next person. But get him off his meds . . .
I was classified as a hyperkinetic child when I was in elementary school. My parents nor my teachers (I just used "nor") gave me pills. And, as much as I would like to say they did, they didn't apply a 2x4 or a paddle. I did miss quite a few recesses. There were some early bedtimes. I was allowed to pace back and forth as I read books in fifth grade. And I survived school.
Most of the students I get that are labeled ADD/ADHD do just fine if they are given a little extra structure and, at times, leeway. Same with foster children. I've had kids, Thomas for instance, who have shown up on my doorsteps so doped up that they are doing a damn good impersonation of a zombie, except they can't even work up enough energy to growl "Brains".
Immediately we changed Thomas' meds. He was way over medicated. Granted, without the huge doses of Depakote, he became very much like Tigger - bouncy, bouncy, bouncy. Also fun, fun, fun, fun, fun. (watch Winnie-the-Pooh and Tigger too). I'll take an active kid over a zombie. It just takes more effort. I think my parents called it "parenting".
Likewise, teachers need to teach. I know. I know. "I have to many students in my classroom." "I don't have time to deal with Johnny and the rest of my students." "It's not fair to ignore the other children while I have to spend extra time with Johnny." Get over it. I don't remember having all these "aides" in school when I was a child. And I teach the kids that public schools can't seem to manage, 21 of them this year, in a classroom by myself. It is work. Don't use a students lack of unnecessary medications as an excuse for not being able to manage your classroom. And quit making suggestions to parents that they need to get their kids on meds unless you have solid indicators that the student has a real, diagnosable problem.
There are young people out there who do need medication to help them focus. Their condition should be across environments (how many kids have "an inability to stay on task and remain in seat" in school, but do just dandy plugged into their PSP or X-Box at home). It should not be a product of learned behavior. And, the sole reason for administering meds should not be to "control behavior". Skinner did that well with out doping up his pigeons.
I did have a student this year who really has ADHD. He can't stay focused or still in school or at home. There is no (at least as far as my colleagues and I can determine) reward for his distracted behavior in school - he didn't gain anything that he saw as a positive from his behavior in school. He is not a behavior problem in the classroom. He can not focus in on what is being done in class. His short term retention of information is poor. How can you synthesize information or draw conclusions if you cannot hold onto discreet pieces of information in your memory? This student could not and it explains why he, or anyone with a real problem, would come to hate school. On meds, much better. He can remember what he read minutes ago, can follow along in class discussions, and can link ideas together. But this students case is, from what I have observed, the exception to the rule.
So, what sent me on this rant tonight? An article on Politics Daily by David Sessions titled "Psychotropic Drug Abuse in Foster Care Costs Government Billions". I'll rant some more tomorrow about my experiences with the excesses and waste of Medicaid, Foster Care, and managed health care.
Later.
No comments:
Post a Comment