|
Post by eb204 on Aug 4, 2008 9:06:29 GMT -5
Are we talking strictly about kids who have been diagnosed with a mental health issue? I'm curious -- how easy or difficult is it for the parents of a "brat" to claim attention deficit disorder? I guess I'm in the camp that believes many more of today's kids are spoiled rotten than in the past. And, as in many areas of society, people refuse to accept responsibility for their actions and instead portray themselves as victims. Look at the sub-prime lending fiasco. Or the fact that we are more obese than ever. Even if there is a verified mental illness, I think the burden should still fall on the parents to ensure the child is not threatening or disruptive to other students. I agree. Over the years, I've known some parents to play the "Oh, he/she has ADD" card, when it's obvious the parenting skills are horrible, if present at all. All I'm going to say on this is yes, there are parents that undoubtedly play this card when it is to their benefit, I'm sure. However, one might only need to look at the other children in the family to judge if it is a lack of "parenting skills" or truly a disorder. If the other children are respectul, listening and acting age-approriate, then maybe the parents have some parenting skills after all. However, things like this can be hereditary, so I wouldn't be so quick to judge others with that situation either. In our case, we wouldn't be spending thousands and thousands of our own money, making countless doctor visits and going to various therapies or waiting 6 months or more to see specialists if we thougt we could turn things around with conventional discipline methods. For most people, the child's disabilitiy is not something they wish to shout from the rooftops. But sadly, there are those that will play a certain card because it's easier that way. That just makes it harder for the rest of us who beat themselves up everyday looking for something that will work or a way to get through to a child who is fixated on something or even just figuring out a good way to explain this to your child, his/her siblings, the extended family members, or even yourself as you wonder "why?" or "how" did this happen? One thing this has all taught me is to not be so quick to judge others. Before we had kids, we were the people who wished that we wouldn't get the table next to the "bratty kids" or wondered how parents could let their child just scream and yell like that. I questioned everyone else's parenting skills and vowed to never be "that parent". That all changed after our child was diagnosed. Now, when I'm in a store and see a child have a meltdown, I just wonder what that mother/father might be feeling. Now, I give the child and parents the benefit of the doubt. I know what it's like to look at the evil stares of other parents or to look at people shaking their heads as if to say, "If he were my child...." Some parents just don't need that added on to what they are already dealing with. Maybe it IS a bratty kids that just wants some candy and is having a tantrum until he gets his way, but maybe it's not.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Aug 4, 2008 10:02:18 GMT -5
Are we talking about disorders in which medications are prescribed?
There will always be quiet kids, bratty kids, funny kids, etc. and I don't think we should be trying to make every child conform to a super strict set of rules. That's why I'd like to know more about the 150 prior incidents. If they include typical kid shenanigans then I'm skeptical of the school's handling. If, however, they are more along the lines of holding chairs over his head and threatening others, that is where I lose all sympathy.
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Aug 4, 2008 10:20:08 GMT -5
I guess I need to know more about the nature of the 150 prior incidents with this kid, but if any involve throwing chairs or being physically threatening, I think the parents have a moral obligation to allow the SD to remove the kid and place him in an alternative school. From what I understand if the SD does not feel that it can handle a student's needs, the SD is obligated to pay for sending them to a non-204 program/facility (which is typically very expensive).
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Aug 4, 2008 11:07:14 GMT -5
Are we talking about disorders in which medications are prescribed? There will always be quiet kids, bratty kids, funny kids, etc. and I don't think we should be trying to make every child conform to a super strict set of rules. That's why I'd like to know more about the 150 prior incidents. If they include typical kid shenanigans then I'm skeptical of the school's handling. If, however, they are more along the lines of holding chairs over his head and threatening others, that is where I lose all sympathy. Medications may or may not be prescribed for the disability/disorder. There are many variables - age of the child, has it been used/tested in children, parental consent, etc. Some kids respond to these medications, some don't. Some parents will try medications for their children, some won't. Some medications "wear off" after months of use or some can make the problem worse. It's a lot of trial and error many times. And again, that trial and error often means time and money. I can speak from experience that certain medications are not covered. Not too fun to spend $1200/month on medications to find out they don't work. And to have to start all over again after feeling you've wasted 6 - 8 weeks. There are many type of disorders that there is simply not a medication for. Autism Spectrum Disorders, of which there are a wide variety, do not have one medication to treat the ASD. There are medications that may treat certain aspects of the disorder. For example, in my son, he experiences a lot of anxiety which causes much of his outbursts. He is on a medication to reduce some of the anxiety. Does it eliminate it? No, but he's come a long way and he's on a higher does of this than some adults. And that bothers me. However, I've seen him without it and he could very well be the child in the article without his medication. His "tantrums" are a direct result of his anxiety and even on his medication, he still has some meltdowns. As he gets older, though, he has learned some coping skills to help those situations. He won't ever be "cured", though or "outgrow" this. We keep trying to find ways to help him more coping skills. The SD has helped with this, but most of it has been through private therapies and a boatload of patience. The therapies cost a lot and often are not covered by insurance and the patience cannot BE bought. If it were, I'd stock up! There are many parents who simply cannot afford the therapies and can only rely on a SD's "expertise", which is very often lacking the knowledge needed for such a variety of kids that walk through their doors. Until you've walked in these parents' shoes, no one really knows what it is like for them, or people like them. We have made some difficult decisions with our son and medication. It's sometimes very agonizing. At 5 YO, they wanted to put him on a medication that I thought he was WAY TOO YOUNG for. Even now, I think he's too young, but we tried it and found that it is working for him. There are other issues that he takes medicatoin for so he has like a "cocktail" of medications to help with his ASD. Alone, they wouldn't help him, but together we are managing for now. The decision to medicate has to be with the parents and the doctors, working together, and only if needed. The medication that works with my son may not work with someone else's child. It's all trial and error, as I said, and often very costly, too.
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Aug 4, 2008 11:10:03 GMT -5
I guess I need to know more about the nature of the 150 prior incidents with this kid, but if any involve throwing chairs or being physically threatening, I think the parents have a moral obligation to allow the SD to remove the kid and place him in an alternative school. From what I understand if the SD does not feel that it can handle a student's needs, the SD is obligated to pay for sending them to a non-204 program/facility (which is typically very expensive). Yes, I think that's pretty accurate, but again, it comes back to LRE (least restrictive environment). If the parents and SD can't agree on that, they may be at an impasse. Again, a difficult situation for both parties and one I hope I never find myself in.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Aug 4, 2008 11:10:10 GMT -5
I guess I need to know more about the nature of the 150 prior incidents with this kid, but if any involve throwing chairs or being physically threatening, I think the parents have a moral obligation to allow the SD to remove the kid and place him in an alternative school. From what I understand if the SD does not feel that it can handle a student's needs, the SD is obligated to pay for sending them to a non-204 program/facility (which is typically very expensive). So it sounds like the parents' refusal to transfer the child was not financial in nature. As unfortunate as it is that the taxpayer would be on the hook for this type of thing, I can understand it in the same sense that we pay for things most of us don't use, such as police or the prison system, and we don't ask parents to pay for it. (Not that I'm comparing these children to criminals...just the funding aspect.) If this family was from White Eagle and they didn't want to transfer their kid to a recommended "alternative" setting, there were still other options they could afford such as private schools, home schooling, etc. On the other hand, perhaps private schools had refused to take him.
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Aug 4, 2008 11:18:24 GMT -5
From what I understand if the SD does not feel that it can handle a student's needs, the SD is obligated to pay for sending them to a non-204 program/facility (which is typically very expensive). So it sounds like the parents' refusal to transfer the child was not financial in nature. As unfortunate as it is that the taxpayer would be on the hook for this type of thing, I can understand it in the same sense that we pay for things most of us don't use, such as police or the prison system, and we don't ask parents to pay for it. (Not that I'm comparing these children to criminals...just the funding aspect.) If this family was from White Eagle and they didn't want to transfer their kid to a recommended "alternative" setting, there were still other options they could afford such as private schools, home schooling, etc. On the other hand, perhaps private schools had refused to take him. Yes, there are often some options and for some, there are more than for others. But there are just as many roadblocks sometimes, as well, regardless of how much money you might be able to throw at the problem. That can be very frustrating too. I know people who have spent life savings, retirement funds and funds earmarked for their child's education trying to find solutions and explore options. Even that isn't enough sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Aug 4, 2008 11:22:36 GMT -5
Are we talking about disorders in which medications are prescribed? There will always be quiet kids, bratty kids, funny kids, etc. and I don't think we should be trying to make every child conform to a super strict set of rules. That's why I'd like to know more about the 150 prior incidents. If they include typical kid shenanigans then I'm skeptical of the school's handling. If, however, they are more along the lines of holding chairs over his head and threatening others, that is where I lose all sympathy. Medications may or may not be prescribed for the disability/disorder. There are many variables - age of the child, has it been used/tested in children, parental consent, etc. Some kids respond to these medications, some don't. Some parents will try medications for their children, some won't. Some medications "wear off" after months of use or some can make the problem worse. It's a lot of trial and error many times. And again, that trial and error often means time and money. I can speak from experience that certain medications are not covered. Not too fun to spend $1200/month on medications to find out they don't work. And to have to start all over again after feeling you've wasted 6 - 8 weeks. There are many type of disorders that there is simply not a medication for. Autism Spectrum Disorders, of which there are a wide variety, do not have one medication to treat the ASD. There are medications that may treat certain aspects of the disorder. For example, in my son, he experiences a lot of anxiety which causes much of his outbursts. He is on a medication to reduce some of the anxiety. Does it eliminate it? No, but he's come a long way and he's on a higher does of this than some adults. And that bothers me. However, I've seen him without it and he could very well be the child in the article without his medication. His "tantrums" are a direct result of his anxiety and even on his medication, he still has some meltdowns. As he gets older, though, he has learned some coping skills to help those situations. He won't ever be "cured", though or "outgrow" this. We keep trying to find ways to help him more coping skills. The SD has helped with this, but most of it has been through private therapies and a boatload of patience. The therapies cost a lot and often are not covered by insurance and the patience cannot BE bought. If it were, I'd stock up! There are many parents who simply cannot afford the therapies and can only rely on a SD's "expertise", which is very often lacking the knowledge needed for such a variety of kids that walk through their doors. Until you've walked in these parents' shoes, no one really knows what it is like for them, or people like them. We have made some difficult decisions with our son and medication. It's sometimes very agonizing. At 5 YO, they wanted to put him on a medication that I thought he was WAY TOO YOUNG for. Even now, I think he's too young, but we tried it and found that it is working for him. There are other issues that he takes medicatoin for so he has like a "cocktail" of medications to help with his ASD. Alone, they wouldn't help him, but together we are managing for now. The decision to medicate has to be with the parents and the doctors, working together, and only if needed. The medication that works with my son may not work with someone else's child. It's all trial and error, as I said, and often very costly, too. I feel for your situation and am sorry to hear that costly medications are required just to make things better, yet less-than-ideal. The problem I would have, as a cynical person, is knowing how much of the improvement is due to the medicine and how much is due to the normal maturing process? I tend to think many if not most of a child's developmental issues go away over time, and the trick is figuring out which ones will take care of themselves and which ones won't. One of my children seemed to be late in developing certain language skills and while I wasn't concerned due to her age, I was convinced to have her undergo some mild speech therapy. After a year or so she is better (I would consider her speech normal) but much of that could be not only her brain "getting it" but also some of the physical aspects of her mouth not being capable of certain sounds as the time. While the important thing is that it all turns out okay, part of me thinks we are increasingly led to believe treatment is required when all it takes is time.
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Aug 4, 2008 13:43:59 GMT -5
In some cases, time is it's own medication, so to speak. In others, time helps, but doesn't "cure". To find out if it's the medication or maturity, one would have to go off/taper off medication. Before doing so, of course, one would have to speak with the doctor. In our situation, our son was on some medication and it had to be increased as he grew (dosage based on weight). As we increased it, it saw improvements. However, recently we saw some changes and the doctors suggested increasing it again. That had an adverse effect and they thought that his hormones (he's pre-pubescent) may be playing a role as well. We weaned him off the medication and he is now better than he was before even starting it. He still has some of those behaviors, but he has them much more under control - again, though, I believe mostly in part to learning to cope with certain things. So, yes, that could be maturity, but it is also repetition. Take for example, learning to tie your shoes. For an "average" kids, you might have to show them a few times, work with them a couple of weeks, remind them and then they might have it mastered. For some kids, this process takes months, even years, if at all. It is similar even in the discipline process. I can tell my one child, who is a few years younger to stop doing something and give a consequence if she doesn't. If her behavior continues another time, I might have to remind her about the consequence she received and she will probably stop. My point is... is that she'll soon "get it" and that Mommy means business. With my son, it often takes repeated consequences. He often doesn't connect the consequence with my request to stop doing something, no matter how many times I've doled out the consequence. It's not connecting. I'm not sure there is a medication to correct that...yet. So, in our case, it's not a matter of poor parenting skills, as clearly one child can comprehend the outcome of her choices, but the other one can't. If we were incompetent parents, I would think that all of my kids would act in similar fashion. The only way to truly know if it's medication or maturation, is trial and error. We periodically do this with our son with his other medication, but find the results to be the same or worse than pre-meds. And those few weeks are NOT fun. That's when I usually stock up on the patience, or medicate myself. I do appreciate you taking the time to ask questions. I wish there were more people who would do that instead of quickly placing some parents in the "bad parent" category.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Aug 4, 2008 14:51:42 GMT -5
Have you considered whether the "consequences" are enough of a deterrent? I, as most parents of young kids, are forced with trying to come up with a consequence that is not too penal but hopefully stops the bad behavior. If I threaten to send my kid to his room, he may actually like that outcome. Conversely, I could escalate the potential punishment up to cruel levels. And one child's threshold is likely different than even his or her siblings. My wife and her sister are completely different as far as their personalities and maturity levels. Do I chalk it up to some physical, chemical, or hormonal difference? Perhaps I allow that to be a partial explanation...but I also don't dismiss the possibility that her parents parented the two kids differently. We often hear that the older kid gets more attention, love, etc. Or that the middle kid gets forgotten. I see it with my kids. There is a natural tendency to not spend as much time reading to each successive child, and I need to always be extra careful to try to split my time with each kid fairly.
Then there are issues of daycare vs. traditional home parenting, single-parent households, etc.
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Aug 4, 2008 14:59:20 GMT -5
Have you considered whether the "consequences" are enough of a deterrent? I, as most parents of young kids, are forced with trying to come up with a consequence that is not too penal but hopefully stops the bad behavior. If I threaten to send my kid to his room, he may actually like that outcome. Conversely, I could escalate the potential punishment up to cruel levels. And one child's threshold is likely different than even his or her siblings. My wife and her sister are completely different as far as their personalities and maturity levels. Do I chalk it up to some physical, chemical, or hormonal difference? Perhaps I allow that to be a partial explanation...but I also don't dismiss the possibility that her parents parented the two kids differently. We often hear that the older kid gets more attention, love, etc. Or that the middle kid gets forgotten. I see it with my kids. There is a natural tendency to not spend as much time reading to each successive child, and I need to always be extra careful to try to split my time with each kid fairly. Then there are issues of daycare vs. traditional home parenting, single-parent households, etc. Yes, we've tried many different consequences and have tried several different reward systems, taking a different approachby focusing on the positive instead of the negative. If it's been suggested, we've tried it. It usually is a combination of a few things and he is getting better, but still not age-appropriate. My point is - it just takes longer with him than my other, younger child. And I do believe that is because of the disabiity. We see it and live it everyday and have to work hard that his choices aren't seen as "getting away with something" by my other child. It's a balancing act.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Aug 4, 2008 16:08:46 GMT -5
Have you considered whether the "consequences" are enough of a deterrent? I, as most parents of young kids, are forced with trying to come up with a consequence that is not too penal but hopefully stops the bad behavior. If I threaten to send my kid to his room, he may actually like that outcome. Conversely, I could escalate the potential punishment up to cruel levels. And one child's threshold is likely different than even his or her siblings. My wife and her sister are completely different as far as their personalities and maturity levels. Do I chalk it up to some physical, chemical, or hormonal difference? Perhaps I allow that to be a partial explanation...but I also don't dismiss the possibility that her parents parented the two kids differently. We often hear that the older kid gets more attention, love, etc. Or that the middle kid gets forgotten. I see it with my kids. There is a natural tendency to not spend as much time reading to each successive child, and I need to always be extra careful to try to split my time with each kid fairly. Then there are issues of daycare vs. traditional home parenting, single-parent households, etc. This requires the child to be able to do the IF/THEN correlation. Some kids can not do that or it takes a Rubik's Cube attempt to create the connection in their mind which takes time and trial and error. Without the connection, each negative reinforcement can be a silent clueless question they ask themselves like "Why does mommy hit me?" which does wonders for their self-esteem. After a while, they answer for themselves "I'm just bad" (in general) which again, does wonders for their self-esteem.
|
|
|
Post by majorianthrax on Aug 4, 2008 21:38:08 GMT -5
From what I understand if the SD does not feel that it can handle a student's needs, the SD is obligated to pay for sending them to a non-204 program/facility (which is typically very expensive). So it sounds like the parents' refusal to transfer the child was not financial in nature. As unfortunate as it is that the taxpayer would be on the hook for this type of thing, I can understand it in the same sense that we pay for things most of us don't use, such as police or the prison system, and we don't ask parents to pay for it. (Not that I'm comparing these children to criminals...just the funding aspect.) If this family was from White Eagle and they didn't want to transfer their kid to a recommended "alternative" setting, there were still other options they could afford such as private schools, home schooling, etc. On the other hand, perhaps private schools had refused to take him. Just one question. You assume that because they are from White Eagle they can automatically afford private schools etc. Not necessarily. I live in WE and I know of alot of people here who are just hanging on. The same as anywhere else. And homeschooling doesn't generally work for kids with these problems. I speak from experience. And of course private schools will not take special needs kids. They are not set up for it and don't have to since they can decide who can enroll
|
|
|
Post by forthekids on Aug 4, 2008 22:42:08 GMT -5
So it sounds like the parents' refusal to transfer the child was not financial in nature. As unfortunate as it is that the taxpayer would be on the hook for this type of thing, I can understand it in the same sense that we pay for things most of us don't use, such as police or the prison system, and we don't ask parents to pay for it. (Not that I'm comparing these children to criminals...just the funding aspect.) If this family was from White Eagle and they didn't want to transfer their kid to a recommended "alternative" setting, there were still other options they could afford such as private schools, home schooling, etc. On the other hand, perhaps private schools had refused to take him. Just one question. You assume that because they are from White Eagle they can automatically afford private schools etc. Not necessarily. I live in WE and I know of alot of people here who are just hanging on. The same as anywhere else. And homeschooling doesn't generally work for kids with these problems. I speak from experience. And of course private schools will not take special needs kids. They are not set up for it and don't have to since they can decide who can enroll You are also assuming that just because the child attends White Eagle Elementary School that he/she is a resident of White Eagle. There are two other subdivisions that feed into the school.
|
|
|
Post by mclovin on Aug 4, 2008 23:35:12 GMT -5
I don't think it makes a difference where the family lives, why should it?
Who cares whether or not they live in WE or not? I don't see the relevance to the situation. Personally, I feel empathy for the parents and administrators and hope the district can resolve this.
Most importantly, I hope the child can get the assistance he needs to help him assimilate himself into a school setting without violent behavior.
It's hard to comment on this further without knowing more information.
|
|