Re: Children 'wrongly diagnosed'

[Guest guest]

Its all about money. The schools get more money, and more staff (and more money especially to the teacher's unions through more dues). Doctors get more money as they generate more patients. Pharmacies peripherally make more money as they fill the prescriptions.

So nice that the public school systems around the world are using children, boys in particular, as cash cows. Far be it for them to consider they should actually be teaching and see the kids as the future.

In a message dated 8/21/2010 1:02:59 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, no_reply writes:

DOCTORS are being pressured to diagnose children with behaviour disorders to get them extra assistance in schools, labelling many with diseases they probably don't have, researchers warn.South-western and western Sydney have become hot spots for children, especially boys, being given diagnoses of behaviour disorder and emotional disturbance. The children are then enrolled in special schools and support classes, according to research soon to be published by Macquarie University academics.Macquarie University researcher Graham said three separate studies pointed to ''pressures on paediatricians to inflate diagnoses so kids get support in class''.

[Guest guest]

" So nice that the public school systems around the world are using children,

boys in particular, as cash cows. Far be it for them to consider they should

actually be teaching and see the kids as the future. "

Another issue is what is going to happen to these children when they grow up.

Some of the diagnoses they are getting prevent them from getting driver's

licences. Certain jobs MUST exclude people who have certain diagnoses, and a

failure to disclose those diagnoses when applying for such jobs could result in

allegations of deception or fraud.

Administrator

[Guest guest]

" So nice that the public school systems around the world are using children,

boys in particular, as cash cows. Far be it for them to consider they should

actually be teaching and see the kids as the future. "

Another issue is what is going to happen to these children when they grow up.

Some of the diagnoses they are getting prevent them from getting driver's

licences. Certain jobs MUST exclude people who have certain diagnoses, and a

failure to disclose those diagnoses when applying for such jobs could result in

allegations of deception or fraud.

Administrator

[Guest guest]

" has some really important points; by wrongfully diagnosing a child, 'the

system' (our society) may be limiting that person's life-time potential, that

would be a horrendous injustice... "

This is one thing parents do not consider when seeking a diagnosis. As is

typical in matters of economics, so it is with medical matters: Parents tend to

take short term gain without looking at long-term consequences.

Getting a diagnosis for a child gives parents an excuse not to work as hard at

parenting. They can get medications for their child and extra services for them,

believing that meds and special services are doing what's necessary for their

children.

But what if the child really doesn't have a disorder, or what if they DO have a

disorder, but the attributes of that disorder are easy to deal with?

Why have an official diagnosis made instead of creating a history where it looks

like the child is hard to deal with without meds and extra services?

Administrator

[Guest guest]

" has some really important points; by wrongfully diagnosing a child, 'the

system' (our society) may be limiting that person's life-time potential, that

would be a horrendous injustice... "

This is one thing parents do not consider when seeking a diagnosis. As is

typical in matters of economics, so it is with medical matters: Parents tend to

take short term gain without looking at long-term consequences.

Getting a diagnosis for a child gives parents an excuse not to work as hard at

parenting. They can get medications for their child and extra services for them,

believing that meds and special services are doing what's necessary for their

children.

But what if the child really doesn't have a disorder, or what if they DO have a

disorder, but the attributes of that disorder are easy to deal with?

Why have an official diagnosis made instead of creating a history where it looks

like the child is hard to deal with without meds and extra services?

Administrator

[Guest guest]

" Taking many mind meds that are prescribed to kids can make one unfit for

military service. Add in that in many cities upwards of 75% of children are

unfit, not just unfit for military service but unfit in general, we could be in

for a rough time the next time a war or major crisis happens. Military aside,

such meds and Dx might disqualify one also for FBI, CIA and other agencies.

Private entities might be more forgiving, but a history or childhood mind meds

and counseling could put them off. "

In turn, anyone who gets a " false " diagnosis gets to avoid putting themselves in

danger by serving in the military in times of draft while those without a

diagnosis wind up serving, getting maimed, and dying.

I suppose the payoff is that people who go undiagnosed have a better shot at

getting certain jobs that falsely diagnosed people are shut out of.

Administrator

[Guest guest]

This is a hot issue that I had to respond to from the point of view of a medical

practitioner. While I agree that in some cases parents are looking for excuses,

in others they are really looking for help for their children. Schools (at

least in NJ) seem to favor the diagnosis of ADHD because they think it excuses

them from teaching. From their persepctive, it puts the onus on the prescriber

to find the " right " medication, when in fact it is the school that is not

providing the right education in the right format for the individual student. (I

can't tell you how many children I send back WITHOUT medication, but instead

with a report that suggests the educational services that are needed.)

The bigger problem, by far, are the insurance companies. The diagnosis

du jour here is " autism " or anything on the spectrum. Here's the dilemma as it

plays out in NJ. If a child is covered by a NJ based health insurance policy,

the company must cover $36,000/year in medical services, OT, PT, ST, ABA therapy

etc. That part is good. Here's the downside: The money had to come from

somewhere so now if a child " just has " Downs Syndrome, " garden variety " mental

retardation (i.e. NOT associated with autism), cerebral palsy, severe language

delay, etc. the same insurance companies are NOT covering therapies and are

making all efforts to NOT cover medical visits (although that seems to be a

little more controversial). Their argument is that these are " developmental

disabilities " and thus not medically based: It's up to the schools to take care

of it. The schools in turn are saying, " It's not our job; it's medical " as

funds for special education are being slashed. So...for example...I provide

services for a beautiful little 2 year old girl who is functioning on about the

level of a 9 month old. She needs PT, OT and ST desperately, but the insurance

company will not pay because " it's just a developmental disability and (they)

don't cover that. " The family cannot afford to pay out of pocket at $80-$120/hr

for services. Is it any wonder that they want an autism diagnosis since their

insurance company has explicitly told them they would pay if the child was

autistic? In all good consciouness, I can't make that diagnosis because there

is no way this child shows s/s of autism, but, on the other hand, I wouldn't

blame the family if they went " doctor shopping " to find someone who would. This

really is a systemic problem! Louise

>

> " Taking many mind meds that are prescribed to kids can make one unfit for

military service. Add in that in many cities upwards of 75% of children are

unfit, not just unfit for military service but unfit in general, we could be in

for a rough time the next time a war or major crisis happens. Military aside,

such meds and Dx might disqualify one also for FBI, CIA and other agencies.

Private entities might be more forgiving, but a history or childhood mind meds

and counseling could put them off. "

>

> In turn, anyone who gets a " false " diagnosis gets to avoid putting themselves

in danger by serving in the military in times of draft while those without a

diagnosis wind up serving, getting maimed, and dying.

>

> I suppose the payoff is that people who go undiagnosed have a better shot at

getting certain jobs that falsely diagnosed people are shut out of.

>

>

> Administrator

>

[Guest guest]

This is a hot issue that I had to respond to from the point of view of a medical

practitioner. While I agree that in some cases parents are looking for excuses,

in others they are really looking for help for their children. Schools (at

least in NJ) seem to favor the diagnosis of ADHD because they think it excuses

them from teaching. From their persepctive, it puts the onus on the prescriber

to find the " right " medication, when in fact it is the school that is not

providing the right education in the right format for the individual student. (I

can't tell you how many children I send back WITHOUT medication, but instead

with a report that suggests the educational services that are needed.)

The bigger problem, by far, are the insurance companies. The diagnosis

du jour here is " autism " or anything on the spectrum. Here's the dilemma as it

plays out in NJ. If a child is covered by a NJ based health insurance policy,

the company must cover $36,000/year in medical services, OT, PT, ST, ABA therapy

etc. That part is good. Here's the downside: The money had to come from

somewhere so now if a child " just has " Downs Syndrome, " garden variety " mental

retardation (i.e. NOT associated with autism), cerebral palsy, severe language

delay, etc. the same insurance companies are NOT covering therapies and are

making all efforts to NOT cover medical visits (although that seems to be a

little more controversial). Their argument is that these are " developmental

disabilities " and thus not medically based: It's up to the schools to take care

of it. The schools in turn are saying, " It's not our job; it's medical " as

funds for special education are being slashed. So...for example...I provide

services for a beautiful little 2 year old girl who is functioning on about the

level of a 9 month old. She needs PT, OT and ST desperately, but the insurance

company will not pay because " it's just a developmental disability and (they)

don't cover that. " The family cannot afford to pay out of pocket at $80-$120/hr

for services. Is it any wonder that they want an autism diagnosis since their

insurance company has explicitly told them they would pay if the child was

autistic? In all good consciouness, I can't make that diagnosis because there

is no way this child shows s/s of autism, but, on the other hand, I wouldn't

blame the family if they went " doctor shopping " to find someone who would. This

really is a systemic problem! Louise

>

> " Taking many mind meds that are prescribed to kids can make one unfit for

military service. Add in that in many cities upwards of 75% of children are

unfit, not just unfit for military service but unfit in general, we could be in

for a rough time the next time a war or major crisis happens. Military aside,

such meds and Dx might disqualify one also for FBI, CIA and other agencies.

Private entities might be more forgiving, but a history or childhood mind meds

and counseling could put them off. "

>

> In turn, anyone who gets a " false " diagnosis gets to avoid putting themselves

in danger by serving in the military in times of draft while those without a

diagnosis wind up serving, getting maimed, and dying.

>

> I suppose the payoff is that people who go undiagnosed have a better shot at

getting certain jobs that falsely diagnosed people are shut out of.

>

>

> Administrator

>

[Guest guest]

-- In FAMSecretSociety , lounur@... wrote:

" I can't make that diagnosis because there is no way this child shows s/s of

autism, but, on the other hand, I wouldn't blame the family if they went " doctor

shopping " to find someone who would. "

I agree with everything you've written in your response. In reply to the comment

you have written above:

1) Many prescribers and/or diagnosticians are not as ethical as you are and WILL

prescribe and/or diagnose unethically. This needs to stop because it gives all

medical people a bad name and negatively affects the children who are being

prescribed for or diagnosed.

2) People can write to have the law changed to ensure that people with

developmental disabilities are covered by insurance and not denied due to

pre-existing conditions.

3) The national healthcare system will do all this in a few years anyway.

4) At which time we will all go broke and be back where we started before

insurance existed, where people had to do the best they could on their own and

at their own expense.

Administrator

[Guest guest]

" We're all going to end up worse off because of the current policies. We always

do when government gets big. Nations always do. Free money policies and the

unrestrained spending of the patronage seeking welfare state always end in

ruin. "

is right.

Perhaps the best example of this is Rome, arguably the biggest welfare state

there ever was. Rome plundered the wealth of adjacent nations so that its

citizens could live in comfort and luxury. As the Republic expanded, so did its

citizenry, and so there was even more of a need to plunder wealth from still

other regions.

When the conquering armies were so dispersed as to be weak, and the leadership

and government so poor as to be mistrusted by the armies, Rome began to

disintegrate and collapse in on itself, during which time previously conquered

regions retook their land and wealth until there was nothing left of the

Republic.

These events happened over a period of centuries, but they happened.

Administrator