I haven't checked with CHADD (ADHD booster group the equivalent of NAMI as drug pushers) but I'll speak out anyway: 1. I question whether ADHD drugs trigger behavior that then gets labelled, mistakenly, as bipolar in children. Disgusto and potentially fatal as both groups of drugs are. 2. Where are the examples of families (and they are definitely out there) who are very cautious about their little boy's diets, behavioral limits, limiting TV, etc., all things which can really help those little boys chill out. Why doesn't Ms. High Horse at the NYT report on these families? Hard work, yes, with great results. I think kids these days have a hard time in general. To drug them with dangerous drugs which can have fatal outcomes or then hopscotch them into atypicals is to go so far as to THROW THEM AWAY. I met a couple of parents at the FDA's ADHD Hearing last year; another flop - no black box warning - and the parents were numb with grief, having lost their children to the various bouquet of ADHD drugs. Was this risk mentioned in the NYT article.

It is beyond my ability to grasp why ---stop the thought--- this is where common sense, pure logic go out the window.

It's an industry. Heartless, cold and calculated. Money making, marketing, profits, and they have enough money to pay off grieving parents, and blitz the media with advertising so that the general population sees nothing else, than 'reason' to medicate kids/adults.

Does the word schizophrenia mean anything any more?

Not a good buzz word in marketing.

How ingenious of the companies to re package psychiatry to appear so broad based, that we now believe children need antipsychotics, antidepressants and extended release Adderall, oh I guess I left out Ritalin.

This is an interesting discussion, which appears to centre on what behaviour one believes is appropriate. And when we've decided what behaviour is appropriate, how to modify the behaviour we see before us (in a child, say), until it looks like our model.

Typically, this will involve reducing the child to something that shuts up and doesn't look for alternative avenues of stimulation (and when it does, be sure to act on the received wisdom that too much TV/computer games/online chat, etc, are not good, and limit them, without providing an alternative), and whom we only speak to when we wish to tell it to shut up and not look for stimulation.

When the child objects to this approach, we look for explanations outside our own conduct, (which can't be the wrong approach, because received wisdom tells us we're right). The sense of relief for parents who are told that their child has a mental health disorder must be enormous, I should have thought - because that removes all responsibility for what has happened from their shoulders (which must, nevertheless, be at the back of their minds).

As such, while it is unfair to blame people who know no better, is it really necessary to make children responsible for the fact that nobody wants to talk to them, because they think too fast, which is what it boils down to, as far as I can see?

Matt

Most kids who act out actually suffer from following conditions:

- Wacky home life
- Bad schools/teachers
- Mobbing
- Boredom
- Loneliness

Few docs/parents have the time or inclination to make sure this isn't the case before they start medicating kids.

I agree. I don't think that children should be drugged or diagnosed with personality disorders before they reach the age of 18-21. And they certainly should not be drugged. Children who have ADHD like to move a lot and I think that can be channeled into dancing or acting. Personality disorders should not be viewed as something abnormal.

Just in case Judith Warner doesn't approve my blog comment, I'll post it here:

Like one of the posters above, I was born in the 1960s. I was lucky. ADHD hadn't been invented yet. Had it been around, I would have been fast-tracked into a lifetime of drug dependency.

The supposed genetic basis for ADHD is about as strong as the mythical genetic basis for bipolar. It should be no surprise that if a parent is feeble-minded enough to accept an arbitrary psychiatric diagnosis, they likely also passed their critical thinking skills onto their children. Gullibility really does seem to be a genetic trait.

I have a couple of questions for the ADHD believers:

(1) To what do you attribute this remarkable neurological epidemic? and

(2) Do these parents have s*** for brains?

What are we doing to this generation of kids? It's not a huge leap from Ritalin to crystal meth. What's going to be the fallout down the road? These doctors and parents are criminally negligent. I hope they get their butts sued off by their drug-addled children.

Francesca, I am inattentive ADD. My suffering is real. Just because ADHD is used to control normal boy behavior doesn't mean shitty dopaminergic function doesn't exist. Don't you dare minimize me.

I laugh at your "poor genetic basis" for bipolar -- the familial coincidence of this disorder is very very high. My father is inattentive like me. All my life I've been called lazy. Dopaminergic drugs saved my life. I'm unmedicated right now but will be trying Trivastal (possibly with a low dose of alpha-2 agonist in eveningsto offset adrenergic effects, which I cannot tolerate hence my difficulty with amphetamine and methylphenidate), which I have high hopes for ...

"It's not a huge leap from Ritalin to crystal meth."

Oh please.

You realize that numerous studies have shown conclusively that illegal drug abuse is strongly reduced in adults with ADHD who have been successfully treated with stimulant medication? You realize the massive benefits a successful medication regime produces in quality of life and ability to function for the inattentive? You don't know anything. You're as blinded by ideology as Ms. Warner.

Francesca wrote:

"The supposed genetic basis for ADHD is about as strong as the mythical genetic basis for bipolar. It should be no surprise that if a parent is feeble-minded enough to accept an arbitrary psychiatric diagnosis, they likely also passed their critical thinking skills onto their children. Gullibility really does seem to be a genetic trait.

I have a couple of questions for the ADHD believers:

(1) To what do you attribute this remarkable neurological epidemic? and

(2) Do these parents have s*** for brains?

What are we doing to this generation of kids? It's not a huge leap from Ritalin to crystal meth. What's going to be the fallout down the road? These doctors and parents are criminally negligent. I hope they get their butts sued off by their drug-addled children."

Question for Francesca: I'm curious--are you a parent? You certainly have a strong anti-parent bias-->"feeble minded, sh*t for brains, criminally negligent, drug-addled children, gulliability as a genetic trait".

Of course, there are clueless, selfish, foolish and negligent parents. And yes, in the current environment of big Pharma & pdocs acting only as pharmacists, many parents rush to choose a quick Rx fix to attempt to solve complex behavorial situatons in their children.

That being said, there are several parents who regularly post on this blog and others whom I have great respect for and whose children are on med(s). After researching & trying many other options, they made a difficult but informed decision without coercion to try med(s). They actually used critical thinking skills and when every other route failed and their child was still self-destructing in front of their eyes,chose a trial of medication. Nico pointed out that in many individuals, the benefits of a successful medication regime can produce a very positive quality of life and the ability to function.

And as to the "mythical genetic basis for bipolar," I find your critical thinking are flawed. In my own family tree and that of my late husband, there are now 3 generations where a diagnosis of bipolar disorder has been correctly identified. And the necessity of taking some sort of mood stabilizer along with CBT is also the common denominator. Without proper diagnosis and tx, many of my relatives would be dead or unable to realize any sort of normalcy/quality of life.

Check out: http://psychiatry.uchicago.edu/research/volunteers/bipolar.html and many numerous sources re: a genetic link

"An inborn tendency to develop Bipolar disorder runs in some individuals and/or families. However, most relatives will never develop the illness.

In our family studies, we can find chromosome regions with genes that may cause some family members to be at risk for Bipolar disorder. As we discover the nature of each gene, we likely will be able to develop better treatments.

For testing specific genes, large numbers of unrelated Bipolar persons offer greater statistical power. So we are enrolling Bipolar individuals without available families as well."

It's widely accepted that there is a genetic basis for developing bipolar disorder in some families. Can it be misdiagnosed and over-diagnosed and diagnosed way too early??? Yes and yes and yes. If/when the human genome project identifies the specific chromosome that puts one at risk for bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, will that disprove the "mythical genetic basis" that you refer to? Biology and environment should both be examined and studied closely.

I don't know which studies you've been looking at, Nico, but the ones I've seen show a very high correlation between illegal drug use and prior treatment with stimulants. You are being fed a line if you think for one minute stimulants prevent illegal drug abuse. Normally stimulants are a direct segue into cocaine and meth. "massive benefits" -- well maybe for that one test or paper that's due the next day but on a long term basis? No way. Stimulants stunt growth, depress mood, have serious cardiac and neuropyschiatric side effects that now have earned the drugs a black box warning etc. etc.

I took the time to read Judith Warner's blog re: Ritalin Wars and re: Second Thoughts from March, 2007 and all the comments posted for both articles. I think Anonymous summed up this "war" quite well when s/he wrote:

"Isn’t part of the problem here that you are thinking in very black and white terms–either ALL these children are overdiagnosed or ALL these children are truly suffering from distinct mental maladies? Perhaps some portion of these children do actually need pharmaceutical interventions, and some portion do not (but rather need different parenting and/or different sets of expectations from schools and society).

I understand that publishers don’t like nuance, but perhaps that is what you might best reach for in writing your book. There is no doubt in my mind that the upperclass today is freaking out its children by their obsessive focus on status and a very narrow definition of achievement, and also that many parents simply do not have the will to act as grown ups and deny their children anything. On the other hand, it is apparent that there are very troubled children who truly need direct medical intervention. Both can and do coexist, the trick is figuring out what situation you are in....

If you can write a book that transcends the sanctimony of both sides of this debate and offers a truly new perspective, then you will really be doing something profound."

I'm so tired of the "Good vs Evil", right vs wrong, sanctimonius extremes, name calling and intolerance of others' experiences & perspectives in this arena. I've lost respect for several bloggers because of their SANCTIMONY (I've been searching for that word---thank u, Anonymous!) I came here to learn, debate, listen and question---with healthy skepticism. Reason, respect, empathy and maturity are rare so I plan on taking a break from this hostile & dysfunctional environment. You "experts" can duke it out.

I posted a comment as well at the Warner blog, who knows if it will get published, regarding the topic of over-medication via over-dx'ing kids. This is what I feel needs to be addressed, and not overlooked, as we all know there are many,many kids being labeled ADHD, some based on simple, normal kid behavior such as inability to sit still in school,etc. I agree this type of discussion places ppl on the defense, and does a disservice to those kids who DO really need the med, --though I am not convinced so many need medicating at all,--- they are just being kids--and it's that easy access dx--most kids get it from the PCP along with the meds, in my experience and observation. I also noticed in that thread over at the Warner blog, one person said to "prove" the natural remedies some ppl. wrote about[diet, etc.] and wanted them to do an "alternatives" study, using placebos, etc.

I want to comment that the Pharmaceutical companies fund the researchers, studies, etc. so unless there is a "alternative" company that has that funding back-up, not much gets into "peer reviewed" journals. Most health alternative remedies are not approved by the FDA, and considering FDA and Pharma are connected, the mainstream thought leaders are connected with Pharma and the studies---well this leaves parents who HAVE found non-pharmaceutical interventions, in the position of being attacked in forums for not using pharmaceuticals.

Chemicals are a strong thing to add to a child's growing brain, heart and body. Why not try other things first? and why bash parents who have discovered an alternative that works? that has always puzzled me.

I still stand by my comment on another post here, that this is part "social hysteria" with the over-dx and over-medication of American children. This is why I am concerned about the approval of anti psychotics in kids--wow, those are powerful medications that quite frankly have proven to be less than effective for quality of life for ppl with schizophrenia, due to side effects, etc. --the efficacy just isn't there, if it was, we would have empty psych wards, group homes and people living full lives, not just existing as some do, and I speak from experience here.

BECAUSE my daughter was shifted from dx to dx to dx and med to med to med--and all labels and meds removed but one---well, this is why I feel it's important to understand that children are truly at risk here, with regard to these drugs getting approval.

I fear, and this is from my heart based on my daughter's experience; that children will be mis-dx, medicated, and by the time they are 18-20 years old, one will not have a baseline to that person's personality, and "real" self. One then ends up like me, as a mom always wondering, what harm the meds did, and would "something emerged" anyway, like so many docs like to say now that she is in a 19 year old body, that has been trashed by psych meds, and that's the truth.[one thing already confirmed via Depakote use is Polycystic Ovary Syndrome, irreversable damage done, due to being given meds not approved for use in children].

Hers is one story, that one can use as an example of a pharmaceutical industry that is corrupt and unethical in sales of product that kills and injures innocent people. The FACT that Zyprexa hid data that effected her in 1999 at age 11 is enough.

I hope other families do not ever have to watch a child lose their spirit and life as a result of a psychiatric paradigm gone wild funded by an industry that uses mass marketing for billions of dollars earned from innocent kids/adults.

I figured my post would ruffle a few feathers. And I also figured their best defence would be "But you're not a parent!" That's right. I'm not. I'm a psych survivor who's been through enough to know that biomedical psychiatry is a fraudulent pseudo-science.

Nancy wrote: "If/when the human genome project identifies the specific chromosome that puts one at risk for bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, will that disprove the "mythical genetic basis" that you refer to?"

No, because I'll be too busy catching the monkeys flying out of my ass. Everybody is "at risk" for mental illness. Your scenario raises an ethical nightmare? What if little Timmy is found to have the wonky chromosome? Are you going to force medicate him even if the disorder was never going to manifest itself? I'm sure Fuller Torrey and NAMI would recommend that you do.

And I think you missed my point. "Bipolar" is just a word, an arbitrary label, a moral judgement. Having multiple people in a family saddled with the same label indicates many things, but not a genetic basis for an alleged neurological disorder. Bipolar, like all the other mental illnesses, is a behavioural disorder. It can be unlearned, just the way it was learned.

I'm not "anti-parent." I'm anti drug abuse. And bombarding developing brains with stimulants is definitely drug abuse.

If a kid is having so much trouble in school that the only way to keep him in is to drug him, critical thinking would dictate that it's best to take the kid out of school. Children aren't chattels. They don't have an obligation to fulfill their parents' desires.

Nico, if you're taking drugs voluntarily and they help you, that's great. My concern is with those who aren't allowed or in a position to give consent: kids, coerced and forced patients.

Dear Francesca,

I don’t think you’ve ruffled a few feathers although I might bring out the shovels because it’s kind of getting deep in here amongst the “monkeys flying out of my ass” and all else.

Maybe it’s a good thing that “you’re not a parent!” Then again that might also apply to your being a support person or care giver.

Unlike you my spouse is so far a survivor of serious depression and I’ll disagree with you on the point that “biomedical psychiatry is a fraudulent pseudo-science.” I personally think it is one of the youngest sciences and one of the most difficult to research and understand.

I can also recall from my readings that surgery was performed with unwashed and unclean hands until research uncovered bacteria and the need for antiseptic applications for surgical purposes.

In time answers will come forth just unfortunately not with the speed that many of us would like.

“Your scenario raises an ethical nightmare? What if little Timmy is found to have the wonky chromosome? Are you going to force medicate him even if the disorder was never going to manifest itself?” --- Francesca Allan

Yup, I will agree with you it is a nightmare to learn that one has a genetic predisposition to a serious illness such as women knowing they’re the carrier of a gene(s) for breast cancer or an individual learning that they’re the carrier for the gene(s) for Huntington's chorea.

What we don’t need, in my opinion, is hysteria, rants and raving but education and relative calm when consulting with trusted, trained medical professionals sharing information and opinions when making extremely difficult decisions for one or for others.

Contrary to your thinking and the fact we currently are without the use of diagnostic means to determine various mood disorders, a term such as “bipolar” is a meaningful set of symptoms describing a disorder that others of us can understand and relate to under the current circumstances.

Having a familial history of similar symptoms would be considered a potential genetic predisposition to bipolar or the disorder such as Huntington's chorea in which the symptoms of these neurological illnesses were also first observed lacking diagnostic means. Then too there is Parkinson Disease also lacking diagnostics means but utilizing symptomology as a means for others to discuss and understand.

Once again I am against hysteria, rants and raving and abrogating the rights of the individual to make his/her choices. As a parent, grand parent and care giver I can assure you that my making decisions for others are far more difficult and challenging than making decisions for me.

“Bipolar, like all the other mental illnesses, is a behavioural disorder. It can be unlearned, just the way it was learned.” --- Francesca Allan
While I cannot speak for others I can speak for myself. I think your positions are as radical and unproven as those you condemn. Mood disorders are symptoms of something gone awry whether from childrearing, abuse, situational and environmental stresses or in the case of my spouse’s serious depression something malfunctioning in her brain. After 44 years nothing she has done or tried can unlearn her depression simply because there are no outside effects or events causing her depression. And like others who have shared similar knowledge and experiences with me your definitive statement appears to be a part of the many things that come from you ass.

While I appreciate and respect your advocating for the prevention of forced treatment I’ll also remind you there is a large population of patients capable of making informed medical decisions without your one-sided crusade.

Warmly,
Herb
VNSdepression.com

“Your scenario raises an ethical nightmare? What if little Timmy is found to have the wonky chromosome? Are you going to force medicate him even if the disorder was never going to manifest itself?” --- Francesca Allan

Herb: Yup, I will agree with you it is a nightmare to learn that one has a genetic predisposition to a serious illness such as women knowing they’re the carrier of a gene(s) for breast cancer or an individual learning that they’re the carrier for the gene(s) for Huntington's chorea.

** Herb, once again, you miss the point entirely. What about little Timmy? Are we going to force medicate him on the basis of his genetic profile? Yes or no?

Herb: What we don’t need, in my opinion, is hysteria, rants and raving but education and relative calm when consulting with trusted, trained medical professionals sharing information and opinions when making extremely difficult decisions for one or for others.

** Yes, Herb, here's where we part company. Many of us civil libertarian types make a point of NOT making decisions for others. Even if we own them, I mean, are married to them.

Herb: Contrary to your thinking and the fact we currently are without the use of diagnostic means to determine various mood disorders, a term such as “bipolar” is a meaningful set of symptoms describing a disorder that others of us can understand and relate to under the current circumstances.

** Horseshit, Herb. Bipolar is a laundry list of undesirable behaviours. It's a "serious" mental illness because it bothers other people.

Herb: Having a familial history of similar symptoms would be considered a potential genetic predisposition to bipolar or the disorder such as Huntington's chorea in which the symptoms of these neurological illnesses were also first observed lacking diagnostic means. Then too there is Parkinson Disease also lacking diagnostics means but utilizing symptomology as a means for others to discuss and understand.

** Yes, I agree completely. Similiar familial history is simply PRESUMED to indicate a genetic basis.

** Keep working on your delusional narrative, Herb. Consider yourself your wife's guardian angel. I (and others) don't share your point of view. I suspect your wife is a virtual prisoner of your over-controlling micro-management.

Herb: Maybe it’s a good thing that “you’re not a parent!” Then again that might also apply to your being a support person or care giver.

** I'm not a parent at this point in time, Herb. I very well may be in the future. And that would be a very good thing. You have no knowledge of whether or not I am a support person or care giver. Once again, you make assumptions to support your crooked world view.

** You're a tedious little turd, Herb. Piss off and go back to selling snake oil. You add nothing to the discussion here.

Coldly,
Francesca Allan

Dear Francesca,

“** Herb, once again, you miss the point entirely. What about little Timmy? Are we going to force medicate him on the basis of his genetic profile? Yes or no?” --- Francesca Allan

Oh really, I miss the point huh? Or is this more of your many theoretically questions and propositions you continually put out there?

Unlike you, I don’t have a Timmy. We’re not the parents of a Timmy and we simply are not in such a situation and don’t have all the facts to make any judgment. My grandchildren are more prone to asking for “yes” or “no” answers. I would guess it is part of childhood but with maturity comes the understanding that everything is not black or white, yes or no and that in reality there are shades of gray and since this is not a courtroom I’ll leave you to what I consider a childish question.

“** Yes, Herb, here's where we part company. Many of us civil libertarian types make a point of NOT making decisions for others. Even if we own them, I mean, are married to them.” --- Francesca Allan

Not being a “civil libertarian” type or any type nor owning anyone as you seem to indicate you do, I am married with a daughter and granddaughters and have almost always made an effort to discuss all matters before making any decision whenever possible. Along those same thoughts are the preparation of our wills and health care directives to also make our wishes known to others should we be incapacitated to do so.

By the way, have you done the same? I wouldn’t want anyone to bear the burden of the responsibility of making any decision on your behalf.

What you seem to miss in your altruism as a “civil libertarian” type are the realities of life and the years of intimate relationships between caring married individuals, partners and/or parents which you may lack, such as my spouse turning blue before me and in the early stages of death from an intentional overdose of medications. You’re right, I’m not a “civil libertarian” type and I chose to make a decision based upon what I know to be right and not some stranger like you shouting platitudes. Now should that happen to you sometime in the future and I happen to be present I’ll try to remember your strong “civil libertarian” type and I’ll first come to these forums to debate and obtain affirmation from others like you as to what is or is not the proper point to making decisions in your case.

“** Horseshit, Herb. Bipolar is a laundry list of undesirable behaviours. It's a "serious" mental illness because it bothers other people.” --- Francesca Allan

Tsk, tsk, tsk you certainly are very judgmental especially about others. Maybe for you it has “undesirable behaviours” but I do know individuals who have credited bipolar for enabling their creativity and their ability to undertake and achieve some outstanding accomplishments. I would only consider it a "serious" mental illness” if it impedes an individuals functioning or one’s life. Your illness or that of anyone else with whom I do not have a caring relationship doesn’t impact me or bother me in the least although I wouldn’t be cheering if you exclaimed it caused you grief.

“** Yes, I agree completely. Similiar familial history is simply PRESUMED to indicate a genetic basis.” --- Francesca Allan

Wow! You agreed with me upon something although in the case of Huntington's chorea nothing need be “PRESUMED.” Genetic testing is now capable of determining the illness.

“** Keep working on your delusional narrative, Herb. Consider yourself your wife's guardian angel. I (and others) don't share your point of view. I suspect your wife is a virtual prisoner of your over-controlling micro-management.” --- Francesca Allan

Thank goodness for my own intellect and ability to discern and to share my thoughts and concerns for what is good or bad for me and my loved ones. Thank goodness also for my spouse’s remark to me and I’ll paraphrase, “Thank you, I’m glad to be alive.” If I happened to listen to the rants and ramblings of individuals like you who lack the knowledge of the facts and intimacies of any situation least that between me and my spouse, my spouse would have been dead a long time ago. Then again, if that were the case I’d have no need any longer to read your rants.

While I still read but do not necessarily appreciate your ill mannered comments it represents for me a reflection on that which you may have been lacking in your own life and the inabilities and shortcomings to understand everyone has not lived your tragedies nor has your negative prospective on many issues.

“** You're a tedious little turd, Herb. Piss off and go back to selling snake oil. You add nothing to the discussion here.” --- Francesca Allan

One again, thanks for your friendly, warm and intellectual perspective and commentary. Unlike your perception of “tedious” I consider myself persistent. Unlike your perception of me “selling snake oil” I’m only sharing my experiences and not selling anything such as “civil libertarian” types and unlike you I tell no one what to do. Most importantly, my spouse is still alive, depression free despite other neurological challenges and enjoying a reasonable quality of life under the circumstances.

In conclusion, “yes,” I’ve made some good decisions. “No,” I don’t think you speak for anyone but yourself and upon some statements, I disagree. I do hope your Thanksgiving was as warm and fun filled amongst loved ones as was our family gathering.

Warmly,
Herb
VNSdepression.com

If I hadn't sworn not to talk to you any more, I'd be tempted to ask if your spouse's neurological difficulties could be related to her mental health treatment.