Attention Disorder or Not, Pills to Help in School

slimvictor

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
6,481
Location
"Darkness cannot be dissipated with more darkness.
When Dr. Michael Anderson hears about his low-income patients struggling in elementary school, he usually gives them a taste of some powerful medicine: Adderall.

The pills boost focus and impulse control in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Although A.D.H.D is the diagnosis Dr. Anderson makes, he calls the disorder “made up” and “an excuse” to prescribe the pills to treat what he considers the children’s true ill — poor academic performance in inadequate schools.

“I don’t have a whole lot of choice,” said Dr. Anderson, a pediatrician for many poor families in Cherokee County, north of Atlanta. “We’ve decided as a society that it’s too expensive to modify the kid’s environment. So we have to modify the kid.”

Dr. Anderson is one of the more outspoken proponents of an idea that is gaining interest among some physicians. They are prescribing stimulants to struggling students in schools starved of extra money — not to treat A.D.H.D., necessarily, but to boost their academic performance.

It is not yet clear whether Dr. Anderson is representative of a widening trend. But some experts note that as wealthy students abuse stimulants to raise already-good grades in colleges and high schools, the medications are being used on low-income elementary school children with faltering grades and parents eager to see them succeed.

“We as a society have been unwilling to invest in very effective nonpharmaceutical interventions for these children and their families,” said Dr. Ramesh Raghavan, a child mental-health services researcher at Washington University in St. Louis and an expert in prescription drug use among low-income children. “We are effectively forcing local community psychiatrists to use the only tool at their disposal, which is psychotropic medications.”

Dr. Nancy Rappaport, a child psychiatrist in Cambridge, Mass., who works primarily with lower-income children and their schools, added: “We are seeing this more and more. We are using a chemical straitjacket instead of doing things that are just as important to also do, sometimes more.”

Dr. Anderson’s instinct, he said, is that of a “social justice thinker” who is “evening the scales a little bit.” He said that the children he sees with academic problems are essentially “mismatched with their environment” — square pegs chafing the round holes of public education. Because their families can rarely afford behavior-based therapies like tutoring and family counseling, he said, medication becomes the most reliable and pragmatic way to redirect the student toward success.

“People who are getting A’s and B’s, I won’t give it to them,” he said. For some parents the pills provide great relief. Jacqueline Williams said she can’t thank Dr. Anderson enough for diagnosing A.D.H.D. in her children — Eric, 15; Chekiara, 14; and Shamya, 11 — and prescribing Concerta, a long-acting stimulant, for them all. She said each was having trouble listening to instructions and concentrating on schoolwork.

“My kids don’t want to take it, but I told them, ‘These are your grades when you’re taking it, this is when you don’t,’ and they understood,” Ms. Williams said, noting that Medicaid covers almost every penny of her doctor and prescription costs.

Some experts see little harm in a responsible physician using A.D.H.D. medications to help a struggling student. Others — even among the many like Dr. Rappaport who praise the use of stimulants as treatment for classic A.D.H.D. — fear that doctors are exposing children to unwarranted physical and psychological risks. Reported side effects of the drugs have included growth suppression, increased blood pressure and, in rare cases, psychotic episodes.

The disorder, which is characterized by severe inattention and impulsivity, is an increasingly common psychiatric diagnosis among American youth: about 9.5 percent of Americans ages 4 to 17 were judged to have it in 2007, or about 5.4 million children, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The reported prevalence of the disorder has risen steadily for more than a decade, with some doctors gratified by its widening recognition but others fearful that the diagnosis, and the drugs to treat it, are handed out too loosely and at the exclusion of nonpharmaceutical therapies.

The Drug Enforcement Administration classifies these medications as Schedule II Controlled Substances because they are particularly addictive. Long-term effects of extended use are not well understood, said many medical experts. Some of them worry that children can become dependent on the medication well into adulthood, long after any A.D.H.D. symptoms can dissipate.

According to guidelines published last year by the American Academy of Pediatrics, physicians should use one of several behavior rating scales, some of which feature dozens of categories, to make sure that a child not only fits criteria for A.D.H.D., but also has no related condition like dyslexia or oppositional defiant disorder, in which intense anger is directed toward authority figures. However, a 2010 study in the Journal of Attention Disorders suggested that at least 20 percent of doctors said they did not follow this protocol when making their A.D.H.D. diagnoses, with many of them following personal instinct.

On the Rocafort family’s kitchen shelf in Ball Ground, Ga., next to the peanut butter and chicken broth, sits a wire basket brimming with bottles of the children’s medications, prescribed by Dr. Anderson: Adderall for Alexis, 12; and Ethan, 9; Risperdal (an antipsychotic for mood stabilization) for Quintn and Perry, both 11; and Clonidine (a sleep aid to counteract the other medications) for all four, taken nightly.

Quintn began taking Adderall for A.D.H.D. about five years ago, when his disruptive school behavior led to calls home and in-school suspensions. He immediately settled down and became a more earnest, attentive student — a little bit more like Perry, who also took Adderall for his A.D.H.D.

When puberty’s chemical maelstrom began at about 10, though, Quintn got into fights at school because, he said, other children were insulting his mother. The problem was, they were not; Quintn was seeing people and hearing voices that were not there, a rare but recognized side effect of Adderall. After Quintn admitted to being suicidal, Dr. Anderson prescribed a week in a local psychiatric hospital, and a switch to Risperdal.

While telling this story, the Rocaforts called Quintn into the kitchen and asked him to describe why he had been given Adderall.

“To help me focus on my school work, my homework, listening to Mom and Dad, and not doing what I used to do to my teachers, to make them mad,” he said. He described the week in the hospital and the effects of Risperdal: “If I don’t take my medicine I’d be having attitudes. I’d be disrespecting my parents. I wouldn’t be like this.”

Despite Quintn’s experience with Adderall, the Rocaforts decided to use it with their 12-year-old daughter, Alexis, and 9-year-old son, Ethan. These children don’t have A.D.H.D., their parents said. The Adderall is merely to help their grades, and because Alexis was, in her father’s words, “a little blah.”

”We’ve seen both sides of the spectrum: we’ve seen positive, we’ve seen negative,” the father, Rocky Rocafort, said. Acknowledging that Alexis’s use of Adderall is “cosmetic,” he added, “If they’re feeling positive, happy, socializing more, and it’s helping them, why wouldn’t you? Why not?”

Dr. William Graf, a pediatrician and child neurologist who serves many poor families in New Haven, said that a family should be able to choose for itself whether Adderall can benefit its non-A.D.H.D. child, and that a physician can ethically prescribe a trial as long as side effects are closely monitored. He expressed concern, however, that the rising use of stimulants in this manner can threaten what he called “the authenticity of development.”

“These children are still in the developmental phase, and we still don’t know how these drugs biologically affect the developing brain,” he said. “There’s an obligation for parents, doctors and teachers to respect the authenticity issue, and I’m not sure that’s always happening.”

Dr. Anderson said that every child he treats with A.D.H.D. medication has met qualifications. But he also railed against those criteria, saying they were codified only to “make something completely subjective look objective.” He added that teacher reports almost invariably come back as citing the behaviors that would warrant a diagnosis, a decision he called more economic than medical.

“The school said if they had other ideas they would,” Dr. Anderson said. “But the other ideas cost money and resources compared to meds.”

cont at
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/09/h...d-pills-to-help-in-school.html?pagewanted=all
 
“I don’t have a whole lot of choice,” said Dr. Anderson, a pediatrician for many poor families in Cherokee County, north of Atlanta. “We’ve decided as a society that it’s too expensive to modify the kid’s environment. So we have to modify the kid.”

:(

When puberty’s chemical maelstrom began at about 10, though, Quintn got into fights at school because, he said, other children were insulting his mother. The problem was, they were not; Quintn was seeing people and hearing voices that were not there, a rare but recognized side effect of Adderall. After Quintn admitted to being suicidal, Dr. Anderson prescribed a week in a local psychiatric hospital, and a switch to Risperdal

Pump your kid soo full of amp that he starts hallucinating? PUT EM ON AN INDUSTRIAL GRADE ANTIPSYCHOTIC! Fuck dose reduction!

Fucking people these days
 
what could go wrong with giving broke-ass kids a bunch of pills that have street value???

Let them chew coca instead.
 
Maybe if they sold the pills they'd be able to have heat in the winter and meals 3 times a day with nutritional content adaquate for nourishing a growing mind.



That might help their performance too!

Also we could use some pills that turn terrible parents into exceptional ones. Sekio you're good with pscyhopharmacological theory and whatnot, any suggestions? :\
 
This is a disgusting hypocrisy of people with in our country, pumping individuals senseless with medications to correct "problems" of children with a terrible distinction between mental illness and environmental factors. I understand the the need for a parent to protect the child, push into a direct of success, etc., but this shouldn't be at the cost of the children who are forced to consume medications for health issues they do not even have, leading to further health issues down the road resulting from the interruption of biological developmental processes. Also, before pharmaceutical intervention should even be considered, therapy and other similar help should be introduced, along with environmental changes in the household and classrooms that need to be made. People just want a quick fix to their child's problems, with their, in reality pretty poor, parenting completely left out of the picture. Children are raised like domesticated animals, where only so much bs is tolerated before they put them out of sight so they don't have to deal with the problems directly. Hey they have schools and doctors who should be fixing them. The role of a parent is just to supply them with food, water, shelter, and medications if needed, not contribute anything useful to their lives.

ugh...
 
And of course because they've been slaving away earning the money needed to support their kids, they shouldn't have to be the ones who actually raise them. With our modern family structure, this leaves basically no one but our government school systems and environmental factor as the ones who unfortunately will raise them, for better or worse...

I don't understand why people will have one kid, let alone multiple, especially when reality hits and the kid requires half of your attention for 20+ years. If you don't want to put in the work, don't have kids. Expecting them to grow up on their own with the help of doctors fast prescription hands, shitty education system, and who knows what possible environmental factors, and nothing else is retarded and unfortunately has a victim after all is said and done.

Similar to my opinion about introducing religion into a child life (when they can't make the choice themselves), which essentially is limiting their exposure to religious pushers, medications should be best avoid (unless they have potentially harmful medical issues), especially those used a supplement for their daily lives.
 
Also we could use some pills that turn terrible parents into exceptional ones.

Poor parenting is often a result of people who treat themselves as poorly as they do their own children. You would have to fundamentally change such a person's attitude towards themselves first, which is going to be next to impossible in today's world.
 
What about the people who actually do have ADD/ADHD?

I know people who do and they've tried diet, supplements/vitamins, exercise, eating right, therapy, etc. and none of it worked except for the ADD/ADHD medications.
 
everyone got along just fine for 2000 years ago until the pseudo science of psychiatry started promoting drugs for everything from inattention to fear of being in pubic. if you ask me, its bullshit. ADD is a marketing ploy used in conjunction with "treatments" like ritalin or adderall. gee, little timmy doesnt sit still in class? tie him to his friggin chair then. its no less ethical than pill pushing in an elementary school. do they worry about ADD in Guatemala? no, they worry about having enough rice to eat and not getting kidnapped on the way home.
 
Poor parenting is often a result of people who treat themselves as poorly as they do their own children. You would have to fundamentally change such a person's attitude towards themselves first, which is going to be next to impossible in today's world.

I'm aware. I was trying to bring this fact to light through the art of dry satirical angst.

It's always a result of environmental conditions as well. There is no such thing as 'predisposition.'

It's a fucking red herring.

everyone got along just fine for 2000 years ago until the pseudo science of psychiatry started promoting drugs for everything from inattention to fear of being in pubic. if you ask me, its bullshit. ADD is a marketing ploy used in conjunction with "treatments" like ritalin or adderall. gee, little timmy doesnt sit still in class? tie him to his friggin chair then. its no less ethical than pill pushing in an elementary school. do they worry about ADD in Guatemala? no, they worry about having enough rice to eat and not getting kidnapped on the way home.

You sound like a Thomas Szasz fan. Smart man.

The myth of mental illness.

Mental illness is a sociological response to environmental conditions most notablty effective on the psycholigical and implicit memory at birth.
 
My opinion is probably in the minority, but it has come from my own personal experience with ADHD/amphetamine. I posted about this in a thread a few months back and I'm going to just cut/paste it here.

I am a PhD student in chemistry who was recently prescribed Adderall for ADHD and benefits greatly from taking it daily. All throughout my middle school and high school student life, I struggled with paying attention in school. In most subjects, just being a bright and intuitive student was enough to keep me doing well. But in math, where rote memorization and practice form the basic foundation for the learning, which is then built upon, I was a mess. It was fine until I hit high school level algebra, and then when the teacher would turn on the overhead projector to start working through examples, I was gone by the 2nd problem. I just COULD NOT pay attention to that, or work through repetitive examples on my own.

I thought it meant I was bad at math, which turned out to absolutely not be the case. Once I struggled through and put in the time, it was pretty easy and made perfect sense. And now that I have ADHD medication, I can pay attention and focus on anything that I want/need to and I learn new things very quickly, whether they are immediately interesting or not. Very often, to get to the interesting part of learning a complex topic, you HAVE to slog through the boring foundations so that you know what the hell is going on. Not ALL learning can be fun, no matter what people say.

The psychiatrist told me that for a lot of bright students, their natural abilities to excel in schoolwork mask the handicap that ADHD puts on them. If a 5 is average, and you are able to perform as a 10 and ADHD brings you down to a 7, you still appear to be doing well. Thus no one considers the idea that you might need medication. But once I hit my ceiling (graduate level chemistry work), it became far, far more difficult for me to cope with the necessary hours and hours of highly focused attention required of me. I couldn't just study in shorter bursts, or start sooner, etc. I needed to be at my maximum potential all the time, and Adderall absolutely helped me with that, with no noticeable negative side effects thus far.

I wish I had been diagnosed and medicated for ADHD sooner. I'd be done with my PhD instead of in the process, and I'd be debt-free due to scholarships, instead of burdened with the student loan debt I have.

In light of my own experiences, I can definitely see a positive side to more kids being prescribed this drug to help them academically. I think it is a little morally preachy to act like proper parenting can make a kid enjoy sitting in a classroom memorizing facts that they can't yet see the value of. Yet despite all of the rhetoric about making learning "fun and engaging", sometimes in order to get a foundation laid down so that one can actually understand the fun and engaging parts, you have to slog through the memorizing drudge-work.

You can't make long division fun. You can't make the periodic table fun, etc etc. There is a small subset of people for whom those things are fun, a large subset of people who can use discipline to work through it, and a small subset of people who can't even do that. Adderall makes it much more attainable to channel one's discipline into productive things. That isn't a bad thing.
 
Last edited:
Adderall is basically chemical masturbation for a new age. It's fucked up. To those who say "well gee guys I take adderall and my performance went up", that's what amphetamine does! This "myth" that only people with ADD can derive good effects from amphetamines is total fucking trash. The people who don't get euphoria, reward, feel more concentrated etc are in the minority, or they're on very small doses.

How is this different than prescribing anabolic steroids to all the kids who can't do a mile in 3 minutes? Kids used to be able to produce a much higher level of physical exertion, now they can't. Obviously they could succeed if they weren't physically handicapped, with Physical Exertion Deficit Disorder. Put little Johnny on a course of test enthanate and wham, he's a better athlete. Hence this proves that PEED is a thing, and we should be medicating kids for it left and right. Now all I have to do is get a few juice-heads to peer review my work and I'm golden.

How is amphetamine any different. You are supplying individuals who aren't predisposed to intellectual exertion a drug that makes them exert themselves intellectually. Making them perform at a level higher than what they would be normally capable of. And that drug can have side effects like cardiac damage, high blood pressure, body odor. And it has to eb taken regularly for it to work. And it has a course of diminishing returns.

If you didn't hear me say 'amphetamine' you could be confused I was talking about 'roids or something!

"You can't make long division fun"? Bull fucking shit. Don't teach your kid to do long division in vacuo then. Teach him about economics, unit prices, discounts, things like that. Give people applications for the knowledge you're teaching them; get them involved. Learning is an active, not a passive process. Sitting in a desk copying notes down is so useless for most of the population as a learning mechanism. Don't teach the periodic table, teach organic synthesis. People don't give two fucks about balancing chemical equations; they care about seeing beautiful chemical reactions.

It pisses me off people are so wont to lean on chemical crutches instead of working their legs out, or finding an alternate way to get around. Not everyone is meant to be a super intellectual genius who learns instantly.

Not to mention, competing against a full class of kids on amphetamine for grades when you're sober is a fucking stacked deck. As soon as you start tying college funding to test scores... now you have an issue where only the medicated win. And since there's no antidoping agency for schools, you're fucked.
 
You sound like a Thomas Szasz fan. Smart man.

The myth of mental illness.

fuck yeah. just started ^reading it this week. the man [was] a genius. as a sufferer of depression among other things, im a firm believer in the fact that "mental illnesses" are not illnesses at all. our culture and its polluted structure is the problem. mental illness is a theory (poorly supported, at that) and not a fact.
 
You gave the tired, worn-out "make learning fun" argument that I specifically and directly addressed in my original statement. Sure, there ARE applications to the skills that must be learned by rote, and those will give a student a goal, an objective, something to look forward to upon completion. But the process of actually learning it, becoming proficient with it so that one can think about it and conceptualize it, takes a lot of practice and repetition that isn't very enjoyable. Since we, as a country, are short on doctors, why don't we just make med school more fun? Then more people will be doctors!

Lol at teaching organic synthesis to a beginning chemistry student.

"The hydroxide ion can act here as either a base or a nucleophile."

"What's a hydroxide ion? What's a base? What is a nucleophile?"

You said it yourself: "People don't give two fucks about balancing chemical equations". And yet, without learning the underpinnings, a student can watch beautiful chemical reactions all day long on YouTube. It isn't going to teach them anything about chemistry. It isn't going to lead to any understanding, any independent thought, or any future of adding to the discipline of chemistry (or any advancing discipline). It might spark an interest in chemistry, yes, and that is certainly a good thing, but the necessary next step is the hard work, the not-fun part.

I look at it from an analytical perspective. I don't see any morality/immorality to the use of performance-enhancing drugs of any sort. If the benefits to an individual outweigh the costs to that individual, they are a viable tool that should be considered. If the benefits to society of allowing individuals this option outweigh the costs to society, the option should be permitted. I feel the same way about anabolic steroids.

Education isn't a sport - it isn't about a fair competition. It is about producing people who are best prepared to advance civilization, be it through science, business, art, or what-have-you. Competing against a class of students who all have a tutor when you don't have access to one isn't fair either, but I don't hear people railing against tutors.

If your opposition is framed in a "amphetamines cause more harm than benefit", or that kids shouldn't be prescribed this type of drug against their will, then I can get on board with you and we can discuss particulars and evidence. But if it is framed in this moralistic, intellectually purist format, then there is really not much to be discussed. You're basically following dogma: "this type of tool is bad, therefore the fruits of its use are bad."
 
Last edited:
^i think it is the case that amphetamines cause more harm than benefit, especially in the long term. If amphetamines had no side effects or long term issues/toxicity then i'd be all with you in prescribing them to everyone. Education isn't really about best preparing people for anything. The public education system is set up to divide people into different classes and to make sure there is a low and middle class to work the shit jobs out there.
 
You make a very fine distinction: "education" vs "the public education system". I don't disagree with you about the shadiness inherent in the public education system. But regardless of the inefficiencies and corruption of the public education system, education itself really is about best preparing people for advancing civilization. How else besides education would people be prepared to be scientists, architects, engineers, etc. To claim that the entire institution of education is there to funnel people into shit jobs is a little bit tinfoil hat-ish.
 
@scureto- if you think there is no problem medicating children, then why dont you have some children of your own, shovel some ritalin down their throats and then tell us how they turn out 20 years down the road.
 
Top