Return-Path: <nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id g0VDsmn13524; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 08:54:48 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 08:54:48 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <3C594B5A.529BB128@ellijay.com> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: Art LaChance <arthur@ellijay.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-ld@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-LD:3875] RE: NIFL-LD:3810 NO Support for phonetic X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) Status: O Content-Length: 4295 Lines: 94 Welcome back Clif Willard!! (Excellent synopsis of ADHD presented in your post) Michelle posted some comments that I need to address so I'll go one at a time, plus some comments on ADHD, I'll try to not bore ya'll. Michelle (nifl3867) "However, I got the impression (correct or not) from your explaination that you do not think that the problems that they had emotional or otherwise when they were younger can be overcome at all when they are older. " Michelle, I have every reason to believe that in most cases those highly disruptive emotional situations that confound the very lives of children DO eventually release their hold on the child. UNLESS they are reinforced over and over again throughout the early stages of development, then they become part of overall makeup and "normal" behavior for that individual. And we're back to the "IF" factor. IF the person sees a need to outdistance the impact or sees a need to change behaviors, then they may seek outside help, or attempt it themselves. As adults sometimes we can do it alone depending on the degree of influence. What is the real psychology involved here?? As an added factor, if ya'll couldn't already tell, I'm pretty much a behaviorist. Michelle (nifl3868) "normal", "average", "slow", and "gifted" are all just terms that we use so that we can put people into catergories. Personally, I'm not too fond of them. I thnk it is more of just a matter of finding what the person is interested in. I have seen the "slowest" people be incredibly gifted in one area or another. Is that still considered to be a "fluke" or "luck"? No, the "fluke" or "luck" is intelligence coming through the maze of interference. And I do not like the terms mentioned, nor do I like categorizing children into lessor-than or greater-than convienient slots and burdening them with additional baggage. Somebody is being relieved of the responsibility of "raising the child". Not to be misunderstood here either, I believe the school systems have had their hands tied here. Michelle (nifl3869) "Are you going to tell me that all the people who are believed to have ADHD are actually being put into a boring, nonattention holding enviornment and instead of responding by just sitting there bored, they try to leave the scene?" and: "How can someone who is not afraid of answering the teacher's questions and not disruptive fall under your classification of where ADHD should go. Or does this child not actually have a problem other than that they won't sit still for more ten seconds and never have their eyes on the teacher or think through things before they do them?" No, I'm not saying "all" of anything. This is not a black/white issue. You've already stated here that you've worked with children that did not exactly fit the parameters of ADHD, (whether you realize that or not). IF they are truly "disabled" as we tell them and their families, then they must be unable to do what you state they can do? Or I sometimes hear and see the response that "Under the right conditions they can function within normal parameter"??? 'scuse me..? Clif(nifl3873) "Internal structure refers to a persons ability to sort and re-organize. Unfortunately the DSM-IV states that one of the criteria is that the person has difficult organizing tasks and activities. This however is incorrect." Clif....The DSM-IV is THE diagnostic Bible. And it's "incorrect"? I agree. My only analogy for this whole situation is that in 1900 it was "scientifically and mathematically 'impossible'" to even consider man going to the moon. We did that in what, 60 years? Take this to the bank. We are going into the emotional realm, and we will go into it at the stage where it affects children so dramatically that they are unable to deal with the environment. The "symptoms" that are described in the DSM may be applicable but the stated causality is not complete enough, and until it's complete we're incorrectly diagnosing children and saddling them with life long mediocrity at best. And no, not all of them, but I've witnessed enough complete turnarounds to cause me to lose trust in our current diagnostic processes and to seriously question the training grounds for the practitioners of same. Art LaChance Gilmer Learning Center Ellijay, GA
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 14:41:14 EST