In message <[log in to unmask]>, Paul Caldwell
<[log in to unmask]> writes
>Ritalin IS useful in properly diagnosed ADHD. But I have many, many parents
>of children with ADHD effectively say that that god he's got a disease and
>its being treated. The point is that immediately a health label is put on
>something then the pt/family perceives that illness is external to them and
>they have no respsonsibility over anything. In the case of ADHD kids, the
>label and ritalin stops them from setting boundaries and the normal things
>other parents do. I now see significant numbers of ADHD children who have
>now 'conduct disorder', ie brat behaviour, as a result.
I used to have a rule of thumb about ADHD (before the arguments about
it's existence and the benefits of getting children statement to meet
even basic educational needs).
Could the child sit still to watch a favourite TV program?
If they could, didn't have ADHD.
BTW , has the tartrazine theory gone out? Removal of colourings used to
work in quite a number of hyperactive kids (but haven't seen many
recently - do they now present to SWs rather than GPs?)
Is it possible that giving a diagnosis (and treatment) allows parents to
establish boundaries - where the overactive and inexplicable behaviour
of the child had made this difficult before?
Finally, if ADHD is solely bad parenting, how many of us have seen
families where only one child out of a number of siblings has ADHD - or
alternatively, *doesn't* have it? Are some children less susceptible to
bad parenting? And if so, why?
MaryH
--
Mary Hawking
|