Jump to content
baddad

Interesting sounding programme starting on ITV

Recommended Posts

in about ten minutes -

 

Chemical Cosh: 'The number of children taking medication to control behaviour has almost doubled in the past 5 years - this programme investigates why'...

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chemical Cosh: 'The number of children taking medication to control behaviour has almost doubled in the past 5 years - this programme investigates why'...

Just watched it. And now feel the need to thump someone. Pass the drugs please. :rolleyes:

 

Is it just me or did anyone else want to slap and/or waft coffee under the nose of and/or send in Super Frosty for the first mum? :angry: Felt really sorry for the kid who was crying out for boundaries and completely lacked any positive behaviour modelling. :tearful:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just watched it. And now feel the need to thump someone. Pass the drugs please. :rolleyes:

 

Is it just me or did anyone else want to slap and/or waft coffee under the nose of and/or send in Super Frosty for the first mum? :angry: Felt really sorry for the kid who was crying out for boundaries and completely lacked any positive behaviour modelling. :tearful:

 

Nope. Not just you... and I think it was completely downplayed too, the whole issue of the 'problems at home', on the basis of assumptions made by the TA who thought that the only explanation for the boy arriving at school in a completely negative frame of mind could be that they'd forgot to medicate him that morning :wallbash: If that doesn't equate to joining up random dots to make the picture you want to see I don't know what does. :( And even the doctor agreeing to the increased meds said this wasn't for the kid's benefit - it was purely to drug him through the summer holidays so mum could 'cope'. Sounds like a catch 22 / vicious circle to me, with the consequences paid in full by the child. :angry:

 

Even more worrying was that final statistic - studies show that for the vast majority of kids with ADHD there will be absolutely no difference in long term expectations after an eight year programme of increasingly high dosages of medication from those who received no medication whatsoever :o That surely begs the question, for anyone with any sense: What if they'd not started down the med route at all and had fully addressed all of the other considerations that were ignored in favour of them? :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. Not just you... and I think it was completely downplayed too, the whole issue of the 'problems at home', on the basis of assumptions made by the TA who thought that the only explanation for the boy arriving at school in a completely negative frame of mind could be that they'd forgot to medicate him that morning :wallbash: If that doesn't equate to joining up random dots to make the picture you want to see I don't know what does. :( And even the doctor agreeing to the increased meds said this wasn't for the kid's benefit - it was purely to drug him through the summer holidays so mum could 'cope'. Sounds like a catch 22 / vicious circle to me, with the consequences paid in full by the child. :angry:

 

Even more worrying was that final statistic - studies show that for the vast majority of kids with ADHD there will be absolutely no difference in long term expectations after an eight year programme of increasingly high dosages of medication from those who received no medication whatsoever :o That surely begs the question, for anyone with any sense: What if they'd not started down the med route at all and had fully addressed all of the other considerations that were ignored in favour of them? :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi -didnt catch programme but will try to now as i can agree with what you have said about meds-as i feel as i was put in the position of having to try meds for my boy as school couldnt cope with him(opposite of mum you quoted from programme). he is off them again ,now,as developed severe dystonic jerks-and i can honestly say ,iam relieved ,as he is no different at all at home with no meds- it is his anxiety at school that poses the "need" for them.he is also fine at his respite day centre,where he will even attempt going in a canoe and rock climbing!of course,medsmight be the answer and help in some situations when all else has been tried -but ,with my son ,i dont feel its the way forward .

Edited by sky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't see the programme, but just to put foreward some balancing views...

 

I think living with severe ADHD has to be experienced to be understood...we did, and it was only when my son was started on Ritalin at 8 that he actually had the 'mental breathing space' to be able to take in behavioural therapy. Before that he simply couldn't focus long enough. And by severe ADHD, in case anyone is wondering, I mean actually bouncing off the walls (and I mean actually...).

 

So I think that for certain children Ritalin can be a genuine life-transformer. Incidentally, at 14 he said he felt he didn't need it any more. The extreme physical hyperactivity had disappeared, although the impulsivity still remains even as an adult.

 

Similarly, where I work some of the young people are on Ritalin, and more on Risperidone. As a specialist placement with well-trained staff who are passionate about enabling these young people to fulfill their potential and live as independently as possible you couldn't say that the medication was for 'our benefit'. They need this medication to enable them to have some quality of life.

 

So, I think it's well worth remembering that there are many young people for whom these types of medication enable them to live a better, more fulfilling life. No doubt occasionally, especially in America, they are prescribed too readily...but it's a pity such programmes, and the various newspaper articles I've seen over the years, don't offer a more balanced view.

 

Bid :)

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't see the programme, but just to put foreward some balancing views...

 

I think living with severe ADHD has to be experienced to be understood...we did, and it was only when my son was started on Ritalin at 8 that he actually had the 'mental breathing space' to be able to take in behavioural therapy. Before that he simply couldn't focus long enough. And by severe ADHD, in case anyone is wondering, I mean actually bouncing off the walls (and I mean actually...).

 

So I think that for certain children Ritalin can be a genuine life-transformer. Incidentally, at 14 he said he felt he didn't need it any more. The extreme physical hyperactivity had disappeared, although the impulsivity still remains even as an adult.

 

Similarly, where I work some of the young people are on Ritalin, and more on Risperidone. As a specialist placement with well-trained staff who are passionate about enabling these young people to fulfill their potential and live as independently as possible you couldn't say that the medication was for 'our benefit'. They need this medication to enable them to have some quality of life.

 

So, I think it's well worth remembering that there are many young people for whom these types of medication enable them to live a better, more fulfilling life. No doubt occasionally, especially in America, they are prescribed too readily...but it's a pity such programmes, and the various newspaper articles I've seen over the years, don't offer a more balanced view.

 

Bid :)

 

 

No, the programme actually was quite balanced and did acknowledge that some people with ADHD are helped by their meds, and showed a contrasting family who weren't on the treadmill of ever-increasing dosages etc. The point being made was more that medication is now being offered pretty casually as a 'stock answer' rather than as part of a programme to provide long-term and real benefits. That horrible word 'casual' again, and the underlying problem of a 'can't do' mentality of lowered expectations and accommodated behaviours that evolves once the casual labels have been applied. One of the doctors they spoke to said (I think, so don't quote me on it) that in his opinion, of the number of children being diagnosed with ADHD and prescribed Ritalin or whatever, the dx and need for medication was probably only appropriate in about 8 - 10% of cases. It also highlighted that medications intended for prescription in circumstances of severe ADHD were pretty much being handed out like sweets.

 

In Both cases, the most significant factors contributing to the child's ADHD symptoms were those arising from the home environment rather than the disorder itself. The second mum acknowleded this, stating that once she had been able to access a parenting course and learn the skills she needed to help her son things improved dramatically. The unfortunate reality is (and I hope no one reading this takes any personal inference from this) that very very few parents seem willing to acknowledge even the possibility that their parenting can in any way be affecting their child's behaviour, and that seems to be a universal truth whether refering to ADHD, ASD's, or any of those dear little monsters with no diagnosis whatsoever we see not sleeping, not eating, not going to school and not responding to parental authority in any way, shape or form whatsoever on 'Supernanny' :lol:

 

Jo Frost for Prime Minister - that's what I say! :lol:

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the programme actually was quite balanced and did acknowledge that some people with ADHD are helped by their meds, and showed a contrasting family who weren't on the treadmill of ever-increasing dosages etc. The point being made was more that medication is now being offered pretty casually as a 'stock answer' rather than as part of a programme to provide long-term and real benefits. That horrible word 'casual' again, and the underlying problem of a 'can't do' mentality of lowered expectations and accommodated behaviours that evolves once the casual labels have been applied. One of the doctors they spoke to said (I think, so don't quote me on it) that in his opinion, of the number of children being diagnosed with ADHD and prescribed Ritalin or whatever, the dx and need for medication was probably only appropriate in about 8 - 10% of cases. It also highlighted that medications intended for prescription in circumstances of severe ADHD were pretty much being handed out like sweets.

 

In Both cases, the most significant factors contributing to the child's ADHD symptoms were those arising from the home environment rather than the disorder itself. The second mum acknowleded this, stating that once she had been able to access a parenting course and learn the skills she needed to help her son things improved dramatically. The unfortunate reality is (and I hope no one reading this takes any personal inference from this) that very very few parents seem willing to acknowledge even the possibility that their parenting can in any way be affecting their child's behaviour, and that seems to be a universal truth whether refering to ADHD, ASD's, or any of those dear little monsters with no diagnosis whatsoever we see not sleeping, not eating, not going to school and not responding to parental authority in any way, shape or form whatsoever on 'Supernanny' :lol:

 

Jo Frost for Prime Minister - that's what I say! :lol:

 

L&P

 

BD

 

Ahh, fair do's then if they did offer a balanced view :)

 

I should also add that when he was older, it was the 'system' who wanted to put him on increasing doses and multiple meds for anxiety (which didn't make any difference anyway)...rather than sort out the root cause of the anxiety, which was his mainstream school. I did then say I would take full responsibility for reducing and then stopping his meds. And funnily enough, once he was in the right ASD placement, he didn't suffer from the same crippling anxiety anymore...

 

Jo Frost...bless 'er! :curlers: Lots of positives, but I do sometimes feel it's a wee bit like celibate Catholic priests giving marriage guidance :devil:;)

 

Bid :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Jo Frost...bless 'er! :curlers: Lots of positives, but I do sometimes feel it's a wee bit like celibate Catholic priests giving marriage guidance :devil:;)

 

Bid :)

 

 

Ahhhhhhhh... that particular 'kakky stick' is one I've seen waved at many Ed Psychs, Teachers, Paediatricians etc (think I might, in fact, have waved it a bit myself in the past :o:o ). I do agree it's a bit of a conundrum, but the truth is she gets results where the mums and dads who are (supposedly) talking the talk AND walking the walk don't.

 

It's also the first line in what become a reductive gainsaying argument:

 

Who are you to tell me how to bring up my kids? Have you got any?

 

Yes, three

 

Oh, and I bet they're all little angels

 

Well they're not beating up teachers and taking knives to school.

 

Ah well... (thinks)... I bet they haven't got ADHD/ASD/ODD/Absent Dad [insert factor of choice/delete as appropriate], have they?

 

Well, actually...

 

Yes... (further thinks)... Well ALL kids are different

 

Yes. And so are all parents

 

Hmmmm [further further thinks]... I'm NOT a bad mum and you can't tell me I am. I love my kids, I do... :crying::crying::crying::crying::crying:

 

 

:whistle::lol:

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hehe, it's more the article I read recently where she says she's too busy to have an adult relationship...so, bless 'er, she's never actually had to balance maintaining a marriage/partnership, with bringing up an assortment of kids ;) Just more a of a wry chuckle :whistle:

 

As I say loads I agree with, and used to love watching her progs with my girlies when they were younger ('See, SEE how you will turn out if you don't behave??!!' :devil: )

 

Bid :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a link on the ITV PLayer.

 

http://www.itv.com/itvplayer/video/?Filter=259926

 

JsMum

 

I managed to watch the programme and I do agree that in the situation with Ryan he needed much more than medication, I was impressed with his school he attended, even the behaviourist felt that he needed his medication increasing yet it was the six weeks holidays, usually kids taking ADHD medication they have a medication vacation, they dont take it in the holidays.

 

What I didnt understand was why where they in agreement for Ryans medication to be increased if it wasnt a cure, that he would still be unhappy, that bit I was confused with.

 

JsMumx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I managed to watch the programme and I do agree that in the situation with Ryan he needed much more than medication, I was impressed with his school he attended, even the behaviourist felt that he needed his medication increasing yet it was the six weeks holidays, usually kids taking ADHD medication they have a medication vacation, they dont take it in the holidays.

 

What I didnt understand was why where they in agreement for Ryans medication to be increased if it wasnt a cure, that he would still be unhappy, that bit I was confused with.

 

JsMumx

 

He actually said 'to give mum a break' :tearful: That's exactly the point the programme was making - Ryan was being given a 'chemical cosh' for everyone else's benefit, not his own...

Don't get me wrong, I'm not in any way saying that the parent's / carer's needs should be ignored. But when there's so much overwhelming evidence that there are things that could be done that would help the child AND the parent and most of those things rely on re-educating the parent/addressing problems in parenting the parent's needs shouldn't be allowed to take precedence over the child's.

 

I felt the one doctor opposing increased meds was 'tucked up' by his colleague, TBH. Right the way through, he was given the impression that his colleague agreed with him, and then suddenly at the last minute it was four to one against with the mother, her daughter, his colleague and the TA all voting to up the dosage and knoch the kid out for six weeks of summer holidays :(

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He actually said 'to give mum a break' :tearful: That's exactly the point the programme was making - Ryan was being given a 'chemical cosh' for everyone else's benefit, not his own...

Don't get me wrong, I'm not in any way saying that the parent's / carer's needs should be ignored. But when there's so much overwhelming evidence that there are things that could be done that would help the child AND the parent and most of those things rely on re-educating the parent/addressing problems in parenting the parent's needs shouldn't be allowed to take precedence over the child's.

 

I felt the one doctor opposing increased meds was 'tucked up' by his colleague, TBH. Right the way through, he was given the impression that his colleague agreed with him, and then suddenly at the last minute it was four to one against with the mother, her daughter, his colleague and the TA all voting to up the dosage and knoch the kid out for six weeks of summer holidays :(

 

L&P

 

BD

 

The doctor actually admitted that Ritalin was cheaper than giving these boys (girls if its ever picked up) what they need such as TAs extra.

 

No daught Ritalin was a cheaper option for the summer holidays, surely there is other provisions available to give the Mum a Break! Such as specialist respite provisions, special needs holiday clubs, sessional workers and home support but ritalin is defo cheaper than ensuring the families have more practicle support.

 

If ritalin is required surely its in a classroom context not a home or holiday context and certainly not to give Mums a break.

 

One of the mums had to wait two years for a parenting course.

 

Ive done the Family Effective Training course which did help with ADHD however Js needs are not just ADHD he has comorbids and learning difficulties that mean he needs additional needs parenting courses, our council did not buy in these parenting courses and so for families like mine the courses where aimed at normally develpmental children.

 

The investment needed for many children with additional needs is outweighed by funding and so medication is going to be going to be a short sticky festering plaster eventually it falls off.

 

What is needed is a Wholistic aproach, medication, provisions and services.

 

Thats not going to happen is it.

 

JsMumx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What is needed is a Wholistic aproach, medication, provisions and services.

 

Thats not going to happen is it.

 

JsMumx

 

No, sadly, it's probably not...

But in all honesty, J's mum, there is another side to that 'parents not getting support' coin and that is that often it would be irrelevant anyway. No parent going on a parenting 'course' is going to be told anything different than what a behavioural psychologist would tell them in a meeting at CAMHS - it's just going to cost a lot more to implement, and afterwards is equally likely to be ignored, disregarded, misinterpreted etc or met with a blank denial. The major difference between the two children shown in the programme was that one child had a mother who was willing to listen and learn and to accept that her child's behaviour was directly influenced by her parenting, and the other one didn't.

 

Looking at the (relative lack of) responses to this thread, and to the one about 'Supernanny', and knowing how defensive people get when any such suggestion of parental influence is raised on the forum, I can't help but feel that in general terms the response of parents confronted with this uncomfortable (but pretty much undeniable) truth involves fingers being stuck in ears and repeated 'lalala' noises until the nasty people suggesting it go away!

 

I do agree that an holistic approach is the ideal and it always has been and it should be what we're working towards. But if we look at that as a triangle, with appropriate meds and appropriate professional support as two 'sides' of the triangle the fundamental base has to be the 24/7 reality that the child lives with at home, and all too often it is that base that is missing from the equation. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the (relative lack of) responses to this thread, and to the one about 'Supernanny', and knowing how defensive people get when any such suggestion of parental influence is raised on the forum, I can't help but feel that in general terms the response of parents confronted with this uncomfortable (but pretty much undeniable) truth involves fingers being stuck in ears and repeated 'lalala' noises until the nasty people suggesting it go away!

 

Oh for heavens sake BD! Some of us haven't commented perhaps because we didn't see either of the programmes? :rolleyes::shame:

 

K x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh for heavens sake BD! Some of us haven't commented perhaps because we didn't see either of the programmes? :rolleyes::shame:

 

K x

 

That's certainly a possibility, but I think it's difficult to overlook the fact that almost any thread, even those that don't talk about specific TV programmes, where parental influence (or lack of influence) on childhood behaviour is raised will almost invariably be derailed or ignored. The same often applies to threads about autistic adults taking accountability for their actions rather than projecting every 'negative' arising in their lives onto their dx. And I find that really sad. And frustrating. Because In MY Opinion they are often the very factors that disable autistic (and NT come to that) children the most, that give rise to situations like the over and casual prescription of controlled medications and provide unhelpful, unrealistic and ultimately disabling stereotypes of autism.

 

But point accepted, it could just be that people haven't seen the programme.

 

L&P

 

BD :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Looking at the (relative lack of) responses to this thread, and to the one about 'Supernanny', and knowing how defensive people get when any such suggestion of parental influence is raised on the forum, I can't help but feel that in general terms the response of parents confronted with this uncomfortable (but pretty much undeniable) truth involves fingers being stuck in ears and repeated 'lalala' noises until the nasty people suggesting it go away!

 

 

"If that doesn't equate to joining up random dots to make the picture you want to see I don't know what does."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:rolleyes:

 

Anything to say about the programme, Adam, or did you post purely to bait/flame?

 

Thought so...

Edited by baddad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair BD, Adam has a valid point. You're making negative assumptions about forum users based on your own preconceptions rather than any actual evidence .

You can't criticise people then cry victiim when they respond. Adam's post above was no more " flaming" or "baiting" than yours. It's merely a challenge.

 

K x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair BD, Adam has a valid point. You're making negative assumptions about forum users based on your own preconceptions rather than any actual evidence .

You can't criticise people then cry victiim when they respond. Adam's post above was no more " flaming" or "baiting" than yours. It's merely a challenge.

 

K x

Hi kathryn -

 

I'm not crying victim in any way (which is not to say, of course, that it's not my opinion that Adam is 'baiting' or whetever, just that whatever his intentions I certainly wouldn't feel intimidated by him). I've already acknowledged, in response to your earlier post, the possibility that my negative assumptions could be wrong, I've also qualified the point I originally made by expanding it to include a more general (i.e. non-programme specific) observation. Not sure, really, what else I could add to that.

 

Perhaps Adam would like to clarify what he intended by his post, rather than you making assumptions? He might well say, 'Yep, what Kathryn said'. In fact, I'd go so far to make another assumption that that's exactly what he would say, :whistle:

 

L&P

 

BD :D

 

Oh PS: And you never know, perhaps he might have something to offer on the programme, or issues raised by the programme, itself.

Edited by baddad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have kids so maybe it's easier for me to comment in some ways (as its less close to home) but in other ways its harder cuz I don't want to offend anyone and there's so many things that offend it seems.....

 

I saw this programme on itv player the night it was aired and just didn't know what to say at first...

 

I don't think the kid (ryan) should be drugged during the summer hols, what's the point? (other than the reason stated in the programme) but I say "what's the point" because if you were gonna up his dose for his sake, then surely september when he's back at school would be more beneficial... especially considering the short period of effectivity of the pills as well.

 

and with his mum I got the impression that the docs just weren't even bothering to try cuz they knew it wouldn't make a difference i.e. that she wouldn't listen or be cooperative - and the fact that one of them did a compete 180 surely didn't help - the consistent administration of pills was questionable it seemed too, yet swiftly glazed over...

 

And I didn't even mention dogs :lol: whoops, failed :devil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the (relative lack of) responses to this thread, and to the one about 'Supernanny',

Would just like to point out that although not a parent I responded in the supernanny one and no-one has said anything since!!! not about my post about dogs from 2 episodes ago and not about last weeks show (where the mum wanted to pack her boys off to india for goodness sake) and you didn't even comment yourself - unless you missed it again?

 

Anyway, there was a free opportunity there - you could have picked holes in my dog theory and then everyone would get angry and read it all and then we could close the topic :lol::devil:

 

I'll add the link for it... in the other post....

 

:jester:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched the programme, and it really disturbed me that he was drugged to give the Mum a break. When L was only sleeping for 4 hours in 24 we refused to have him medicated (not melatonin as that didn't work, proper sedatives) as we decided it would have been for our benefit and not his as at that point, he didn't seem to need anymore sleep.

 

I disagree that most parents wouldn't take parenting courses if offered though, purely due to the demand I see at work. At work we offer an ASD parenting course which is 7 weeks long and one called Living with ASD and ADHD which is 10 weeks long. We offer free babysitting for families in the Borough so people can attend. Both are very specific to those conditions and we get referrals from CAHMS, Social Services, Schools and more often from parents themselves who attend the centre support groups looking for help. We are always fully booked with a waiting list, from our Borough and neighbouring boroughs. Yes, there are some people that you can tell whilst they are on the course that they're not going to implement anything from it, but on the whole people really seem to benefit from the advice.

 

I often agree with you BD about some parents not wanting to take responsibility for raising their children and blaming everything but themselves on the problems the child may have, but lately your posts come across that you believe the majority of parents take that tack rather than just 'some' and in my personal experience that's just not true.

 

Lynne

Edited by Lynden

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I often agree with you BD about some parents not wanting to take responsibility for raising their children and blaming everything but themselves on the problems the child may have, but lately your posts come across that you believe the majority of parents take that tack rather than just 'some' and in my personal experience that's just not true.

 

What Lynne said :thumbs:

 

I also agree that it is a lack of parenting knowldge/course rather than the denial that they could possibly be wrong that is (part of) the che problem. Cerainly when we went on our parenting course I was`amazed at how perfectly intelligent and sensible epople seemed to have zero idea of how to parent a child! The simplest management techniques were suggested, practised (by the VAST majority of the parents) and in most cases solved the family issues!

 

I have always known there is a massive lack of parenting knowledge in the uneducated/disenfranchised of society, and have been involved in a number of programmes designed to tacke that - alough I fel they are still not enough and not always getting to the most needy people.... But the numbers of well educated and empowered members of society sriously screwing up the next generation is something I thin we al should be concerned about..

 

Anyways I just thought I'd shove my twopenny's worth in, even though I didn't see either programme, whch is why I didn't comment before ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I often agree with you BD about some parents not wanting to take responsibility for raising their children and blaming everything but themselves on the problems the child may have, but lately your posts come across that you believe the majority of parents take that tack rather than just 'some' and in my personal experience that's just not true.

 

Lynne

 

I think that's probably a catch 22: the more aggressively the point I'm trying to make is responded to (and lately it has been very aggressive!) the more concerete I feel I have to make my observations. If I'm allowed to make them, that's good enough for me, but when I'm 'shouted down' - especially by what appears sometimes to be a mob with the explicit intention of doing exactly that - with what are often nothing more than gainsaying arguments or personal attacks I tend, quite naturally, to respond in kind...

 

And I totally agree with Kez's post too: I don't think it's all parents in denial, or 'bad' parenting, or autism exclusive; I think it's part of a much bigger problem that encompasses our society generally; that in an effort to give our children 'everything' we are failing to give them the things they actually need most. The problem is, that if I (or anyone else) tries to include autistic children or their parents within that general observation you do often run into denial and hostility.

 

I've said in the past I think one difference between me and many other posters is that I don't only see autism (or disability) only in terms of my own son/my own experience. I became 'political' (for want of a better word) about disability issues before my son was even born, and the most disabling barriers that disabled people face are that arise from responses to their disability rather than their disabilities themselves. I think more than any other area of disability, autism stands out as the one where responses (IMO) have worsened (can't do rather than can do) rather than got better, and where people are being further disabled rather than empowered. That scares the cr*p out of me, TBH.

 

Thank you, Kez and Lynden, for responding in ways that actually move the discussion - even the bits about me rather than the topic itself - forward rather than bringing it to a grinding halt! :thumbs:

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's all parents in denial, or 'bad' parenting, or autism exclusive; I think it's part of a much bigger problem that encompasses our society generally; that in an effort to give our children 'everything' we are failing to give them the things they actually need most.

Where I live, there is so many people who fall under that category, they buy their kids lots of stuff (indeed this was the problem in the latest JF program for one family) and then they can't understand why their kids aren't happy "but they've got everything" they insist, but they aren't actually doing anything with the kids most of the time! They are just plonking them in front of the tv or telling them to go and play with all their things...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, to be honest I think it was Plato that gives us the first recorded quote lamenting the state of 'yoof'!! ;) And I think you will find each successive generation has very similar complaints :lol:

 

One trend that I have noticed is that there appears to have developed an extended adolescence, with young adults still living at home into their 30's, and continuing with quite adolesecent lifestyles.

 

However, I would also like to point out the really terrific young people who are out there, who we never hear about. I work with colleagues who are predominantly in their late teens to early 20s. They care for the most disabled and challenging of children, with complex medical needs in addition to their learning difficulties. They do this with great compassion, patience and fantastic humour. And they appear to come from a complete cross-section of backgrounds. I have had a lump in my throat before now when I have seen a great, hulking late-teenage lad tenderly stroking the face of a little boy recovering from a seizure.

 

So I say HURRAH for our young people...in my opinion the vast majority are hard-working, caring and a credit to ...oooh, who would that be now??...oh that's right, their parents!! ;):D

 

Bid :)

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, to be honest I think it was Plato that gives us the first recorded quote lamenting the state of 'yoof'!! ;) And I think you will find each successive generation has very similar complaints :lol:

 

Yes, that's certainly the case, as somebody pointed out the other week. TBH though, even though I fully acknowledge that there has always been a 'generation gap' and always will be, I don't see how it's relevant to generalise that factor into the wider equation(?) If a new strain of flu developed that was 99% fatal, it wouldn't be relevant to say 'yes, but flu's been killing people since the days of Plato' would it?

 

Just to clarify, because I'm not quite sure, are you now saying that you don't think the current generation of teens is generally less respectful, more selfish, more undercontrolled and more indulged than children generally were in, say, 'your' day? Or that autistic children are for some reason not included in those statistics? Similarly, are you now saying that if children are generally less respectful, more selfish, more undercontrolled and more indulged than children of 'your' generation you don't think parents/parenting have any influence on that factor? :unsure:

 

One trend that I have noticed is that there appears to have developed an extended adolescence, with young adults still living at home into their 30's, and continuing with quite adolesecent lifestyles.

 

I do agree that 'failure to launch' is part of the same equation, and there are all sorts of social changes (housing costs, unemployment, higher education that extends further into adulthood etc) that impact on that, but the question of 'dependency' and failure to achieve independence isn't entirely down to those kinds of shifts. There's an advert that crops up on TV from time to time with a five year old Indian girl street urchin, who is pretty much expected to look after herself and her tiny baby brother all day every day; cooking, feeding, fending for themselves etc, It is, it goes without saying, an absolute horror and totally wrong that those levels of poverty exist in the world and that children lose their lives through them, but comparing that girls plight with the situation of a nineteen year old brat who spends every waking hour playing his / her Xbox and verbally or physically abusing the rest of his /her family shows just how low expectations can be in our society.

 

 

However, I would also like to point out the really terrific young people who are out there, who we never hear about. I work with colleagues who are predominantly in their late teens to early 20s. They care for the most disabled and challenging of children, with complex medical needs in addition to their learning difficulties. They do this with great compassion, patience and fantastic humour. And they appear to come from a complete cross-section of backgrounds. I have had a lump in my throat before now when I have seen a great, hulking late-teenage lad tenderly stroking the face of a little boy recovering from a seizure.

 

So I say HURRAH for our young people...in my opinion the vast majority are hard-working, caring and a credit to ...oooh, who would that be now??...oh that's right, their parents!! ;):D

 

Bid :)

 

I totally agree there are some lovely, terrific young people out there... I don't know whether I'd agree it's the 'vast majority' but I really would like to think so. But lets not overlook the absolute monsters, the minor monsters, the neds, the nasties, the ne'er do wells and the plain old numpties that are out there too, or overlook the further fact that many of them were born with at least the same amount of potential to find roles within the former set, or the influence that their significant adult role models would/could have had on the adults they turned out to be.

 

Some will be high achievers and some won't. That's human nature, biodiversity, whatever... Some will achieve great things with the support and influence of their parents / networks etc and and some will achieve great things despite the implications of negative influences and a lack of support from the parents / networks etc. The same applies to the neds: some will be neds because of negative influences/lack of support and some will be neds despite having all the opportunties & support anyone could really wish for. But I honestly think the last of those really are a minority, and I totally think that parents, carers and 'significant adults' are by far the most influential role models for all children.

 

L&P

 

BD

 

Oh - PS: Another thing that really bugs me is that often those children who do end up acheiving despite, as it were, have that achievement taken from them under the assumption that the parents were 'getting it right all along'. I think that short changes them :(

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Thank you, Kez and Lynden, for responding in ways that actually move the discussion - even the bits about me rather than the topic itself - forward rather than bringing it to a grinding halt! :thumbs:

 

L&P

 

BD

 

Well I hoped it wouldn't come across as an attack on you, because it isn't, which is why I said your posts come across as, rather than you come across as. I agree with you more often than I don't and many threads have gotten horribly personal lately.

 

I do agree with you in part about society in general disabling disabled people - My Mum had a serious brain haemorrhage when she was 46 and was in hospital for 6 months and in rehab for over 2 years. I finished University the month she got home so it was generally accepted that I would become her carer for a while. That was fine, and I didn't mind doing it, but I got a LOT of flack from people who would come and visit us. They would see her struggling to spread her toast for example, and would give me grief for not helping (read do it for her), but if I had done it for her, she would never have relearnt the skill. Never mind the fact that I had to shower her and take care of her personal care and all that stuff, they just saw what I wasn't doing and her struggling to do it. Peed me off no end ;)

 

I think that's mostly due to lack of education/understanding. Where I work I mostly see parents from all backgrounds that are willing to do anything to help their children and improve their home life so my views are coloured by that. Also, like Bid, we have some fantastic young people who work at our sister charity playschemes/after school club, and the young staff at my sons school are amazing with the kids.

 

However, I did find it a little interesting the other day when talking with my daughter who is only 9 about what she would like to be when she grew up and she said she didn't feel like she would want to be a teacher when she saw how some of the children in her school talk to the teachers.

 

Incidentally, 123 Magic is one of the courses we offer at work and I did it as a parent a few months back and the little adult analogy really hit home for me too, especially as to how I treated my daughter rather than my son.

 

Lynne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that's certainly the case, as somebody pointed out the other week. TBH though, even though I fully acknowledge that there has always been a 'generation gap' and always will be, I don't see how it's relevant to generalise that factor into the wider equation(?) If a new strain of flu developed that was 99% fatal, it wouldn't be relevant to say 'yes, but flu's been killing people since the days of Plato' would it?

 

Just to clarify, because I'm not quite sure, are you now saying that you don't think the current generation of teens is generally less respectful, more selfish, more undercontrolled and more indulged than children generally were in, say, 'your' day? Or that autistic children are for some reason not included in those statistics? Similarly, are you now saying that if children are generally less respectful, more selfish, more undercontrolled and more indulged than children of 'your' generation you don't think parents/parenting have any influence on that factor? :unsure:

 

 

 

I do agree that 'failure to launch' is part of the same equation, and there are all sorts of social changes (housing costs, unemployment, higher education that extends further into adulthood etc) that impact on that, but the question of 'dependency' and failure to achieve independence isn't entirely down to those kinds of shifts. There's an advert that crops up on TV from time to time with a five year old Indian girl street urchin, who is pretty much expected to look after herself and her tiny baby brother all day every day; cooking, feeding, fending for themselves etc, It is, it goes without saying, an absolute horror and totally wrong that those levels of poverty exist in the world and that children lose their lives through them, but comparing that girls plight with the situation of a nineteen year old brat who spends every waking hour playing his / her Xbox and verbally or physically abusing the rest of his /her family shows just how low expectations can be in our society.

 

 

 

 

I totally agree there are some lovely, terrific young people out there... I don't know whether I'd agree it's the 'vast majority' but I really would like to think so. But lets not overlook the absolute monsters, the minor monsters, the neds, the nasties, the ne'er do wells and the plain old numpties that are out there too, or overlook the further fact that many of them were born with at least the same amount of potential to find roles within the former set, or the influence that their significant adult role models would/could have had on the adults they turned out to be.

 

Some will be high achievers and some won't. That's human nature, biodiversity, whatever... Some will achieve great things with the support and influence of their parents / networks etc and and some will achieve great things despite the implications of negative influences and a lack of support from the parents / networks etc. The same applies to the neds: some will be neds because of negative influences/lack of support and some will be neds despite having all the opportunties & support anyone could really wish for. But I honestly think the last of those really are a minority, and I totally think that parents, carers and 'significant adults' are by far the most influential role models for all children.

 

L&P

 

BD

 

Oh - PS: Another thing that really bugs me is that often those children who do end up acheiving despite, as it were, have that achievement taken from them under the assumption that the parents were 'getting it right all along'. I think that short changes them :(

 

L&P

 

BD

 

What I'm saying is that while I agree that there are, and always have been, feckless parents, over-indulgent parents, and any other kind of 'negative' parent you care to describe, personally I don't think it is the epidemic you believe it to be. Anthropologically I'm willing to bet that parenting (within its generational and cultural differences) has probably kept more or less the same negatives and positives since hunter-gatherers first started to hunt and gather!

 

In my opinion, the vast majority of adults are, and always have been, perfectly adequate parents, who love their kids...and make some mistakes, do some things brilliantly, but mostly muddle-through and produce adults who are no more and no less messed up than every previous generation.

 

Which is not to say that parenting books, courses and even :o She Who Must Not Be Named (:curlers:) aren't valuable and positive things :thumbs:

 

 

Bid :)

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In my opinion, the vast majority of adults are, and always have been, perfectly adequate parents, who love their kids...and make some mistakes, do some things brilliantly, but mostly muddle-through and produce adults who are no more and no less messed up than every previous generation.

 

Bid :)

 

^^ this! :D I am trying my damnedest to be a good mother but I have no doubts at all that I'll still be giving my two plenty to talk to their therapists about in 20 years time ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anthropologically I'm willing to bet that parenting (within its generational and cultural differences) has probably kept more or less the same negatives and positives since hunter-gatherers first started to hunt and gather!

 

Bid :)

 

Oh. No. Don't agree with that at all. I think styles of parenting have changed hugely over the centuries - or even from decade to decade. If they hadn't, 'Spock' would still be as relevant today as he was in the 40's and 50's.. 'Supernanny, 1,2,3 Magic' etc are actually strong indicators that Spock got it massively wrong in many ways, as did all those daft parents who bought into him. I think, probably, that in hunter-gatherer culture mothers and children had far more interaction with each other, more strongly defined roles and much more concrete boundaries and expectations. I've never seen any video footage of hunter gatherer-societies where mums indulged three, four and five year olds with buggies or 'harnesses' to stop them running away, or swapped their dinners of witchety grubs and cassava root for chicken nuggits and yoggits because they're 'the only things they will eat'... In fact, in most of the documentary's I've seen there's a complete absence of 'naughty step' behaviours in the first place, so the naughty step would be a moot point. Of course, it might be all down to the editing. Naughty Messrs Attenborough, Grylls, Mears et al,

 

Heaven forbid - if parenting styles and fashions didn't change we'd all be 'Victorian dads', and we wouldn't want that now, would we? :whistle: I don't know about the vast majority of parents... I'm quite happy to accept that the majority are, and that even the ones who aren't all have the best intentions, but in the very simplest terms whenever I've seen any programme that features parents who I think have a positive affect through their parenting on their kids (i.e. the vast majority of them on 'born to be different') they all seem very grounded, to have firm and realistic boundaries and expectations of their kids and expend a lot of time and effort reinforcing those messages and interacting with their kids. Contrasting that, whenever I see a programme featuring badly behaved kids I tend to see the opposite. As I say, that could all be down to the edit, but it really does seem unlikely...

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say 'styles' of parenting...if you look I put in parenthesis a qualification regarding generational and cultural differences.

 

I specified positives and negatives within parenting...so there were feckless or over-indulgent parents in Plato's time or among the followers of Truby King/Spock/ Kitsinger, just as there are today...positives and negatives that transcend parenting styles.

 

Hope that's clarified my opinion.

 

Bid :)

 

And as an after thought...the majority of ordinary, good-enough parents muddling through as they have always done wouldn't make good TV would it...so we could suppose that Super Nanny et al could well be the exception rather than the epidemic that concerns you :unsure:

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never seen any video footage of hunter gatherer-societies where mums indulged three, four and five year olds with buggies or 'harnesses' to stop them running away

That's 'cause they saw their older brothers and sisters who did try running away being eaten by random woolly mammoths and sabre-toothed tiggers. Oh, and video hadn't been invented then. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say 'styles' of parenting...if you look I put in parenthesis a qualification regarding generational and cultural differences.

 

I specified positives and negatives within parenting...so there were feckless or over-indulgent parents in Plato's time or among the followers of Truby King/Spock/ Kitsinger, just as there are today...positives and negatives that transcend parenting styles.

 

Hope that's clarified my opinion.

 

Bid :)

 

And as an after thought...the majority of ordinary, good-enough parents muddling through as they have always done wouldn't make good TV would it...so we could suppose that Super Nanny et al could well be the exception rather than the epidemic that concerns you :unsure:

 

Hold on - when have I said there's an 'epidemic'? Although that said, I think going back to the original topic the the programme talked about an 'endemic over-priscription of medications' and certainly dx of autism ADHD has been described as 'epidemic' so maybe from there?

 

Yes, certainly there would have been feckless and over-indulgent parenting in Platos time - or at any other point in history come to that, but again that's not what's being discussed here. What's being discussed is ineffective parenting - and that will be subject to the whims and dictates of 'fashion' or to the kind of medical advice / social 'models' that drive those fashions and to all sorts of other winds of change too.

 

Sorry, kind of think this is just going round in circles...

 

I do agree that

good-enough parents muddling through as they have always done wouldn't make good TV

 

But I've got to admit that the logic of

so we could suppose that Super Nanny et al could well be the exception
is lost on me? Why 'suppose' anything? Why not just watch the programme, see what happens and draw an informed conclusion based on the result. Unless, of course, we come back to that same old lame old of 'well it's probably the edit'.

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's 'cause they saw their older brothers and sisters who did try running away being eaten by random woolly mammoths and sabre-toothed tiggers. Oh, and video hadn't been invented then. :lol:

 

Noooooooooo... there are still hunter-gatherer societies and they still appear from time to time on our screens, but it's not tigers (sabre toofed or otherwise) or effluence (hirsute or baldy) they're afeared of - it's upsetting mater and pater hunter gatherer!

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What struck me was that although ryan's mum definitely was going after the tablet route - it begs the question - how many uncertain parent are pushed down it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry BD, I was thinking about and extrapolating Lynne's point, with which I agree...but you're right, you haven't actually used the term epidemic.

 

 

I often agree with you BD about some parents not wanting to take responsibility for raising their children and blaming everything but themselves on the problems the child may have, but lately your posts come across that you believe the majority of parents take that tack rather than just 'some' and in my personal experience that's just not true.

Lynne

 

And since you feel I'm :offtopic: I'm happy to bow out now.

 

Bid :)

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And since you feel I'm :offtopic: I'm happy to bow out now.

 

Bid :)

 

Hold on... I'm, not bothered about the topic wandering at all. Just felt that as far as my involvement in that particular aspect's concerned there's not much else I can say without repeating myself. The quote you extrapolated from Lynne's post is a good case in point - I've already responded to it once, so any further comment would be 'going round in circles'. Wouldn't it? :unsure:

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...