[email protected]

>Yes, I agree with many here who say Ritalin is overprescribed and that ADD
>doesn't apply in an unschooling life.

I am glad that we can agree on this.

>Again, to me those things were
>irrelevant. WHat really bothered me was someone deliberately violated a
>parent's wishes and decisions.

Nope, the parent was free to disallow the trip; I explained this was the
case before. Suggesting it again does not make it true.

>I want to let you all know that when I responded to the orginal post with
>the concerns of children on ritalin going cold turkey, I was only coming from
>this standpoint. Be it ritalin, or any prescribed medication meant for
>children
>on the standpoint of calming, anxiety or antidepressant etc...
>The uncle that wrote the post, gave no clue how the children stopped
>medication
>Except that he used the term cold turkey in
>his post.

As has been explained by me and other people in other replies already, cold
turkey is not an issue with Ritalin and most other psychocactive
substances. In fact there's only a very few that have any serious side
effects resultant from going cold-turkey off them.

And even then, a lot of the "cold-turkey" side effects are no more
dangerous than the side effects of staying on the drug.

Before you comment further about the dangers of cold-turkey recission of
ANY drug, I would strongly suggest that you read the complete list of the
side effects of Ritalin and the other chemicals the schools are pumping our
young boys full of, and then do an objective comparison of the "on the
drug" effects vs. the "coming off the drug" effects. It might just open
your eyes.

from another message:

>I'm sure Marc meant well by taking his nephews hiking and leaving their
>medication home. But I'm not sure I cared for the authoritarian tone of "we
>marched their little butts all over creation, and they HAD to keep up." It
>sounded a little disrespectful. Just my 2 cents.

Maybe it did, and perhaps I was being more facetious than comes across in
plain typed text -- but the fact is that they thoroughly enjoyed the week
and have been asking when we're going to take them on another one ever since.

And one thing you don't know about the one boy is that he had SO MUCH
energy that the one thing he needed to have on a regular basis -- a day
chock full of "wearing-out" activity -- is the one thing that caused him to
always be in trouble at home. His parent sat him in front of the TV for
hours on end, and then wondered why he'd get up in the middle of the night,
break things, raid the refrigerator, and other stuff. He NEEDED the
activity; it was bursting out of his seams. This was my point when I
explained how they slept peacefully and quietly the entire night through by
the second day -- their energy was channelled into healthy activity.

>From another post, repeating the comment quoted above:

>I noticed the same thing.

Hmmmm... Perhaps I either have a tone in text that comes across much
differently than I really mean it, or perhaps I just don't quite fit here.

>I also wondered what he meant by the
>"hypnosis box." Was that referring to television or to something else?

I was indeed referring to TV.

I fully realize that there are some here who believe a passive session of
watching TV is as valuable to a developing mind as an active session of
looking for bugs, playing in a sandbox, taking a hike through the woods and
chasing the local jackrabbits and squirrels, or building forts out of
boxes. I frankly think the TV is not a good substitute for anything that
involves activity.

-- Marc

AprilWells

WELL SAID!!

April

rambler@... wrote:

>
>
> I was indeed referring to TV.
>
> I fully realize that there are some here who believe a passive session of
> watching TV is as valuable to a developing mind as an active session of
> looking for bugs, playing in a sandbox, taking a hike through the
> woods and
> chasing the local jackrabbits and squirrels, or building forts out of
> boxes. I frankly think the TV is not a good substitute for anything that
> involves activity.
>
> -- Marc

[email protected]

In a message dated 6/6/02 1:50:16 PM Central Daylight Time,
rambler@... writes:


> >I'm sure Marc meant well by taking his nephews hiking and leaving their
> >medication home. But I'm not sure I cared for the authoritarian tone of
> "we
> >marched their little butts all over creation, and they HAD to keep up."
> It
> >sounded a little disrespectful. Just my 2 cents.
>
> Maybe it did, and perhaps I was being more facetious than comes across in
> plain typed text -- but the fact is that they thoroughly enjoyed the week
> and have been asking when we're going to take them on another one ever
> since.
>
> And one thing you don't know about the one boy is that he had SO MUCH
> energy that the one thing he needed to have on a regular basis -- a day
> chock full of "wearing-out" activity -- is the one thing that caused him to
> always be in trouble at home. His parent sat him in front of the TV for
> hours on end, and then wondered why he'd get up in the middle of the night,
> break things, raid the refrigerator, and other stuff. He NEEDED the
> activity; it was bursting out of his seams. This was my point when I
> explained how they slept peacefully and quietly the entire night through by
> the second day -- their energy was channelled into healthy activity.
>
> >From another post, repeating the comment quoted above:
>
> >I noticed the same thing.
>
> Hmmmm... Perhaps I either have a tone in text that comes across much
> differently than I really mean it, or perhaps I just don't quite fit here.
>
We all have different posting styles, we just have to get used to it. <bwg>

This is the first time I have posted on this particular subject. Although I
think TV is good, that is another subject. I do agree with Marc when he talks
about giving children, who have energy for three, lots of opportunity for
expending it. When Jack was three, we were having a terrible time with him.
He was always goooing! (at the time, I didn't realize that this is just how
boys are.) At his regular check up I spoke to his doctor about this, and he
(without talking to or observing Jack for any length of time.) wrote a script
for Adderall 5mg 1 tab each morning and 1 at noon (for ADHD) and another
script for Clonidine 0.1mg 1 tab each evening before bed (an *adult
medication* that relaxes and dilates blood vessels resulting in lowered blood
pressure. Treating hypertension.) so Jack could relax and sleep!

I loved Jack's doctor, his dad was my pediatrician, his brother is my regular
doctor and is married to my cousin. So before this and another incident six
months later involving a severe case of appendicitis misdiagnosed as a bad
case of the flu, I never questioned him! (resulting in Darin and I being
questioned at the hospital, in the middle of the night, about whether or not
we were child abusers! If we hadn't brought him in when we did, he would have
died in a few hours. AND he almost died on the OR table and twice in the next
two days. He stayed for 18 days and had to have another operation 5 days
later to remove 6 inches of bowel that became infected.) We kept Jack on
these meds for two months. During that time he became withdrawn, developed a
facial tic, constantly licked his lips and his hands shook. It broke my heart
to see my baby like this, but I trusted the doctor.

Now I am not saying that there is no such thing as ADD/ADHD, but I do believe
that giving the child the freedom to learn while standing up and walking
around (whatever helps) is best. I also believe that activity was/is the
answer to all of Jacks energy. During the day, we go to swimming lessons and
play at our park for at least two hours in the afternoon. The kids take their
bikes out every day too. Each evening when Darin gets home, he and Jack go
outside and clean up the yard, wrestle around and walk the dogs. Both kids
also have evening and Saturday ballgames two or three times a week. (in the
spring and summer) When they go visit their grandparents in Oklahoma, my Mom
keeps them busy too. She takes them to the OKC zoo, to the omni-plex and the
hands on science museum. They have bikes at her house and they ride all over.
My Dad takes them walking on the nature trails with his dog, fishing, and
teaches them gun safety. The little boy who I used to be at my wits end with,
now sleeps peacefully all night and isn't bouncing off the walls all day. He
can sit for a story and *most of the time* helps around the house.
Ironically, when he went to school this past year, he showed no signs of
ADD/ADHD. His teacher said he sat still during lessons, played nice... All
the things that are revered in public school.

Although I know there are children who have ADD/ADHD, I seriously doubt that
Jack ever had it. I believe that if his doctor had taken the time to visit
with Jack, he would have (maybe?) told me I was overreacting. I also believe
that if I had taken the time to read about, and talk to other parents with
children diagnosed with ADD/ADHD, I would have seen that Jack didn't fit the
picture.

Lessons learned with children are often the hardest. In some ways I am glad
this all happened, it gives me empathy with those who struggle with this
every day. It also opened my eyes regarding my own needs as a parent. I
really loosened up after all was said and done. This is when I learned that
if something isn't going to matter in 10 minutes, then it just isn't worth
worrying about at all.
Just my 15 cents. ~Nancy






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 6/6/02 3:44:35 PM, averyp@... writes:

<< And why is tv automatically a "substitute" for something else in a way
that other activities are not?
Everything we do is a substitute for something else we could be doing.
Hiking in the woods or looking for bugs might be a substitute for
painting a picture or baking cookies, but that doesn't make hiking in
the woods wrong. It's just the choice for the moment. >>

I was wondering the same kinds of things. And wondering whether Marc isn't
heavy on Gardner's nature intelligence, and lighter on visual and musical,
perhaps. Because all the bugs in the world you can find and watch life
cycles on will not bring you pictures of Nepal, nor opera, nor Shakespeare.
Yet on TV there are also bugs!

I know someone who disparages and rejects books with pictures. TRULY isn't
interested in picture books. Because... because she learns from written word
only, and pictures irritate her. She is not at all a visual learner. But
instead of saying "Some people are visual learners," she says people who need
pictures aren't as smart as she is.

Sandra

Patti

rambler@... wrote:

> Maybe it did, and perhaps I was being more facetious than comes
> across in
> plain typed text -- but the fact is that they thoroughly enjoyed the
> week
> and have been asking when we're going to take them on another one ever
> since.

I'm sure they enjoyed the week, it sounds like it was a lot of fun for
them.
And I realized your comment about "marching their little butts around"
was facetious, but I've just become more aware in recent years of an
unconscious attitude that children are second class citizens. I make
comments like yours myself at times, and then I try to imagine saying
the same thing in the same way about a respected adult, or hearing my
husband saying it about me. It's an eye-opening exercise.
Imagine a husband saying to his friends about his wife "I marched her
little butt all over creation today and she *had* to keep up."

> I fully realize that there are some here who believe a passive session
> of
> watching TV is as valuable to a developing mind as an active session
> of
> looking for bugs, playing in a sandbox, taking a hike through the
> woods and
> chasing the local jackrabbits and squirrels, or building forts out of
> boxes. I frankly think the TV is not a good substitute for anything
> that
> involves activity.

This is interesting. I have a few questions if you don't mind...
Do you feel the same way about other non-physically active pastimes-
like reading for example? In other words, would you say "reading is not
a good substitute for anything that involves physical activity"? I was
shamed for reading too much as a child and told I should be out
"playing."
And why is tv automatically a "substitute" for something else in a way
that other activities are not?
Everything we do is a substitute for something else we could be doing.
Hiking in the woods or looking for bugs might be a substitute for
painting a picture or baking cookies, but that doesn't make hiking in
the woods wrong. It's just the choice for the moment.
Also, what about watching tv while simultaneously doing something else?
We've watched tv while folding laundry, while playing with legos or
other building toys, while drawing pictures, while having a conversation
about what's on the tv, etc. Some people even exercise while they watch
tv. Watching tv doesn't automatically equal inactivity.

Patti


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]