ADVICE, please.
Jack Lazariuk
In article <3225cc18...@news2.h1.usa.pipeline.com>, Doc wrote:
§ My girl is a July birthday and just started third grade (she's among
§ the youngest in the class) in a full-day gifted class at a two-way
§ bilingual school (her second year in a bilingual school, learning a
§ second language). Her test scores showed gaps in performance: her
§ highs were very high, and her lows were at average to low-average
§ levels --overall, she was 'superior' thus the gifted class.
What I have found about bilingual schools is that it sometimes require the
children to be all working at a slow pace and paying very close
attention. This is often necessary with second languages. It can be very
difficult for children who like to think at a faster pace.
My son was in a french immersion school and we found this to be a problem.
He has since been moved to an english school for the gifted and has taken
to that much better.
Jack
Michael Schweisguth
What's Up Doc? (Bu...@mit.not) wrote:
: x-no-archive: yes
: (4) Should she be in the gifted class (15 kids, more demanding, less
: structure) or in an advanced class (30 kids, grade level+ instruction,
: more structure)? We have arranged for a tutor this year as well.
if she must take retaline, i would leave her in the gifted class. why
should she go into a non-gifted class where she would be bored. if she
IS gifted with 100% attention, why should you do anything else.
my mother and father were both teachers and fighted with the school
district to leave me in "level 3." "level 1" was remedial, "level 2"
was normal w/ no flash, "level 3" was normal/shows promise, and
"level 4" was gifted. tracking students has always been a hot topic.
some people argue that all students should be streamlined. anyway,
the school district told my mother that "level 2" and "level 3" were
the same-- so don't worry. she worried, and so they put me into
"level 3."
one interesting note about education is called "latent learning."
although i hated to read in highschool, i am now reading more than
most people i know. it seems that a lot of what i learned in highschool
is still with me! so, don't be too tough on your kid. like you mentioned,
once she knows something, she likes to show it off. this might be
viewed as applying latent knowledge.
: (5) Should she be learning a second language? (she likes it, we are
: bilingual but speak English at home). School will give her extra
: help. Or is this just an unreasonable added demand on her. The
: psychologist feels that if she's enjoying it we should stick with it.
i agree with the psychologist. if your daughter enjoys what she is doing,
then let her keep doing it. ultimately, she will have to make up her own
mind about what she wants to do anyway!
i would imagine that you can give her the tools, but not the motivation.
based on my opinion, i would do whatever i could to let your child feel that
she is in control. most people have to fall on their asses a few times before
they learn. of course, it is always nice to have friends to help you up
when you fall!
-michaels.
Donna Maso-Furedi
In article <3225cc18...@news2.h1.usa.pipeline.com>, Bu...@mit.not
says...
>
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>My eight-year-old daughter was recently diagnosed by a psychologist as
>having mild ADD (more inattention than hyperactivity) and perhaps mild
>dyslexia (based on weak --yet grammatical-- handwriting and spelling
>[I'm not persuaded]). As I write this, she is with my wife at a
>neurologist who will likely try Ritalin (suggested by psychologist,
>and agreed to by her pediatrician). As you may imagine, this is a new
>and scary experience for us.
>
>My girl is a July birthday and just started third grade (she's among
>the youngest in the class) in a full-day gifted class at a two-way
>bilingual school (her second year in a bilingual school, learning a
>second language). Her test scores showed gaps in performance: her
>highs were very high, and her lows were at average to low-average
>levels --overall, she was 'superior' thus the gifted class.
>
>grade level, Math at slightly above grade (a year ago was a year ahead
>of grade --dearth of progress is likely due to our focus on reading,
>poor math instruction, and introduction of a second language), writing
>is a year behind at beginning second grade level, and she finished a
>year of her second language, understands it, communicates in it, but
>needs work on reading and writing it. These are some of our concerns:
>
>(1) What is the typical trial dosage or Ritalin in such a case?
* Every person is different. There is no "typical" dosage, but the
medical professional should start at the smallest dosage & work up
(typically 5mg BID).
>(2) Is the 'time-release' (8 hour or so) version as effective as the
>regular (3-4 hour) version?
* No, it hasn't shown to be as effective.
>(3) What should we expect when she starts the medicine? Can we start
>on a school day or wait for the weekend?
*Most medical prof's ask parents to give a med. trail on the
weekend when the parents can observe for when the meds. wear off/ do the
parents see a difference after the meds. (usually wears off 3-4 hrs.)
Then one can proceed to a school trial/trails.
>(4) Should she be in the gifted class (15 kids, more demanding, less
>structure) or in an advanced class (30 kids, grade level+ instruction,
>more structure)? We have arranged for a tutor this year as well.
*That's up to you, the teachers and your daughter. Where will she
do the best? Where does she want to be? School wants?
>(5) Should she be learning a second language? (she likes it, we are
>bilingual but speak English at home). School will give her extra
>help. Or is this just an unreasonable added demand on her. The
>psychologist feels that if she's enjoying it we should stick with it.
*ADHD kids can do well at anything they enjoy.
>
>I have taken the liberty of making a copy of 'diagnostic criteria'
>from an article posted recently, and used it to describe my daughter's
>behavior. The intent here is not to seek a 'diagnose' but to help you
>get a sense of her particular difficulties. Any advice you can offer
>us will be deeply appreciated.
>
>Doc.
>
>
>DIAGNOSTIC CRITERIA
>
>Either (I) or (II):
>
>(I) INATTENTION: six (or more) of the following symptoms of
>inattention have persisted for at least 6 months to a degree that is
>maladaptive and inconsistent with developmental level:
>
>(a) often fails to give close attention to details or makes careless
>mistakes in schoolwork, work, or other activities.
>
>Yes.
>
>(b) often has difficulty sustaining attention in tasks or play
>activities.
>
>Depends on the task; not in play activity.
>
>(c) often does not seem to listen when spoken to directly.
>
>At times; perhaps a quarter of the time.
>
>(d) often does not follow through on instructions and fails to
>finish schoolwork, chores, or duties in the workplace (not due to
>oppositional behavior or failure to understand instructions).
>
>Yes. Particularly has difficulty finishing seat work at school and
>doing her homework, even with help, takes a long time.
>
>(e) often has difficulty organizing tasks and activities.
>
>Not very noticeable as she is an only child and we tend to do too much
>for her. But her desk and play area are quite disorganized (bedroom
>less so)
>
>(f) often avoids, dislikes, or is reluctant to engage in tasks that
>require sustained mental effort (such as schoolwork or homework).
>
>Yes, but only in those she is having difficulty with and has not yet
>mastered. Once she has mastered it, she is all too happy to display
>her skills (and sustained mental effort is not a factor).
>
>(g) often loses things necessary for tasks or activities (e.g.,
>toys, school assignments, pencils, books, or tools).
>
>Not really. But may need to look for homework-related things.
>
>(h) is often easily distracted by extraneous stimuli.
>
>Not by repetitive sounds or music, but is distracted by other people,
>whatever discussions they may have.
>
>(i) is often forgetful in daily activities.
>
>Mostly yes.
>
>(II) HYPERACTIVITY-IMPULSIVITY: six (or more) of the following
>symptoms of hyperactivity-impulsivity have persisted for at least 6
>months to a degree that is maladaptive and inconsistent with
>developmental level:
>
>HYPERACTIVITY:
>
>(a) often fidgets with hands or feet or squirms in seat.
>
>Yes.
>
>(b) often leaves seat in classroom or in other situations in which
>remaining seated is expected.
>
>No.
>
>(c) often runs about or climbs excessively in situations in which it
>is inappropriate (in adolescents or adults, may be limited to
>subjective feelings of restlessness).
>
>Not really. Has some difficulty in transitioning during play with
>friends from high activity and games to more sedate and quiet, and
>sometimes in "knowing when to stop."
>
>(d) often has difficulty playing or engaging in leisure activities
>quietly.
>
>No.
>
>(e) is often "on the go" or often acts as if "driven by a motor"
>
>No. But loves to be "on the go" and may complain of being bored.
>
>(f) often talks excessively.
>
>Not really.
>
>
>IMPULSIVITY:
>
>(g) often blurts out answers before questions have been completed.
>
>Not really. More subtle, like sight-read a word (incorrectly) after
>noticing beginning couple of letters and shape/size (when told to read
>it again, will do so correctly).
>
>(h) often has difficulty awaiting turn.
>
>Not really. When she was younger perhaps. But we note that she has
>gained greater controls as she matures.
>
>(i) often interrupts or intrudes on others (e.g., butts into
>conversations or games).
>
>Yes.
>
>OTHER: (Other things to note provided by original poster)
>
>(i) An ADDer has a hard time falling asleep AND waking up ("I have a
>hard time falling asleep... a hard time waking up... when asleep,
>wake up in the middle of the night a lot").
>
>Yes, all three.
>
>(ii) An ADDer is very easally startled ("I'm a don't touch me
>type! I can get positively jumpy").
>
>Not really.
Koula
Bu...@mit.not (What's Up Doc?) wrote:
<snip....>
>I have taken the liberty of making a copy of 'diagnostic criteria'
>from an article posted recently, and used it to describe my daughter's
>behavior. The intent here is not to seek a 'diagnose' but to help you
>get a sense of her particular difficulties. Any advice you can offer
>us will be deeply appreciated.
>Doc.
<snip...list of Diagnostic Criteria>
Doc,
Oh my god, you just described my daughter Sarah (10 yo) almost to a T
- I believe the only differences are that Sarah talks excessively and
she's not dyslexic.
Her psychologist told us that she is mildly ADD inattentive (just like
me) and that he doesn't think she would ever need medication. Maybe
there is something else there that your doctor's psych feels she does
need them, I don't know - every child/adult is different. Make sure
she really *does need them* before you give her any. Sometimes meds
are prescribed when not necessary (from what I've read - not
experience).
Take care & I hope this helps.
Koula
ksm...@microstar.com
Joshua Goldman
First of all, Ritalin doses vary tremendously from person to person and
typically, you start at a lower dose and work up.
But it's important to realize that Ritalin, even when it does help
significantly, is not the entire treatment for ADD.
Typically ADD students do better in smaller, more structured classes, so
it's not clear which one will work better.
Has she gotten a full educational evaluation. As you've discovered,
it's typical for someone with ADD to have a wide variation in skills.
It's key to figure out what her lows are and to get tutoring to
compensate. My daughter was having a lot of trouble learning to read
and organizing. Testing showed that she was very weak at decoding
symbols and her school focused on the whole language approach, when she
needed drilling on basic letter combinations. After testing, the school
was able to provide a specialist who worked on these basic reading
skills and now her reading is much better. Organization is still a
problem.
Your daughter may also have fine motor coordination problems. There are
various treatments for this (occupational therapy with a sensory
integration focus) but physical activity: sports, playing catch, etc.
that help with coordination is good.
[If you're in the USA and she hasn't gotten a 766 Special needs
evaluation, she should get one.]
One thing about Ritalin is that it has a very quick effect. You'll see
the impact the first time she takes it (when the dose is right). There
can be a problem with moods when it wears off. But although having a
kid with ADD means you will have an interesting parenting experience, I
wouldn't worry excessively about Ritalin.
If you haven't yet, learn more about ADD. Your understanding of it is
key to helping set up the right environment.
By the way, if ADD tendencies run in your family, sometimes your base
level for judging disorganization can be somewhat skewed.
good luck.
let us know what happens.
MSProbert
In article <506oi7$1...@loki.tor.hookup.net>, ksm...@microstar.com (Koula)
writes:
>Oh my god, you just described my daughter Sarah (10 yo) almost to a T
>- I believe the only differences are that Sarah talks excessively and
>she's not dyslexic.
Talking excessively is a sign of hyperactivity. It is indicative of a lack
of inhibitory control and is a hallmark of ADHD. It can cause major social
problems for any child. I know, as I have one who is just this way.
>Her psychologist told us that she is mildly ADD inattentive (just like
>me) and that he doesn't think she would ever need medication. Maybe
>there is something else there that your doctor's psych feels she does
>need them, I don't know - every child/adult is different. Make sure
>she really *does need them* before you give her any. Sometimes meds
>are prescribed when not necessary (from what I've read - not
>experience).
If your daughter is doing well, and has no academic OR social problems,
then she probably does not need meds. However, she still needs coping
skills and, careful monitoring as she may not be realying all of her
experiences to you.
Mark S. Probert
Merrick, New York
Glenn Danforth
MSProbert wrote:
> Talking excessively is a sign of hyperactivity. It is indicative of a lack
> of inhibitory control and is a hallmark of ADHD. It can cause major social
> problems for any child. I know, as I have one who is just this way.
Well Mark, there is a theory on this group that you could control
your child by stressing the behavior is not acceptable. (Or could have
prevented it had you stressed it during the child's first five years
of life.) How do you feel about that?
____________________________________________________________
Check out Glenn Danforth's Humor Factory at:
*** http://www.cris.com/~nd1irish/index.htm ***
28 pages of humor and growing. (Like a malignant tumor!)
Jack Lazariuk
In article <322C6C...@cris.com>, Glenn Danforth <ND1I...@cris.com> wrote:
§ Well Mark, there is a theory on this group that you could control
§ your child by stressing the behavior is not acceptable. (Or could have
§ prevented it had you stressed it during the child's first five years
§ of life.) How do you feel about that?
Glen I see the tangent you are on and I think you are missing the point of
what a previous poster had said.
Consider:
Child A wants to run all over the classroom and sometimes does.
Child B does not want to run all over the classroom and doesn't
Child C wants to run all over the classroom but doesn't because the last
time she did that she got locked in the basement for six days living on
bread and water and having rats biting on her toes.
Given the same set of circumstances Child A and Child C might behave in
the same way and be considered to have the same problem.
Because Child C does not run all over the classroom doesn't mean that
Child C doesn't have a problem.
Because Child C's behavior is more like Child B it doesn't mean that Child
C is More like Child B.
Make any sense ?
I went to a Catholic school run by priests and nuns and believe me I know
that children's behavior can be controlled.
Jack
Glenn Danforth
Well Jack, I'm glad the answer to ADHD is Catholic school. Since
children's behavior *can* be controlled maybe you could explain why so
many are put on Ritalin? I guess we can throw the drugs away and get rid
of therapists since hyperactivity isn't a problem. Great! I wonder why the
nuns couldn't control me? Bad nuns I guess. And I thought it was because
I had a hyperactivity disorder. I stand corrected. (Oh they could stop
me temporarily, but we've never, EVER, been talking *temporary* control.)
I'll forward this to Rush Limbaugh and all the others who have been claiming
that discipline is all that's needed to control hyperactive kids. They'll be
glad to know they were right all along.
You know something, since not one person has sided with me on this
argument I have to be missing something. For months I've seen people here
complain about people who claim discipline is the answer to ADHD/ADD, but
not a soul has spoken up to counter this. I guess everyone's changed their
minds, and discipline *is* the answer. I'm going to have to write to my Mom
and bitch her out for not disciplining me well enough as a child. It's
her fault (and those bad nuns) that I have this disorder!
To all you parents out there with ADHD kids: How come you aren't upset
to find out your kids have suffered because you're such terrible parents? It's
all your fault. KIDS BEHAVIOR CAN BE CONTROLLED! Why can't you control your
kids?
Lena
In article <322C6C...@cris.com>, Glenn Danforth <ND1I...@cris.com> says:
>
>MSProbert wrote:
>
>> Talking excessively is a sign of hyperactivity. It is indicative of a lack
>> of inhibitory control and is a hallmark of ADHD. It can cause major social
>> problems for any child. I know, as I have one who is just this way.
>
>your child by stressing the behavior is not acceptable. (Or could have
>prevented it had you stressed it during the child's first five years
>of life.) How do you feel about that?
Glen,
Yeah, I think you know quite well, that this is not what has been said.
I agree with you a 100% that ADD cannot be controled. No ammount of
badmouthing, lectures, threats, training, punishment/reward etc will
change the child or adult with ADD. However, this constant pressure
will have an effect on ADDers, where they will channel their energy (if
hyperactive) or behaviours into different displays that would not
provoke overly negative reactions.
So instead of jumping up and down and bounce off the walls, a child
will figet, and squirm around, instead of running and pacing in place
she'll talk or eat or clean or control too much - engage in some
compulsive behaviours to compensate for the lack of overt activity.
Now, not everyone with ADD does that either - but what I understand
more women are forced into these displacement behaviours than men
(I think this is where this discussion got it's start). No wonder
more women are diagnosed as depressed, compulsive / obsessive, or
anxious. There might be just as many women with ADD (not necessarily
H) as men, but they are incorrectly diagnosed (I was).
If you're still interested in this topic, I highly suggest "Women with
ADD" by Sari Solden. While, in my opinion, she might be a little
overnegative and falling into a blaming/martyr tone, a lot of arguments
she raises are excellent ones, and she gives a great perspective on
ADD in women.
By the way, I enjoy your snide remarks..:))
Lena
Glenn Danforth
Lena wrote:
>
> In article <322C6C...@cris.com>, Glenn Danforth <ND1I...@cris.com> says:
> >
> >MSProbert wrote:
> >
> >> Talking excessively is a sign of hyperactivity. It is indicative of a lack
> >> of inhibitory control and is a hallmark of ADHD. It can cause major social
> >> problems for any child. I know, as I have one who is just this way.
Glenn answered: Well Mark, there is a theory on this group that you could control
> >your child by stressing the behavior is not acceptable. (Or could have
> >prevented it had you stressed it during the child's first five years
> >of life.) How do you feel about that?
> Lena wrote:
Glen,
> Yeah, I think you know quite well, that this is not what has been said.
Glenn again: Yes, that's *exactly* what has been said. I only responded to Kira
and that's what she said. If she didn't say it, I wouldn't have had a problem.
I've repeated this in every post I wrote and she just continued to argue she was
correct. If it wasn't what was said, Kira would have clarified it instead of
defending it in three posts we each made.
Kira wrote: " If the fact that sometimes little boys are
encouraged to be a little wild ("He's all boy") and the fact that little
girls are encouraged to be the opposite possibly from the day of their
births, is imposed on top of ADHD, I don't see how it can have no effect."
She IS saying here that little girls are encouraged not to act wild
like boys. Please take note that Kira used the term ADHD. We were never
talking about ADD. I can't seem to get this crucial point through to people.
We were ONLY talking about *hyperactivity disorder.* You can throw the attention
deficit portion away. It is irrelevant! We were discussing *hyperactive* kids.
I tend to get confused when dealing with Kira, but I know what we
have been discussing. She does tend to change things around and bring in
different points that subtly change her position. An example can be found in
two separate posts she made in a.s.a.d. I will edit them just to show the
relevant portions:
On 8/15 she wrote to Yaov: "... I wasn't diagnosed till my mid-30's."
On 8/30 she wrote: "...I was past 40 when I was diagnosed altho I had
ADHD all my life."
This is just to show that she tends to change in midstream, so I can
understand why you may think we were talking about something else.
> I agree with you a 100% that ADD cannot be controled. No ammount of
> badmouthing, lectures, threats, training, punishment/reward etc will
> change the child or adult with ADD.
If Kira had written those words about AD*H*D, we wouldn't have had any
disagreement. (You're talking about ADD. We *never* were.)
However, this constant pressure
> will have an effect on ADDers, where they will channel their energy (if
> hyperactive) or behaviours into different displays that would not
> provoke overly negative reactions.
> So instead of jumping up and down and bounce off the walls, a child
> will figet, and squirm around, instead of running and pacing in place
> she'll talk or eat or clean or control too much - engage in some
> compulsive behaviours to compensate for the lack of overt activity.
Are you saying that a child who fidgets, squirms or talks to much won't
be noticed? Kira was saying that little girls who's hyperactivity was surpressed
weren't noticed. You have described me to a T. I didn't jump out of my seat
or "bounce off walls." I did, and still do, fidget, talk fast and too much, and
walk fast. I still have a hyperactivity disorder. Kira wasn't talking about
little girls who talk too fast or much or fidget or squirm. Kids like that
are noticed and can be diagnosed. She was talking about hyperactivity being
controlled to the extent that it's not noticed (because they are "expected" to
behave that way). All I have EVER said is if it's controllable to that extent
it isn't a *disorder*. If I could shut the hell up when I knew I should, or
slow down my speech when I know I'm losing my audience, I wouldn't have a
disorder. Even if the reason I could shut up was because my parents brought
me up the way Kira said, I wouldn't have a disorder. I know I'm talking fast,
and I can see when my brother and his friends are laughing because I'm on a roll,
and I know I need to slow down, so why can't I? I'm not always that way. In
fact I usually can control it. But not all the time. I have a disorder.
In grade school they didn't know it was a disorder, but man did I stand
out among all those little boys who were encouraged to "be a little wild." (Kira's
exact words.) How come?
>
> Now, not everyone with ADD does that either - but what I understand
> more women are forced into these displacement behaviours than men
> (I think this is where this discussion got it's start).
No, it wasn't about "displacement behaviors." It started with this
exact quote from Kira:
"I've often wondered if the real reason more boys are
hyperactive than girls is because girls are not allowed to be..."
This is what I responded to and the ONLY thing that I've been discussing.
Look at that quote. Do you agree with it? Girls aren't hyperactive because
thay aren't allowed to be. She wasn't even talking about the difference in
the number of "diagnosis'. She was talking about the number of boys/girls
who are *actually* hyperactive. That is the quote I copied and argued with and
Kira defended. If you think that's true then I say you're wrong too! If
you disagree then stop defending it. She did bring in (later) that this was
only true in the first 5 years of life.
So, do you want to stick by your first statement that, "Yeah, I think
you know quite well, that this is not what has been said."
No wonder
> more women are diagnosed as depressed, compulsive / obsessive, or
> anxious. There might be just as many women with ADD (not necessarily
> H) as men, but they are incorrectly diagnosed (I was).
Not necessarily H? Not necessarily H? This shows that you haven't
followed this discussion at all. Why are you using ADD as some sort of
counter argument. As I KEEP trying to explain, my discussion with Kira has
*nothing* to do with ADD. It is *only* about "H".
Recall Kira's statement that started this:
"I've often wondered if the real reason more boys are
hyperactive than girls is because girls are not allowed to be..."
Do you see anything about ADD? We never were talking anbout ADD.
We were talking about hyperactivity. A physical disorder that *can't* be
controlled.
>
> If you're still interested in this topic, I highly suggest "Women with
> ADD" by Sari Solden. While, in my opinion, she might be a little
> overnegative and falling into a blaming/martyr tone, a lot of arguments
> she raises are excellent ones, and she gives a great perspective on
> ADD in women.
Here's that ADD term again. I think (hope) once you realize we aren't
talking about ADD you'll see you are defending a position that was never
even brought up. Perhaps you should go back and read the thread. Kira was
energized when you first jumped in to defend her (she mentioned that to me). I
realized right away that your "defense" had nothing to do with Kira's position,
but I didn't feel it necessary to point that out. Now it's necessary. Your
"argument" is something I agree with 100%. But it's as valid to this discussion
as if you jumped in to say Hitler was evil and Tim Brown is crazy. Both true,
but what does that have to do with controlling hyperactivity because society
has taught you it's expected of you?
>
> By the way, I enjoy your snide remarks..:))
Thanks. I know about 33% of the people know I'm just being a goofy
dork, but the rest will see me as nasty. I never mean anything personally,
but my ADHD shows through like a beacon. Of course society, and the people
on this list tell me I shouldn't do it, but I keep going like the Energizer
Bunny. :) Speaking of hyperactivity disorder. That damn bunny needs a fist full
of Ritalin! Of course, bunnies are encouraged by their parents to move fast.
Hmmm. Maybe Kira's right...
Judi Scarpelli
For months I've seen people here
>complain about people who claim discipline is the answer to ADHD/ADD,
but
>not a soul has spoken up to counter this. I guess everyone's changed
their
>minds, and discipline *is* the answer. I'm going to have to write to
my Mom
>and bitch her out for not disciplining me well enough as a child.
It's
>her fault (and those bad nuns) that I have this disorder!
> To all you parents out there with ADHD kids: How come you aren't
upset
>to find out your kids have suffered because you're such terrible
parents? It's
>all your fault. KIDS BEHAVIOR CAN BE CONTROLLED! Why can't you
control your
>kids?
> ____________________________________________________________
> Check out Glenn Danforth's Humor Factory at:
> *** http://www.cris.com/~nd1irish/index.htm ***
> 28 pages of humor and growing. (Like a malignant tumor!)
Dear Glenn,
I was just reading this and thought I should share my views on
discipline.
I don't think discipline is the only answer. I was beaten by my stepdad
and it only made me rebel worse. I do believe there are different forms
of discipline. But like I said it is not the only answer. I agree with
you on this point. I also went to catholic school where I was made fun
of by the other kids. Not one teacher ever disciplined any kid who made
fun of me. And it was much worse than name calling. So I don't see
where the "catholic school" made me feel better. I also feel that with
overcrowding of schools these days, a teacher does not have the time to
handle a class of 32 kids who are being just that--kids. I believe it
is up to the parents who wanted those kids in the first place. If you
want a child, then you must be responsible for him/her. It's not the
teacher's job to raise our children nor is it in their job
descriptions.
So, I am siding with you on this point because not only did discipline
NOT work for me, it actually tore my family apart. There are different
ways of handling children and I think that if the child knows that he
or she has loving parents and those parents are willing to put the time
involved in raising that child and teaching them some manners and some
respect, that they will eventually realize that certain actions have
certain consequences. Now if a child does something totally off the
wall, or out of disrespect for someone or their property then a
reasonable course of action should be used. Yes there are things that a
child does that do need to be disciplined , but NOT everything they do.
Being a child is part of life. It is our job to teach them
responsibility, kindness, and respect. No we are not perfect, and we
all are constantly learning. We learn with our children everyday,
whether we realize it or not. If a child is hyper, this is no reason to
make them sit on a chair telling them that they are bad. Making a child
sit down does nothing to help them release all that energy. A good
solution to their hyperactivity might be to help them find a hobby
which would enable them to use their energies in a positive way.
Praising them for doing a good job with that hobby only reinforces good
behavior. Not to mention that if their energies are being put to a good
hobby or interest, then they will no doubt get attention, which is what
I was starving for in my childhood. They are less likely to get into
trouble for the sake of gaining attention.
Even gettiing involved with the childs particular interest may keep
them focused a bit better because they are getting attention from their
parents. I don't think that I have all the answers, but speaking from
experience helps to offer suggestions to those who may feel they are
"at the end of their rope".
Hugs to you Glenn for your views!!
Judi
Cheryl Mathison
On 3 Sep 1996 21:02:58 GMT, mev...@heinous.music.uiowa.edu (Lena)
announced:
>change the child or adult with ADD. However, this constant pressure
>will have an effect on ADDers, where they will channel their energy (if
>hyperactive) or behaviours into different displays that would not
>provoke overly negative reactions.
Constant "pressure" (read: *PUNISHMENT*) will send a kid's self
esteem straight down the toilet. They might just do what you say and
start fidgeting and keeping to themselves...never to think themselves
"good enough" to exert themselves. Or, like me, they might just
*RETALIATE* toward their oppressors. I had a husband who wanted to
control me. This was before I was ever diagnosed. He has learned not
to screw with my kid or with me...I hit him in the wallet for what he
did...and he'll be paying for it for many years to come.
He's lucky I had a two year old on my lap at the time I "went
balistic"...I sincerely don't think he would have survived it had I
been alone.
>more women are diagnosed as depressed, compulsive / obsessive, or
>anxious. There might be just as many women with ADD (not necessarily
>H) as men, but they are incorrectly diagnosed (I was).
ADHD women will more often be misdiagnosed with "Borderline
Personality Disorder" and given stelazine or one of the other
anti-psychotic drugs to control them. If you go look at the website
for BPD (I think I found it through Yahoo, along with someone posting
the site here), you'll see roughly identical symptoms to ADHD, and, as
ADHD is roughly diagnosed 70% male/30% female, BPD is diagnosed
roughly 70% female/30% male.
And after having been diagnosed BPD and put on stelazine for six
months several years ago, I can tell you that the misdiagnosis is
*HELL*. Anti-psychotic meds and ADHD don't get along together...the
meds tend to "void out" the ADHD personality, and what is left is an
empty shell. The ADHD meds don't do that...the personality is there,
but without the "spaciness".
>If you're still interested in this topic, I highly suggest "Women with
>ADD" by Sari Solden. While, in my opinion, she might be a little
>overnegative and falling into a blaming/martyr tone, a lot of arguments
>she raises are excellent ones, and she gives a great perspective on
>ADD in women.
I don't think she's over-negative at all. When I read that book, I
cried my eyes out...she wasn't "on the right track"...she was "on the
same train" as I was. (yes, Ned, I looked funny with no
eyes...<grin>)
But believe me, punishment to ADHDers will just as often breed
violence as it will capitulation. I don't suggest it unless there's
some other comorbid problem (like CD or ODD, but even then I'd be wary
of retaliation).
Hugs!
Cheryl
kal...@randomc.com
Lena
We are beating around the bush now. Your arguments are on target,
and I was speaking of AD*H*D, but was too lazy to write it. I used
the term ADD because I think the issue we discussed definitely
encompass it as a whole - w/ or w/o Hyperactivity (H).
The more we talk, the more I wonder why there are so many more males
diagnosed with ADD, and majority of these diagnoses include H.
Does that mean, that females do not experience that disorder?
Or is it a genetic thing - there is a strong possibility that ADD and
ADHD are inherited conditions, so why not propose a tie between Y chromosome
(the one that makes men men) and H? Or perhaps females do not
experience H, because of differences between male and female brains?
Or is it those pesky hormones that make the difference?
Any other =biological= causes that we might speculate on?
And if none of the above reasons seems feasible (and frankly they're not
to me - just in case someone is supposing that they'd be) - what do
we have left?
Curious,
Lena
PS. Remember Glen, that not everyone is as wonderfully eloquent as you
are. We are trying to learn from you. Besides, we are here to =explore=
issues, not give definite answers. Blunders will occur...
PPS Hey, I wonder what the correlation between Catholic Schools and
ADD is... I went to one too! Just wonderin'...;0
In article <322CA5...@cris.com>, Glenn Danforth <ND1I...@cris.com> says:
->
->Lena wrote:
->>
->> In article <322C6C...@cris.com>, Glenn Danforth <ND1I...@cris.com> says:
->> >
->> >MSProbert wrote:
->> >
->> >> Talking excessively is a sign of hyperactivity. It is indicative of a lack
->> >> of inhibitory control and is a hallmark of ADHD. It can cause major social
->> >> problems for any child. I know, as I have one who is just this way.
->
->Glenn answered: Well Mark, there is a theory on this group that you could control
->> >your child by stressing the behavior is not acceptable. (Or could have
->> >prevented it had you stressed it during the child's first five years
->> >of life.) How do you feel about that?
->> Lena wrote:
-> Glen,
->> Yeah, I think you know quite well, that this is not what has been said.
->
->Glenn again: Yes, that's *exactly* what has been said. I only responded to Kira
->and that's what she said. If she didn't say it, I wouldn't have had a problem.
->I've repeated this in every post I wrote and she just continued to argue she was
->correct. If it wasn't what was said, Kira would have clarified it instead of
->defending it in three posts we each made.
-> Kira wrote: " If the fact that sometimes little boys are
->encouraged to be a little wild ("He's all boy") and the fact that little
->girls are encouraged to be the opposite possibly from the day of their
->births, is imposed on top of ADHD, I don't see how it can have no effect."
->
-> She IS saying here that little girls are encouraged not to act wild
->like boys. Please take note that Kira used the term ADHD. We were never
->talking about ADD. I can't seem to get this crucial point through to people.
->We were ONLY talking about *hyperactivity disorder.* You can throw the attention
->deficit portion away. It is irrelevant! We were discussing *hyperactive* kids.
-> I tend to get confused when dealing with Kira, but I know what we
->have been discussing. She does tend to change things around and bring in
->different points that subtly change her position. An example can be found in
->two separate posts she made in a.s.a.d. I will edit them just to show the
->relevant portions:
Have you considered, that by writing she is trying to explore the issue?
I know I do that - look at many possibilities, different angles. I'm
not stuck on one point of view (as you seem to be right now - hyperfocus?)
So what if I'm often wrong - at least I learn something.
-> On 8/15 she wrote to Yaov: "... I wasn't diagnosed till my mid-30's."
-> On 8/30 she wrote: "...I was past 40 when I was diagnosed altho I had
->ADHD all my life."
-> This is just to show that she tends to change in midstream, so I can
->understand why you may think we were talking about something else.
You're mixing up issues here. Who cares how old she was - so what - she
might have been 37 - rounded down once, up the other time. Ask any woman
past 25 about her age and you'll get foggy answer 50% of the time.
>> I agree with you a 100% that ADD cannot be controled. No ammount of
>> badmouthing, lectures, threats, training, punishment/reward etc will
>> change the child or adult with ADD.
>
> If Kira had written those words about AD*H*D, we wouldn't have had any
>disagreement. (You're talking about ADD. We *never* were.)
As I said when I used the term ADD, I automatically included the H - just
like the authors of most literature on the subject that is not specifically
addressed to w/H or w/oH issues. That seems to be a standard, and I just
followed it.
>
>However, this constant pressure
>> will have an effect on ADDers, where they will channel their energy (if
>> hyperactive) or behaviours into different displays that would not
>> provoke overly negative reactions.
>> So instead of jumping up and down and bounce off the walls, a child
>> will figet, and squirm around, instead of running and pacing in place
>> she'll talk or eat or clean or control too much - engage in some
>> compulsive behaviours to compensate for the lack of overt activity.
>
> Are you saying that a child who fidgets, squirms or talks to much won't
>be noticed? Kira was saying that little girls who's hyperactivity was surpressed
>weren't noticed. You have described me to a T. I didn't jump out of my seat
>or "bounce off walls." I did, and still do, fidget, talk fast and too much, and
>walk fast. I still have a hyperactivity disorder.
Right. So in a sense to some degree your hyperactivity =was= 'controled'.
How and why?
Now consider the possibility, that whatever these factors were, they
were applied to someone else with 3x the diligence and pressure.
What do you think the outcome would have been, if anything?
>Kira wasn't talking about
>little girls who talk too fast or much or fidget or squirm. Kids like that
>are noticed and can be diagnosed. She was talking about hyperactivity being
>controlled to the extent that it's not noticed (because they are "expected" to
>behave that way).
It can be controled to the extent, that it is not noticeable, but is
still a disorder. There are different degrees of hyperactivity. When
it reaches levels of great concern, yes, something will be done about it.
But if it is borderline, other reasons will be found to explain it.
Why the heck not all active kids are sent for evaluation? And as
everyone knows, it's rather hard to distinguish normal over-active
child, and child with ADD and mild hyperactivity!
Well, I think right there I'm getting into the sticky issues of diagnosing
children in schools...
> All I have EVER said is if it's controllable to that extent
>it isn't a *disorder*. If I could shut the hell up when I knew I should, or
>slow down my speech when I know I'm losing my audience, I wouldn't have a
>disorder. Even if the reason I could shut up was because my parents brought
>me up the way Kira said, I wouldn't have a disorder. I know I'm talking fast,
>and I can see when my brother and his friends are laughing because I'm on a roll,
>and I know I need to slow down, so why can't I? I'm not always that way. In
>fact I usually can control it. But not all the time. I have a disorder.
> In grade school they didn't know it was a disorder, but man did I stand
>out among all those little boys who were encouraged to "be a little wild." (Kira's
>exact words.) How come?
Degree of mal-adaptation?
>>
>> Now, not everyone with ADD does that either - but what I understand
>> more women are forced into these displacement behaviours than men
>> (I think this is where this discussion got it's start).
>
> No, it wasn't about "displacement behaviors." It started with this
>exact quote from Kira:
> "I've often wondered if the real reason more boys are
>hyperactive than girls is because girls are not allowed to be..."
Eee.. who cares what Kira said? Take the discussion to another level,
so instead of beating to death what Kira said, we might explore this
fascinating subject. And tell me who said, that I need to stick by
what she said? I'm expanding upon what was brought up. I'm not saying
that I'm right... but we might come to some interesting conclusions, if
we do not make hasty value jugments.
>
> This is what I responded to and the ONLY thing that I've been discussing.
>Look at that quote. Do you agree with it? Girls aren't hyperactive because
>thay aren't allowed to be. She wasn't even talking about the difference in
>the number of "diagnosis'. She was talking about the number of boys/girls
>who are *actually* hyperactive. That is the quote I copied and argued with and
>Kira defended. If you think that's true then I say you're wrong too! If
>you disagree then stop defending it. She did bring in (later) that this was
>only true in the first 5 years of life.
Well, I have a right to independent opinion. I agree with you on some
points you bring up, and I agree with some of Kira's. Why do you just
see the duality agree-disagree? right-wrong? What about partial
go-alongness? What happened to that famous ADD characteristic (supposedly)
of being able to look at different sides of the issue and innovate?
Why are you so rigid?
Are you just a Hyperactive normie in disguise? ;))
> So, do you want to stick by your first statement that, "Yeah, I think
>you know quite well, that this is not what has been said."
>
I'm sticking to it, because I see many possiblities to how this discussion
might be extrapolated and expanded on. You have got a death grip on
one statement, and you cannot let go...
Have you just taken a formal debate class or are you just being
obstropulous? ;0
>
>
>No wonder
>> more women are diagnosed as depressed, compulsive / obsessive, or
>> anxious. There might be just as many women with ADD (not necessarily
>> H) as men, but they are incorrectly diagnosed (I was).
>
>
> Not necessarily H? Not necessarily H? This shows that you haven't
>followed this discussion at all. Why are you using ADD as some sort of
>counter argument. As I KEEP trying to explain, my discussion with Kira has
>*nothing* to do with ADD. It is *only* about "H".
I have been, but as I said at the begining, I wonder what that H really
signifies? Oh, wait, I thought all along, that this was a discussion of
H in the context of AD(H)D .... but if it's just about lonely ol' H,
than pardon moi, I'm in the wrong discussion!
> Recall Kira's statement that started this:
> "I've often wondered if the real reason more boys are
>hyperactive than girls is because girls are not allowed to be..."
> Do you see anything about ADD? We never were talking anbout ADD.
>We were talking about hyperactivity. A physical disorder that *can't* be
>controlled.
>
>>
>> If you're still interested in this topic, I highly suggest "Women with
>> ADD" by Sari Solden. While, in my opinion, she might be a little
>> overnegative and falling into a blaming/martyr tone, a lot of arguments
>> she raises are excellent ones, and she gives a great perspective on
>> ADD in women.
>
> Here's that ADD term again. I think (hope) once you realize we aren't
>talking about ADD you'll see you are defending a position that was never
>even brought up. Perhaps you should go back and read the thread. Kira was
>energized when you first jumped in to defend her (she mentioned that to me). I
>realized right away that your "defense" had nothing to do with Kira's position,
>but I didn't feel it necessary to point that out. Now it's necessary. Your
>"argument" is something I agree with 100%. But it's as valid to this discussion
>as if you jumped in to say Hitler was evil and Tim Brown is crazy. Both true,
>but what does that have to do with controlling hyperactivity because society
>has taught you it's expected of you?
I'm not defending anyone. And I explained the ADD term. And I already
said, that this issue might have greater implications than just the
question of H?
What if .. IF... it were true, that hyperactive behaviour =was= supressed
(I hesitate to use the word 'controlled') in girls from a very early
age, and the hyperactivity was displaced into other manifestations.
I'm no psychologist, but what about channeling that hyperactive energy
into other avenues - such as excessive daydreaming, distractability,
even compulsive behaviours? And this seems to be the usual MO on ADD
in girls. Keeping in mind that in some hyperactivity just cannot be
contained, just as in some boys it might be.
This is a big what-if... but you suggest some other explanation..
>>
>> By the way, I enjoy your snide remarks..:))
>
>
> Thanks. I know about 33% of the people know I'm just being a goofy
>dork, but the rest will see me as nasty. I never mean anything personally,
>but my ADHD shows through like a beacon. Of course society, and the people
>on this list tell me I shouldn't do it, but I keep going like the Energizer
>Bunny. :) Speaking of hyperactivity disorder. That damn bunny needs a fist full
>of Ritalin! Of course, bunnies are encouraged by their parents to move fast.
>Hmmm. Maybe Kira's right...
I think that even a lie has it's basis in truth... so why not disregard
the falsehood, and look at the premises on which it was built, and we
just might get the right ansewer?
MSProbert
In article <322C93...@cris.com>, Glenn Danforth <ND1I...@cris.com>
writes:
> To all you parents out there with ADHD kids: How come you aren't
upset
>to find out your kids have suffered because you're such terrible parents?
>It's
>all your fault. KIDS BEHAVIOR CAN BE CONTROLLED! Why can't you control
your
>kids?
Many here have answered the parent blamers. They are too dense to learn.
MSProbert
In article <322C6C...@cris.com>, Glenn Danforth <ND1I...@cris.com>
writes:
>> Talking excessively is a sign of hyperactivity. It is indicative of a
lack
>> of inhibitory control and is a hallmark of ADHD. It can cause major
social
>> problems for any child. I know, as I have one who is just this way.
>
> Well Mark, there is a theory on this group that you could control
>your child by stressing the behavior is not acceptable. (Or could have
>prevented it had you stressed it during the child's first five years
>of life.) How do you feel about that?
Nope. Talking excessively is one of the things Barkley mentions in his
discussions of the lack of inhibitory control. Stopping talking requires
control. No matter what you do (absent medication), when a child who is
affected this way wants to talk, they will talk. Josh is like this. It is,
in a way, his biggest problem.
I wrote to Judith Heyer, the author of the article I mentioned about
speech pathology and ADHD. I mentioned this. I am awaiting her answer (now
that school is back in session.) I will resend the message.
MSProbert
In article <lazariukj-030...@news.sk.sympatico.ca>,
laza...@process.cyancorp.com (Jack Lazariuk) writes:
>Given the same set of circumstances Child A and Child C might behave in
>the same way and be considered to have the same problem.
>Because Child C does not run all over the classroom doesn't mean that
>Child C doesn't have a problem.
>Because Child C's behavior is more like Child B it doesn't mean that
Child
>C is More like Child B.
>
>Make any sense ?
>
>I went to a Catholic school run by priests and nuns and believe me I know
>that children's behavior can be controlled.
Nope. You can terrorize a child into submission, but they do not learn the
appropriate behavior and really why it is appropriate.
MSProbert
In article <322C93...@cris.com>, Glenn Danforth <ND1I...@cris.com>
writes:
> You know something, since not one person has sided with me on this
>argument I have to be missing something. For months I've seen people
here
>complain about people who claim discipline is the answer to ADHD/ADD, but
>not a soul has spoken up to counter this. I guess everyone's changed
their
>minds, and discipline *is* the answer. I'm going to have to write to my
Mom
>and bitch her out for not disciplining me well enough as a child. It's
>her fault (and those bad nuns) that I have this disorder!
I do not disagree. Discipline is part of the answer. However, it is not
the QUANTITY of discipline, but the QUALITY of it that matters (unless
there is too much discipline).
We are recovering "over discipliners". Josh spent many days and nights
being sent to his room for time outs, etc. for things that were
unwarranted. We have loosened up. He is more relaxed and is aware that he
can do more things and not be disciplined for them. No, he is not doing
bad things. He is doing things that are just different. That is what we
had to learn. We had to learn to accept his differences and take our joy
from them. It is VERY HARD for a parent to do this. But, with less
discipline, his anxiety level is way down, and he is in more control of
his behavior.
GeneDoug
RE: the below. My dad was proud of the obedience he had trained into his
children. He would even give commands to show us off to friends, like
bird dogs or something.
That doesn't mean we obeyed him when we were out of his sight, or when we
thought we wouldn't get caught. And it doesn't mean that it made us grow
up to be better adults.
I think the three of us feel we survived despite him, and not because of
him. Today he is in a nursing home, and doesn't get a lot of visits. And
when we get together, we don't say loving things about him, either.
>Given the same set of circumstances Child A and Child C might behave in
>the same way and be considered to have the same problem.
>Because Child C does not run all over the classroom doesn't mean that
>Child C doesn't have a problem.
>Because Child C's behavior is more like Child B it doesn't mean that
Child
>C is More like Child B.
>
>Make any sense ?
>
>I went to a Catholic school run by priests and nuns and believe me I know
>that children's behavior can be controlled.
Nope. You can terrorize a child into submission, but they do not learn the
appropriate behavior and really why it is appropriate.
Mark S. Probert
Merrick, New York
Glenn Danforth
I assume his hyperactivity didn't vanish because you taught him
it wasn't acceptable, (since you wouldn't have needed to "loosen up" if your
other method had worked so well).
Glenn Danforth
Judi,
It's great to hear from you! Heck, even if you disagreed with
me it would be great! Okay, maybe it would just be really nice. :)
Glenn
--
X-NO-ARCHIVE: YES
Glenn Danforth
Lena wrote:
>
> We are beating around the bush now. Your arguments are on target,
> and I was speaking of AD*H*D, but was too lazy to write it. I used
> the term ADD because I think the issue we discussed definitely
> encompass it as a whole - w/ or w/o Hyperactivity (H).
Actually it doesn't encompass it as a whole. I've said time and
time again that the discussion was *only* about hyperactivity. Kira made
a statement about hyperactivity and I disagreed. We weren't even talking
about ADHD. Get rid of the entire "attention deficit" portion. Our discussion
had nothing at all to do with ADD or ADHD. It was about hyperactivity. I used the
term ADHD because she mentioned her own, and I have it, that's all. I keep
saying this but I can't seem to get you to understand that. It's frustrating
because I don't think I can possibly be any clearer, yet you keep bringing
up ADD.
Nobody is beating around any bush. I could not be any clearer! Take a
nomal kid. No ADD. No ADHD. But she is severely hyperactive. She has a
hyperactivity *disorder*. Kira made a statement about hyperactive girls being
able to suppress their hyperactivity because society taught them it was appropriate
to suppress it. I've said (so many times it's wearing me out) that I was
arguing that statement and nothing else. Why are you talking about ADD? It's
as relavent as cancer or the common cold in this discussion.
>
> The more we talk, the more I wonder why there are so many more males
> diagnosed with ADD, and majority of these diagnoses include H.
> Does that mean, that females do not experience that disorder?
It seems it's saying females experience it a lot less.
> Or is it a genetic thing - there is a strong possibility that ADD and
> ADHD are inherited conditions, so why not propose a tie between Y chromosome
> (the one that makes men men) and H? Or perhaps females do not
> experience H, because of differences between male and female brains?
> Or is it those pesky hormones that make the difference?
> Any other =biological= causes that we might speculate on?
Or is it that men were the hunters and ADHD is part of evolution. Until
recently (the 60's) women didn't need the aggressiveness and other traits of
hyperactivity in order to survive and advance. Evolution has a way of working these
things out.
It could be any of these. They certainly are logical compared to "society
taught little girls not to be hyperactive." (This darn logic course I'm taking
must be actually sticking to this Teflon brain.)
> And if none of the above reasons seems feasible (and frankly they're not
> to me - just in case someone is supposing that they'd be) - what do
> we have left?
I'd love to know why you think they aren't feasable, but I
don't want to open a can of worms. I'm much more inclined to believe it has a
biological basis than it was "learned." (By saying girls aren't diagnosed with
hyperactivity - we aren't talking about ADD/ADHD - because they are "taught"
to be calm, means that "normal", non-hyperactive behavior was "leaned.)
The only thing I can see is that you keep thinking in ADD/ADHD terms when
we were only discussing hyperactivity. Do you really believe hyperactivity
isn't biological in origin? It's a purely physical disorder. How can it be
anything but biological? It is bio-LOGICAL!
>
> Curious,
> Lena
>
> PS. Remember Glen, that not everyone is as wonderfully eloquent as you
> are. We are trying to learn from you.
Oh God, please don't try to learn from me. I teach some great lessons,
but they are all in what *not* to do. As I tell my staff, if you want to be
a journalist just study me carefully and do the exact opposite!
> PPS Hey, I wonder what the correlation between Catholic Schools and
> ADD is... I went to one too! Just wonderin'...;0
Well, for me, I couldn't concentrate because I was always having
to say Hail Marys! :)
D.C. Sessions
Sorry -- Mr. Danforth's message hasn't appeared here. Attributions,
as usual, unchanged.
MSProbert wrote:
>
> In article <322C6C...@cris.com>, Glenn Danforth <ND1I...@cris.com>
> writes:
>
> >> Talking excessively is a sign of hyperactivity. It is indicative of a
> lack
> >> of inhibitory control and is a hallmark of ADHD. It can cause major
> social
> >> problems for any child. I know, as I have one who is just this way.
> >
> > Well Mark, there is a theory on this group that you could control
> >your child by stressing the behavior is not acceptable. (Or could have
> >prevented it had you stressed it during the child's first five years
> >of life.) How do you feel about that?
STRESS is certainly a good way to put it. ADD appears stem from the
lack of a 'reflective pause' that normies insert between impulse and
action. It's that pause that allows them to fire complex rules
inhibiting behaviors in some circumstances and not others.
Without that pause, an ADDer can't distinguish between circumstances
when speaking out is appropriate ("I'm about to throw up and have to
leave the classroom NOW!" or responding to questions) and those where
it is not. What *can* be done is to instill an unconditional aversion
to the behavior in general -- the little kid who is *always* quiet
and gets marked down for poor class participation.
Of course, under sufficient stress the aversion can be overcome, such
as the barf scenario. (The response is likely to be so unpleasant,
though, that it will strengthen the aversion. NEXT time, the kid'll
keep still right up until reverse peristalsis takes over.) The same
process is likely to apply when Sister Mary bullies a child into
speaking up.
--
D. C. Sessions
dc.se...@tempe.vlsi.com
D.C. Sessions
MSProbert wrote:
>
> In article <322C93...@cris.com>, Glenn Danforth <ND1I...@cris.com>
> writes:
>
> > To all you parents out there with ADHD kids: How come you aren't upset
> >to find out your kids have suffered because you're such terrible parents?
> >It's
> >all your fault. KIDS BEHAVIOR CAN BE CONTROLLED! Why can't you control your
> >kids?
>
> Many here have answered the parent blamers. They are too dense to learn.
Not necessarily -- but it's like knocking heads off of a hydra.
Ta...@sound.net
When thinking about how I tried to disipline Amy before I learned more
about ADHD, I cringe. They say you are supposed to reward "good"
behavior and disipline "bad" behavior. Catching her doing something
good, following the rules was hard. One second she would be doing
things appropriately, and before I could say anything, inappropriate
behavior would raise it's ugly head.
When the school and the first psychiatrist told me that it was just
bad parenting and she needed more discipline, I did some sole
searching. I tried being more strict for almost a week, but I
couldn't do it to her. It was affecting her opinion of herself. I
couldn't accept that she was this bad child who has a heart of gold,
is perceptive with other's feelings, but would willingly do things so
off the wall and lie. While I am not saying that it isn't possible
that these people were right, I just didn't think beating the kid was
the answer.
There, thanks for allowing the vent. I feel better now. I guess each
of us have to deal with idiots who think that these are bad kids, or
that we are bad people. Instead of just being different, unique and
special, others have to label us negatively, or we label ourselves
negatively. Here's to change for the better.
Tammy
lil...@sound.net
Jack Lazariuk
> Well Jack, I'm glad the answer to ADHD is Catholic school. Since
> children's behavior *can* be controlled maybe you could explain why so
> many are put on Ritalin? I guess we can throw the drugs away and get rid
> of therapists since hyperactivity isn't a problem. Great! I wonder why the
> nuns couldn't control me? Bad nuns I guess. And I thought it was because
> I had a hyperactivity disorder. I stand corrected. (Oh they could stop
> me temporarily, but we've never, EVER, been talking *temporary* control.)
> I'll forward this to Rush Limbaugh and all the others who have been claiming
> that discipline is all that's needed to control hyperactive kids. They'll be
> glad to know they were right all along.
There is nothing in my post that suggest what you are claiming I am suggesting.
Glenn I find it hard to believe that you are not seeing the point that is
being made to you. When someone's behavior is controlled does not imply
that they are no longer hyperactive.
If someone puts you in a straightjacket and you are no longer running
around it doesn't mean that they have cured you of the problem you had of
running around all the time. When you said that the nuns would stop you
temporarily it does not imply that you were cured temporarily.
One person was trying to make the point to you that some people especially
young life can become very very vulnerable to those they need for love and
can have their behavior controlled, as you say, temporarily. Temporary
for some can be a decade or two. You must have some kind of appreciation
for the range of what some people can do to other people. We are born
helpless and stay that way for a very long time and as they say "Shit
happens"
The point being made to you is that for some of us having our children or
ourselves controlling our behavior is not the issue as much as learning to
live and love with wholeness.
Jack
Glenn Danforth
Glenn Danforth wrote:
>
> > Well Jack, I'm glad the answer to ADHD is Catholic school. Since
> > children's behavior *can* be controlled maybe you could explain why so
> > many are put on Ritalin? I guess we can throw the drugs away and get rid
> > of therapists since hyperactivity isn't a problem. Great! I wonder why the
> > nuns couldn't control me? Bad nuns I guess. And I thought it was because
> > I had a hyperactivity disorder. I stand corrected. (Oh they could stop
> > me temporarily, but we've never, EVER, been talking *temporary* control.)
> > I'll forward this to Rush Limbaugh and all the others who have been claiming
> > that discipline is all that's needed to control hyperactive kids. They'll be
> > glad to know they were right all along.
>
> Jack Lazariuk wrote: There is nothing in my post that suggest what you are claiming I am suggesting.
You responded to my saying that hyperactivity disorder can't be controlled
(and we were talking a matter of years) by discipline, by writing: "I went to a
Catholic school run by priests and nuns and believe me I know that children's
behavior can be controlled." Need I say more?
> Glenn I find it hard to believe that you are not seeing the point that is
> being made to you. When someone's behavior is controlled does not imply
> that they are no longer hyperactive.
Jack, I find it hard to believe you can't see what has been the only
topic of discussion. Kira suggested little girls with hyperactivity disorder
were never diagnosed (until their 40's in her case) because they were
taught by society that they shouldn't be hyperactive. If that behavior is
controlled for 40 years (and to escape diagnosis, it would have to be in
control 24 hours a day) then the person doesn't have a disorder. If I can
control all of my ADD traits 24 hours a day for 40 years, I don't have ADD.
If I can concentrate and do everything normies do, such that nobody would
ever suspect me of ADD (because I have no problem), then I don't have ADD.
If a little girl can sit still and not fidget and not talk fast for 40 years,
whether it's society or nuns that cause the calm behavior, then that person
doesn't have a hyperactivity disorder. I can't believe you are not seeing
the *only* point that is being made to you.
> If someone puts you in a straightjacket and you are no longer running
> around it doesn't mean that they have cured you of the problem you had of
> running around all the time.
Gee Jack, when have we ever talked about physical restraint. That
isn't worthy of your intellect. You jumped into a thread where it was suggested
that little girls weren't hyperactive because they were brought up believing it
wasn't proper behavior for girls. Not just hyper behavior, but hyperactivity
disorder. SO hyperactive that they were, by definition, uncontrollable (disorder).
But, these little girls were able to stop this hyperactivity disorder to such an
extent that no one thaught they even had it (Kira suggested that's why girls
weren't diagnosed as much as boys.) And how were they able to reverse this disorder
that scientists, doctors, teachers, and parents can't reverse? These little girls,
before age 5, just decided to stop because they were told "it isn't proper."
Give me a freakin' break!
>When you said that the nuns would stop you
> temporarily it does not imply that you were cured temporarily.
What does this response have to do with anything that has been discussed
on this thread. (It's a long thread, I just renamed this portion, "You're Bad
Parents.")
> One person was trying to make the point to you that some people especially
> young life can become very very vulnerable to those they need for love and
> can have their behavior controlled, as you say, temporarily. Temporary
> for some can be a decade or two.
Well, that person wasn't talking about "some" people, or "especially"
in young life. She was talking about hundreds of thousands of girls "in the
first five years of life." (Sounds more like a Tim Brown conspiracy each day.)
We weren't talking about a child or a lot of children being physically or
mentally abused into submission. We were arguing millions actually, of little
girls stopping their hyperactivity disorder because Mommy and Daddy said it wasn't
nice to be hyperactive. Plllleeeeeaaaasssseee!!!!!
You must have some kind of appreciation
> for the range of what some people can do to other people. We are born
> helpless and stay that way for a very long time and as they say "Shit
> happens"
Let me ask you a simple question. Do you or do you not agree with Kira's
original statement that the reason there are [three times] as many boys
diagnosed with HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER than girls is because little girls are
taught that it's improper behavior (taught, not beaten) and little boys are
encouraged to act that way? Yes or no. If it's no, then why are we talking?
If it's yes, then why am I wasting my time?
Nessa
Glenn wrote that:
<snip Lena and Glenn>
> the discussion was *only* about hyperactivity. Kira made
>a statement about hyperactivity and I disagreed. We weren't even
>talking about ADHD. Get rid of the entire "attention deficit"
>portion. Our discussion had nothing at all to do with ADD or ADHD.
>It was about hyperactivity. <snip snip snip> I could not be any
clearer! Take a nomal kid. No ADD. No ADHD. But she is severely
>hyperactive.
and Nessa (not meaning to be argumentative but confused) asks:
YO! Glenn! Seriously...can you explain to me very gently and
clearly how a person can be 'hyperactive' yet not ADD or ADHD but be
considered with a disorder?
MY understanding of this concept is that a person can have ADD w/o
the H but you can't have the H w/o the ADD. (as explained by
Kathleen et. al) In fact when I was first diagonised they called it
Hyperactivity (or Minimal brain disfunction or damage).
How can you say a person has a hyperactivity disorder but not
ADD/ADHD... to me that means the person is an average active person.
Glenn Continues
>Why are you talking about ADD? It's as relavent as cancer or the
>common cold in this discussion.
Nessa asserts...
Wait a minute Glenn, I beg to differ.. well no I won't beg but...
If your saying a person has 'abnormal levels' of hyperactivity then
ADD/ADHD is very relevant. If you are saying that 'typical' tomboy
type female children are taught that 'it's not ladylike to climb
trees and scream like a banshee' or "play tackle football with the
boys" and she aquieses(sp?) then yes I agree that ADD/ADHD has NO
PLACE in this discussion. However if you are talking about women
like myself who as a child was diagnoised (in 1969 mind you) with
"MBP-Hyperactivity" and placed on Ritilan then I disagree. That
differentiaion makes it most relevant to ADD/ADHD...
You seem to be questioning whether females have this disorder less
than males.. From my understanding it is that there are more males
with ADHD but more females with ADD. Which of couse is so much
harder to diagnoise...
She's lazy... she doesn't pay attention, she stares out the window,
she daydreams... That's ADD...undiagnosed (possibly).
She never stops talking, she always interupts, she never listens,
she never thinks, she's never on time, she's never organized, she's
loud and unladylike, she's always moving.. can't sit still.., always
has her hands in something, or something in her mouth (when she's
not talking).. she chews her hair or bites her nails.. Thats... ME
oh no sorry that's ADHD in a female child which is how they figured
out I had this...disorder..affliction, syndrome..challenge..etc etc
etc..
Glenn said (or was it Lena)
<snip>" (By saying girls aren't diagnosed with
hyperactivity - we aren't talking about ADD/ADHD - because they are
"taught"
to be calm, means that "normal", non-hyperactive behavior was
"leaned.)
and Nessa asks:
How can you say that you can teach a hyperactive girl to behave in a
non-hyperactive fashion... if she complies then she's not
hyperactive is she???
I mean if you tell a girl..stop banging your shoe on the chair leg
and she does..for 2 minutes and then she twirls her hair or does
some other acceptable fidget type behavior is this saying she has
been taught to be non-hyperactive or has she been taught to be
'quietly hyperactive'?
<snip more>
Ok guys.. now somewhere in this currently nonmedicaited ADHD addled
brain I am SURE I missed something.....so be kind.. be very kind..
warm thoughts in confusion..
Nessa
--
An Error is not a Mistake until you Refuse to Correct it.
Nessa ne...@ix.netcom.com
Jack Lazariuk
> Let me ask you a simple question. Do you or do you not agree
with Kira's
> original statement that the reason there are [three times] as many boys
> diagnosed with HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER than girls is because little girls are
> taught that it's improper behavior (taught, not beaten) and little boys are
> encouraged to act that way? Yes or no. If it's no, then why are we talking?
> If it's yes, then why am I wasting my time?
Glenn when I was in school they sometimes had me thinking that the
opposite of the right answer was the wrong answer, in life I've come to
see that sometimes the opposite of a profound truth can be another
profound truth.
In this thread, myself and others are trying to talk to you and others
about things we are thinking about concerning this subject and you seem to
just want to stick to the issue of who is right - you or Kira. From your
perspective it seems like it is you and from some other perspectives it
may seem that you are both right. You seem like an open-minded
intelligent guy, the kind of guy that can appreciate that not everything
can be answered with a yes or no.
Let me take a run at this from another direction.
Not everyone is in total agreement on what ADHD is. I am probably closer
to what you sense ADHD is than I am to a lot of other people in this
group. Some of us feel that when ADHD is spoken of that it is describing
parts of ourselves that we value and try to actualize and live with
completeness, others feel that it is describing parts of themselves that
just causes them pain. It is not really ADHD that we are looking at but
rather our vision of what it means to be human.
When ADD/ADHD gets discussed intelligently , for me, it sheds light on
things that are interfering with what I am trying to do. But my focus is
not on the ADD/ADHD but rather on what I am trying to do and the vision I
have of the quality of life I could be living. I tend to think that you
see things that way as well.
In other posts you have spoken eleoquently on the subject of having an
optimistic view of life and have contrasted that with other views that
didn't share your optimism and you have suggested that these views often
determine how we view ADD/ADHD.
Lets say, as an example, that you and I are both optimistic and when we
look at ADD/ADHD we see it as transparent and have often experienced
passing through it and seeing what we can be on the other side. For us
the ADD/ADHD is a direction to be explored.
Now lets say that there are others that see ADD/ADHD as opaque and reveals
only what can not be passed through. For these ADD/ADHD is a direction to
be avoided.
For one the mirror of ADD/ADHD is reflecting what one can be and for the
other it reflects what one is not. You ask the question " Is it a
direction worth traveling?" some say yes, some say no.
For some the words " control of behavior" means lack of freedom and for
others it means freedom to live in proper relation. Some want to be in
proper relationship with the current social structure and others want to
be in proper relationship with the heart. Some are strangers to their
heart.
The direction I was taking this Glenn was to try to show you an example of
a perspective that could read Kira's words as very true, but I am running
out of time and will leave it for you to finish in your imagination.
JAck
Glenn Danforth
> Glenn wrote that:
> > the discussion was *only* about hyperactivity. Kira made
> >a statement about hyperactivity and I disagreed. We weren't even
> >talking about ADHD. Get rid of the entire "attention deficit"
> >portion. Our discussion had nothing at all to do with ADD or ADHD.
> >It was about hyperactivity. <snip snip snip> I could not be any
> clearer! Take a nomal kid. No ADD. No ADHD. But she is severely
> >hyperactive.
> and Nessa (not meaning to be argumentative but confused) asks:
>
> YO! Glenn! Seriously...can you explain to me very gently and
> clearly how a person can be 'hyperactive' yet not ADD or ADHD but be
> considered with a disorder?
Boy! Do you know how long it's been since a woman asked me to be
gentle? Maybe I should stop hanging out in those S&M clubs. Besides, it's
false advertising. I hardly ever meet and Spaniards & Mexicans.
I figured when I wrote that I would be creating some confusion. It was
meant to be hypothetical. Since I have only been talking about the hyperactivity
portion of ADHD, and everyone kept bringing in other parts of it, I needed
to create a scenario that would let them get ADD symptoms out of the discussion.
Kira made the original statement about hyperactivity and argued that.
But people kept talking about ADD. This was my desperate attempt to keep the
subject focused. (Did I really say that on an ADD group?)
> Glenn Continues
> >Why are you talking about ADD? It's as relavent as cancer or the
> >common cold in this discussion.
>
> Nessa asserts... If you are saying that 'typical' tomboy
> type female children are taught that 'it's not ladylike to climb
> trees and scream like a banshee' or "play tackle football with the
> boys" and she aquieses(sp?) then yes I agree that ADD/ADHD has NO
> PLACE in this discussion.
That was exactly what I was arguing. Yes, those girls are taught
not to do so, and it works in many cases. But the statement I disagreed with
was that girls with *hyperactivity* weren't being diagnosed. (Not tomboys -
hyperactivity) because society taught them not to be hyperactive. What I
have said 'til I'm blue in the, hell, I'm blue all over at this point,
is that:
1) To be diagnosed with ADHD one must have ADHD.
2) If one has ADHD that means they have a hyperactivity *disorder*.
3) Kira said girls with that hyperactivity disorder aren't being
diagnosed as much as boys.
4) That implies that those girls have a hyperactivity disorder (it
can't be misdiagnosed if they don't *have* it to begin with).
5) A hyperactivity *disorder* means that you can't control your
hyperactivity.
6) If you can control your hyperactivity then you don't have a
hyperactivity disorder.
7) Kira suggests that many girls have been taught to control their
hyperactivity disorder by society.
8) If they can control it, they don't have it.
If anyone can explain how someone can learn to be calm all of the time,
and still have a hyperactivity disorder, I will gladly admit I am wrong. Her theory
is like saying that society has taught blind girls that it's not nice to be
blind. So, many blind girls have taught themselves to see with 20/20 vision.
But, they are still blind. Just undiagnosed as blind because they have taught
themselves to see.
If little girls teach themselves to not have the symptoms of hyperactivity
disorder (fidgeting, fast talking, bouncing of walls, constantly twirling their hair)
then they don't have hyperactivity disorder. I say they never had it. But let's
agree with Kira that they have learned to stop all of those symptoms. At the very
least, they have miraculously been cured. Either way, if you can control your
hyperactivity you don't have a disorder. If you don't have it, then of course
you won't be diagnosed with it.
We aren't talking about ADD. The reason that
fewer girls are diagnosed with *ADD* is probably because they don't have the
hyperactivity and aren't as noticeable. Kira was claiming that just as many girls
*do* (or may) have hyperactivity as boys. (Hyperactivity - not ADD) She claimed
that those hyperactive girls learned to control the hyperactivity. I say,
if they control it, it's not a disorder. They will have ADD, but not ADHD (if
they aren't hyperactive). Regardless of the reason they're sedate.
This is not about "some" girls. I know some girls or boys can have their
hyperactivity beaten out of them. We have been talking about the entire population
of girls vs. boys. Regardless of what Kira wants to believe, the reason there are
more hyperactive boys diagnosed than hyperactive girls is simple: There ARE more
hyperactive boys!
There may be 10 times as many ADD girls. Who knows? But there are more
ADHD boys. A girl with hyperactivity stands out like a sore thumb. It's much
easier to spot hyperactive girls because it's so unusual. If there were as many
girls with hyperactivity disorder as boys, they would be diagnosed. Even if
society *could* teach girls to control it (as someone who has it, I promise it's
not a matter of willpower, that's why it's a disorder), it would take years to
do it. After a few months of dealing with a hyperactive you know they are
hyperactive. These girls would be diagnosed easily.
However if you are talking about women
> like myself who as a child was diagnoised (in 1969 mind you) with
> "MBP-Hyperactivity" and placed on Ritilan then I disagree. That
> differentiaion makes it most relevant to ADD/ADHD...
How come society didn't teach you to control it so well that you
weren't diagnosed? That's what Kira is saying. Hyperactive little girls are
taught to control it so well that teachers, parents and doctors aren't able
to diagnose them. Where did your parents go wrong?
>
> You seem to be questioning whether females have this disorder less
> than males.. From my understanding it is that there are more males
> with ADHD but more females with ADD. Which of couse is so much
> harder to diagnoise...
EXACTLY!!!!!! That is the *only* thing I've said from day one. More
boys DO have ADHD than girls. Kira thinks just as many girls may have ADHD, but
they have learned to control the hyperactivity so well that they aren't
diagnosed.
That's why I keep saying to forget about ADD! We have only been talking
about hyperactivity. That's what Kira talked about and what I argued. I just
don't understand why I can't seem to get this through to people! Where am I
being so unclear? More boys are hyperactive. Kira suggests that isn't true.
This is ONLY about *******hyperactive!!!*******
> She's lazy... she doesn't pay attention, she stares out the window,
> she daydreams... That's ADD...undiagnosed (possibly).
I agree 110%! I believe many girls with *ADD* aren't being diagnosed.
This has never been about that. That is why I got so desperate that I created the
above hypothetical. I just can't get people off the subject of ADD. This isn't
about daydreaming, laziness, or paying attention. This is about hyperactivity.
You just can't believe how frustrating this is. I don't see how I can be any
clearer. Kira knows what it's about. Still, she keeps defending her statement.
>
> She never stops talking, she always interupts, she never listens,
> she never thinks, she's never on time, she's never organized, she's
> loud and unladylike, she's always moving.. can't sit still.., always
> has her hands in something, or something in her mouth (when she's
> not talking).. she chews her hair or bites her nails.. Thats... ME
> oh no sorry that's ADHD in a female child which is how they figured
> out I had this...disorder..affliction, syndrome..challenge..etc etc
> etc..
Well, according to Kira, girls are taught that this is unladylike
behavior. So, little girls learn to stop doing this. That's why fewer girls
are diagnosed with hyperactivity (adHd). It sounds like you agree with me,
but just didn't realize the bizarre position Kira took and continued to defend.
> and Nessa asks:
> How can you say that you can teach a hyperactive girl to behave in a
> non-hyperactive fashion... if she complies then she's not
> hyperactive is she???
You just repeated my position word-for-word. I've been saying this exact
same thing in about 10 consecutive posts. You just repeated it. I suggest you
go back through Deja News and reread the 10,000 words or so I've written trying
to get this exact point through to Kira. It will be a great cure for insomnia.
I now see that you and I agree 100%. Now, if we could only get Kira
to understand that the only reason more boys are diagnosed with the hyperactivity
portion of ADD/ADHD is because more boys are hyperactive...
> An Error is not a Mistake until you Refuse to Correct it.
After a week of trying to get Kira to "see the light" it's now
officialy her mistake. ;)
Glenn Danforth
Jack,
Thanks for a well-reasoned post. I appreciate what you said. I agree
with much of it, if not most. I realized after Kira finally mentioned her
abuse as a child, that her personal experience was being projected upon
[millions] of other little girls. I said then I would have no problem had she
made it a personal point of view. Yet, she continued to defend her statement
as it were true of the entire female population.
I think it's obvious that this is a subject I feel deeply about. To be
blunt, her statement pissed me off! I have gone out of my way to try not to
be emotional and to remain civil. Outside of some snide remarks I have done so.
As a person who went through hell as a child because of my ADHD it makes my blood
boil when someone implies that ADHD kids (in her case it was girls) can be taught
to control themselves through teacher/parent discipline.
I haven't been nasty because Kira seems like a very nice person, and I know
that she meant well. Had a known trouble maker said the same thing I might
have really expressed my distaste of their position. ;)
Kira was offended because I said her statement was dangerous thinking.
I don't know why she felt that was particularly offensive. Had I said she was
a dangerous parent, or something similar, that would be offensive. But her
statement *is* dangerous. Many people are already spouting that line. There are
thousands of children suffering because parents believe strong discipline will
teach them to control their hyperactivity. For many children that discipline
crosses the line into abuse. As one who has been abused I can't fathom why
Kira can't understand how dangerous that line of thinking is.
She says that [potentially millions] of hyperactive little girls are
disciplined into controlling their hyperactivity so well that no one thinks
they're hyperactive and she doesn't understand how dangerous that is? If I
believe her, then my answer to my little girl's hyperactivity is stronger
discipline. That IS dangerous.
Jack Lazariuk wrote:
>
> In article <322ECE...@cris.com>, Glenn Danforth <ND1I...@cris.com> wrote:
>
> > Let me ask you a simple question. Do you or do you not agree
> with Kira's
> > original statement that the reason there are [three times] as many boys
> > diagnosed with HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER than girls is because little girls are
> > taught that it's improper behavior (taught, not beaten) and little boys are
> > encouraged to act that way? Yes or no. If it's no, then why are we talking?
> > If it's yes, then why am I wasting my time?
>
____________________________________________________________
MSProbert
In article <50jk7c$f...@news1.randomc.com>, kal...@randomc.com (Cheryl
Mathison) writes:
>>change the child or adult with ADD. However, this constant pressure
>>will have an effect on ADDers, where they will channel their energy (if
>>hyperactive) or behaviours into different displays that would not
>>provoke overly negative reactions.
>
>Constant "pressure" (read: *PUNISHMENT*) will send a kid's self
>esteem straight down the toilet. They might just do what you say and
>start fidgeting and keeping to themselves...never to think themselves
>"good enough" to exert themselves. Or, like me, they might just
>*RETALIATE* toward their oppressors. ----snippo----
Absolutely. I as previously posted, when we backed off a bit on Josh,
increased his limits and decreased the pressure there were several
positive effects behaviorily. There also was a direct, and pronounced,
physical effect. Josh had what appeared to be a MPH triggered tic. He was
on Catapres to control it, with control being equivocal at times.
However, when he had more space, and LESS pressure, the tic management was
no longer equivocal. It was totally shut down. Zero, zilch nada. Nothing.
Glenn Danforth
I just wanted to add something from Thom Hartmann:
The idea that such "weaknesses" or
"damage" will automatically cause us to fail is, in fact, not at
all consistent with reality. For example, studies of "at risk"
children done over the past 30 years (the most famous one being a
study done in Hawaii) show that children from abusive, alcoholic,
"broken" and poverty-struck homes are far more likely to grow up
as healthy, well-adjusted adults than they are to grow up mentally
ill, neurotic, or "damaged."
____________________________________________________________
Check out Glenn Danforth's Humor Factory at:
*~* http://www.cris.com/~nd1irish/index.htm *~*
30 pages of humor and growing. (Like a malignant tumor!)
GeneDoug
We are beating around the bush now. Your arguments are on target,
and I was speaking of AD*H*D, but was too lazy to write it. I used
the term ADD because I think the issue we discussed definitely
encompass it as a whole - w/ or w/o Hyperactivity (H).
****
Oddly, the DSM-IV now has a category called ADHD--inactive type.
Considering that the H stands for hyperactive, isn't that an oxymoron? On
the other hand, isn't Whopper Jr. also?
Gene
Jack Lazariuk
> I just wanted to add something from Thom Hartmann:
>
>
> The idea that such "weaknesses" or
> "damage" will automatically cause us to fail is, in fact, not at
> all consistent with reality. For example, studies of "at risk"
> children done over the past 30 years (the most famous one being a
> study done in Hawaii) show that children from abusive, alcoholic,
> "broken" and poverty-struck homes are far more likely to grow up
> as healthy, well-adjusted adults than they are to grow up mentally
> ill, neurotic, or "damaged."
Yes I think that people are very resilient and can advantage themselves by
the opportunities presented by hurt. The ones that do become damaged are
the ones who are abused and do not know it. Whose abuse came as
metaphysical violence masquerading as love.
Jack
Jack Lazariuk
> Kira was offended because I said her statement was dangerous thinking.
> I don't know why she felt that was particularly offensive. Had I said she was
> a dangerous parent, or something similar, that would be offensive. But her
> statement *is* dangerous. Many people are already spouting that line.
There are
> thousands of children suffering because parents believe strong discipline will
> teach them to control their hyperactivity. For many children that discipline
> crosses the line into abuse. As one who has been abused I can't fathom why
> Kira can't understand how dangerous that line of thinking is.
> She says that [potentially millions] of hyperactive little girls are
> disciplined into controlling their hyperactivity so well that no one thinks
> they're hyperactive and she doesn't understand how dangerous that is? If I
> believe her, then my answer to my little girl's hyperactivity is stronger
> discipline. That IS dangerous.
You say her statement was dangerous thinking but it was her statement that
you focused on and not her thinking. It seems like she wants to talk to
you in a friendly way and is not afraid of having her views challanged
and you are good at that.
I was once in a university classroom and started to express an opinion.
As I started talking I caught the eye of another student whose look made
me realize that what I was about to say was incorrect, he knew it and I
knew it. Before I got to the ned of my sentence I completely changed the
point of view I expressed. He laughted and so did I. I was glad he
didn't hide his thoughts so that I would finish and he could prove me
wrong. I might have defended my position. Sometimes dialogue can happen
when only one person is talking. But we are in newsgroups because we
value dialogue and not just wishing to exchange monologues.
Where I felt that Kira was heading with her thinking was that she could
demonstrate that what she needed was an enviroment where her ADHD could
grow and florish and find a meaningful place in today's complex society.
She wasn't heading toward making the point that children need to be
treated with strong discipine to take away their ADHD.
JAck
Glenn Danforth
Jack Lazariuk wrote:
> Where I felt that Kira was heading with her thinking was that she could
> demonstrate that what she needed was an enviroment where her ADHD could
> grow and florish and find a meaningful place in today's complex society.
Then you missed the point entirely. We weren't talking
about Kira or her ADHD. Where she was headin after 4-5 posts is
meaningless. There was only one statement being discussed and
challenged. My ADHD and Kira's has nothing to do with it. It may
have formed our beliefs, but it doesn't change the correctness of
the statement or lack there of. What you are saying has nothing to
do with anything we were discussing.
> She wasn't heading toward making the point that children need to be
> treated with strong discipine to take away their ADHD.
It doesn't matter where she was *heading*. By saying that strong
discipline has allowed an entire populatiom of little girls to control
their hyperactive behavior, she made that point with her very first statement.
That's what I was arguing.
____________________________________________________________
Check out Glenn Danforth's Humor Factory at:
*~* http://www.cris.com/~nd1irish/index.htm *~*
30 pages of humor and growing. (Like a malignant tumor!)
Jack Lazariuk
In article <32302C...@cris.com>, Glenn Danforth <ND1I...@cris.com> wrote:
§ If little girls teach themselves to not have the symptoms of
hyperactivity
§ disorder (fidgeting, fast talking, bouncing of walls, constantly
twirling their hair)
§ then they don't have hyperactivity disorder. I say they never had it.
But let's
§ agree with Kira that they have learned to stop all of those symptoms.
At the very
§ least, they have miraculously been cured. Either way, if you can
control your
§ hyperactivity you don't have a disorder. If you don't have it, then of
course
§ you won't be diagnosed with it.
There is a difference between bouncing off walls and twirling hair. One
can be more disruptive than the other and more subject to social
pressures. All the examples you gave Glenn are visible ones. Can you
think of any hyperactivity symptoms that are less visible and imagine a
situation where only the person who is hyperactive knows.
If you were to accept that social pressures can cause someone who wants to
bounce off walls to fidget instead then you would have to accept the
possible implications of the direction.
You are a very outward expressing person and you seem to be not too
disconnected from your childlike impulses. Keep in mind that this is not
true of all.
Jack
Glenn Danforth
> Glenn Danforth wrote:
> If little girls teach themselves to not have the
> symptoms of hyperactivity disorder (fidgeting, fast talking,
> bouncing of walls, constantly twirling their hair) then they
> don't have hyperactivity disorder. I say they never had it.
> But let's agree with Kira that they have learned to stop all
> of those symptoms. At the very least, they have miraculously been
> cured. Either way, if you can control your hyperactivity you don't
> diagnosed with it.
Jack Lazariuk wrote:
> There is a difference between bouncing off walls and twirling hair. One
> can be more disruptive than the other and more subject to social
> pressures.
Glenn answers: That wasn't the point. It's only about having a hyperactivity
disorder and it being diagnosed. If a little girl twirls her hair that
isn't a hyperactivity disorder. If she does it excessively and can't stop
when told to, then she might have a hyperactivity disorder. If it's
noticeable it will be diagnosed. If it's not noticeable or it can be
stopped at will, it's not a disorder.
Jack continues: All the examples you gave Glenn are visible ones. Can you
> think of any hyperactivity symptoms that are less visible and imagine a
> situation where only the person who is hyperactive knows?
No I can't. Give me some examples please. And make sure that these
symptoms of hyperactivity would be considered a hyperactivity disorder by
a the psychological community. Otherwise, what's your point?
> If you were to accept that social pressures can cause someone who wants to
> bounce off walls to fidget instead then you would have to accept the
> possible implications of the direction.
Who ever said that? If that's true, I really would like to know
where I could find it in a psych manual. I never said someone wanted to
bounce off walls but fidgeted instead. That would be ridiculous. I said,
and every ADD specialist says, hyperactivity can manifest itself in fast
talking, fast walking, and fidgeting. That's how it is with me. I never
"wanted to bounce off walls."
Perhaps you are confusing the hyperactive brain of all ADDers with
a hyperactivity disorder. The hyperactivity disorder is physical, not
mental. It's manifestations are physical by definition. If your brain
is always racing, you may have ADD. If your body is always racing you have
a hyperactivity disorder. I wish you would explain how a calm person
(physically calm) can possibly have a hyperactivity disorder. Everyone keeps
writing these esoteric posts and trying to tiptoe around the only issue I've
been asking about and arguing.
I really don't care to hear any more off-topic baloney. Either tell
me exactly how a calm person (physically calm) can possibly have a hyperactivity
disorder (facts please, not opinion) or stop responding. This is getting
more ridiculous with each post.
>
> You are a very outward expressing person and you seem to be not too
> disconnected from your childlike impulses. Keep in mind that this is not
> true of all.
What the heck does that mean? And, what does it have to do with
the issues? Are you a politician Jack? If not, you've missed your calling. ;)
____________________________________________________________
Check out Glenn Danforth's Humor Factory at:
*~* http://www.cris.com/~nd1irish/index.htm *~*
30 pages of humor and growing. (Like a malignant tumor!)
Glenn Danforth
Jack Lazariuk wrote:
>
> X-No-Archive: Yes
> In article <32318B...@cris.com>, Glenn Danforth <ND1I...@cris.com> wrote:
>
> § It doesn't matter where she was *heading*. By saying that strong
> § discipline has allowed an entire populatiom of little girls to control
> § their hyperactive behavior, she made that point with her very first
> statement.
> § That's what I was arguing.
>
> on one way that she worded something that she was wrong because of the way
> you took it and you were right.
Actually Jack I stopped days ago. You are the one obsessively
jumping in to comment and interpret the posts for everyone. When you
get your nose out of it, it will end. I don't know why you feel you
need to play white night, but try to show a bit of maturity and self control.
____________________________________________________________
Check out Glenn Danforth's Humor Factory at:
*~* http://www.cris.com/~nd1irish/index.htm *~*
30 pages of humor and growing. (Like a malignant tumor!)
GD 1
Jack Lazariuk wrote:
> Maybe I'm wrong in my thinking Glenn. I am thinking along the lines of:
> Someone with repressed sexuality still has sexuality
> Someone with repressed anger still has anger
> Someone who projects their dark side still has a dark side
> As you see my thinking is focused on the inner condition and not the
> behavior and you may be right that hyperactivity is just behavior. If
> there is no hyper behavior that is manifest then there is no
> hyperactivity.
> Can hyperactivity be manifest in dreams?
> Can it be manifest in blinking eyes?
> Can it be manifest in ulcers?
> In heartbeat?
> In blood pressure?
I suggest that these things may be caused by stress. I believe
stress to be a mental condition. In the case of rapid heartbeat, it may
be stress or fear (fight or flight). Adrenaline can do that. Same with
blood pressure. The type of stress that would cause such things is based
on your conscious or subconscious thought process (as opposed to physical
stress). If someone cuts you off the road you may curse and scream or
laugh at the idiot. Stress depends (as far as I am aware) on the individual.
Perhaps that is the problem. Perhaps the people I've been arguing
were under the impression that stress and hyperactivity are related. One
is a physical disorder and the other is mental. In all the talk of
"internalizing hyperactivity" if you substitute the word "stress" their
statements make sense. I can understand how one might confuse the two, but
they are the same. One may temporarily cause the other, in both directions.
(Heck, hyperactivity in children is known to cause stress in parents. Ha ha.)
Yes, a stressed out person can internalize that stress or externalize
it, as they have said about hyperactivity. This REALLY makes sense if it's
true. I was dumbfounded at the statements about hyperactivity being controlled
through willpower and "internalized. This might explain it. Stress and
hyperactivity are not the same thing. Apples and oranges.
____________________________________________________________
Check out Glenn Danforth's Humor Factory at:
*~* http://www.cris.com/~nd1irish/index.htm *~*
30 pages of humor and growing. (Like a malignant tumor!)
Cheryl Mathison
On Fri, 06 Sep 1996 10:52:33 -0300, Glenn Danforth <ND1I...@cris.com>
announced:
>But people kept talking about ADD. This was my desperate attempt to keep the
>subject focused. (Did I really say that on an ADD group?)
<snicker>
>hyperactivity) because society taught them not to be hyperactive. What I
>have said 'til I'm blue in the, hell, I'm blue all over at this point,
>is that:
> 3) Kira said girls with that hyperactivity disorder aren't being
> diagnosed as much as boys.
> 4) That implies that those girls have a hyperactivity disorder (it
> can't be misdiagnosed if they don't *have* it to begin with).
> 5) A hyperactivity *disorder* means that you can't control your
> hyperactivity.
> 6) If you can control your hyperactivity then you don't have a
> hyperactivity disorder.
Umm...here you're wrong, as I mentioned the "other diagnosis" to Nessa
and to others...from what I can find, ADHD seems to be diagnosed 70%
male/30% female. Borderline Personality Disorder (which has the
*SAME* symptoms as ADHD except that they don't care about history)
seems to be diagnosed 30% male/70% female. Is there something wrong
with this picture? BPD is treated with anti-psychotics (like
Stelazine), which tend to make the person "demure" (vacuous) and "shy"
(vacant). In other words, it tends to make "tomboys" into "ladies".
They misdiagnosed me with BPD several years ago...horrid
experience...if a doctor tries to hit me with anti-psychotics or a BPD
diagnosis again, I'll strangle him. I *LIKE* my brain. I *LIKE* my
personality. On stelazine, I had *NEITHER*.
>least, they have miraculously been cured. Either way, if you can control your
>hyperactivity you don't have a disorder. If you don't have it, then of course
>you won't be diagnosed with it.
No argument.
> We aren't talking about ADD. The reason that
>fewer girls are diagnosed with *ADD* is probably because they don't have the
>hyperactivity and aren't as noticeable. Kira was claiming that just as many girls
>*do* (or may) have hyperactivity as boys. (Hyperactivity - not ADD) She claimed
>that those hyperactive girls learned to control the hyperactivity. I say,
I counter that they're being misdiagnosed with BPD. If you look at
the description of BPD, and the gender statistics, you will probably
agree...BPD and ADHD are unbelieveably close...well close enough that
if BPD and ADHD were songs or pieces of art, then BPD would have a
"copyright infringement" lawsuit slapped on it...close like "My Sweet
Lord" is to "He's So Fine"...
>more hyperactive boys diagnosed than hyperactive girls is simple: There ARE more
>hyperactive boys!
Look at Borderline Personality Disorder and tell me that. I don't
think so.
>ADHD boys. A girl with hyperactivity stands out like a sore thumb. It's much
Yup...and she gets misdiagnosed and cubbiholed.
> How come society didn't teach you to control it so well that you
>weren't diagnosed? That's what Kira is saying. Hyperactive little girls are
>taught to control it so well that teachers, parents and doctors aren't able
>to diagnose them. Where did your parents go wrong?
Back when I was a kid, they "knew" that "girls can't be hyperactive".
Merely "fidgety"...or just plain "tomboys". They didn't see anything
"medical" about it at all...don't ask me why, but that's what my
doctor said when my mom took me to him about my hyperactiveness.
Yeah, my mom saw it. Yeah, my teachers saw it. The doctor *SAW* it,
but was told by his "cute little medical manuals" that it was akin to
saying that a fish can breathe on top of a mountain...i.e., physically
impossible. That it was a "mental problem"...and I went from
therapist to therapist, being misdiagnosed with just about every weird
problem that could be thought of in avoidance of ADHD. If you ask me,
it was the *THERAPISTS* and the *DOCTORS* that had "mental
disorders"...
Check out what the mental health web page says about Borderline
Personality Disorder. I think the mental health community needs to
look at it too...
Hugs!
Cheryl
kal...@randomc.com
GD 1
Cheryl Mathison wrote:
> Umm...here you're wrong,
Who, moi? How dare you suggest such a thing? :)
as I mentioned the "other diagnosis" to Nessa
> and to others...from what I can find, ADHD seems to be diagnosed 70%
> male/30% female. Borderline Personality Disorder (which has the
> *SAME* symptoms as ADHD except that they don't care about history)
> seems to be diagnosed 30% male/70% female. Is there something wrong
> with this picture? BPD is treated with anti-psychotics (like
> Stelazine), which tend to make the person "demure" (vacuous) and "shy"
> (vacant). In other words, it tends to make "tomboys" into "ladies".
> They misdiagnosed me with BPD several years ago...horrid
> experience...if a doctor tries to hit me with anti-psychotics or a BPD
> diagnosis again, I'll strangle him. I *LIKE* my brain. I *LIKE* my
> personality. On stelazine, I had *NEITHER*.
First, I hate to even get into "borderline personality disorder."
In my arrogant opinion, it's a cop-out diagnosis for shrinks who can't
figure anything else out. Sort of similar to "stress" for the medical
community. ("Doc, I have pain and nausea." Doc can't figure out the cause.
Doc decides it's stress. Months later the real problem is discovered.)
BPD is a favorite among forensic psychologists. You murder and dismember
someone. You feel guilty, so you aren't sociopathic. You aren't schitzophrenic.
You don't fit into any category. Perhaps you're just evil. Of course the
psychiatrist can't justify his existence if that's true, so they invent
BPD. (Sorry about the rant.)
Anyway, I see what you're saying and it may be 100% fact. Regardless,
Kira said little girls aren't being *diagnosed* because they control their
hyperactivity. You are saying they are noticed because of the hyperactivity,
but diagnosed as BPD and not ADHD. These are two different statements. I'm
not in disagreement with you at all. I am in disagreement with Kira's statement.
(My apologies to Kira - I know you wish this would end as much as I do, but
people keep adding to it.)
>
> >least, they have miraculously been cured. Either way, if you can control your
> >hyperactivity you don't have a disorder. If you don't have it, then of course
> >you won't be diagnosed with it.
>
> No argument.
Well that's the only thing *I* have been discussing. So why is
everyone feeling the need to keep adding things about ADD or BPD or STP (the
racers edge)?
Glenn:
> > We aren't talking about ADD. The reason that
> >fewer girls are diagnosed with *ADD* is probably because they don't have the
> >hyperactivity and aren't as noticeable. Kira was claiming that just as many girls
> >*do* (or may) have hyperactivity as boys. (Hyperactivity - not ADD) She claimed
> >that those hyperactive girls learned to control the hyperactivity. I say,
> Cheryl:
> I counter that they're being misdiagnosed with BPD. If you look at
> the description of BPD, and the gender statistics, you will probably
> agree...BPD and ADHD are unbelieveably close...
That very well may be the case. If it is, then add that to my statement.
I did say "probably" for a reason. I've said all along that there may be many
reasons for fewer girls not being diagnosed. The only one I am saying *isn't*
the reason is Kira's idea that they have learned to control their hyperactivity.
> well close enough that
> if BPD and ADHD were songs or pieces of art, then BPD would have a
> "copyright infringement" lawsuit slapped on it...close like "My Sweet
> Lord" is to "He's So Fine"...
I love the reference! Of course I'm a Dennis Miller/Bob Costas
fan who loves obscure references. This one may not qualify as obscure,
but I bet only a small percentage got it. (By the way, as much as I
loved All Things Must Pass, and was upset with the suit, I have to agree
that the similarities were too great to be coincidence.)
Glenn:
> >more hyperactive boys diagnosed than hyperactive girls is simple: There ARE more
> >hyperactive boys!
Cheryl:
> Look at Borderline Personality Disorder and tell me that. I don't
> think so.
I agree that I went too far with that statement. I have no idea
if it's true. I'd be the first to jump on such a blanket statement. Sorry.
Glenn:
> > A girl with hyperactivity stands out like a sore thumb.
Cheryl:
> Yup...and she gets misdiagnosed and cubbiholed.
The key is that she gets *diagnosed or misdiagnosed*. I was only
arguing that true hyperactivity disorder can't be controlled to the point
where girls sit quietly and unnoticed. Kira never said *misdiagnosed.*
She said they weren't diagnosed at all because they learned to supress the
hyperactivity to the point where they aren't noticed at all.
Glenn:
> > How come society didn't teach you to control it so well that you
> >weren't diagnosed? That's what Kira is saying. Hyperactive little girls are
> >taught to control it so well that teachers, parents and doctors aren't able
> >to diagnose them. Where did your parents go wrong?
Cheryl:
> Back when I was a kid, they "knew" that "girls can't be hyperactive".
> Merely "fidgety"...or just plain "tomboys". They didn't see anything
> "medical" about it at all...don't ask me why...
As interesting as that may be, this discussion has nothing to
do with when we were kids. Kira's statement was present tense. In 1996
teachers and parents are very aware of ADHD. She said little girls aren't
being (currently) diagnosed because society dictates they control their
hyperactivity. I could argue the second part of that statement if I were
so inclined (I don't believe "society" discourages little girls from being
active and outgoing any more.) But, I stuck with the portion that indicated
hyperactivity *disorder* can be controlled if the child feels she should do so.
When I was a kid (yesterday?) in the 50's/60's/early 70's I wasn't
diagnosed or even suspected of a disorder. I was as ADHD as humanly possible.
What happened back then has nothing to do with what is happening now.
> but that's what my
> doctor said when my mom took me to him about my hyperactiveness.
If your mom took you to a doctor for your hyperactivity then you
certainly aren't the person to argue *for* Kira's position. You are a
perfect example that she's wrong.
> Yeah, my mom saw it. Yeah, my teachers saw it. The doctor *SAW* it,
> but was told by his "cute little medical manuals" that it was akin to
> saying that a fish can breathe on top of a mountain...i.e., physically
> impossible. That it was a "mental problem"...and I went from
> therapist to therapist, being misdiagnosed with just about every weird
> problem that could be thought of in avoidance of ADHD. If you ask me,
> it was the *THERAPISTS* and the *DOCTORS* that had "mental
> disorders"...
I agree again. I don't see why you continue to try to counter my
position by helping to prove me right. Can't you see that your situation
counters Kira's claim that girls with hyperactivity disorder aren't noticed
(in her example it's because they are in such great control).
> Check out what the mental health web page says about Borderline
> Personality Disorder. I think the mental health community needs to
> look at it too...
As I explained I know BPD and despise it's catch-all diagnostic
qualities. I hope you finally see that you have been defending Kira's
statement while helping prove it's false. I really want to let this thread
die a well-deserved death. No one has come forward to explain how someone
can have a hyperactivity *disorder* but, through pure will, control it so well
that they aren't hyperactive. (That's what drugs are supposed to do. If
self control can do it let's get rid of the drugs for hyperactives.) Until
they can do that, can we get off of this. Pretty please?
____________________________________________________________
Check out Glenn Danforth's Humor Factory at:
*~* http://www.cris.com/~nd1irish/index.htm *~*
30 pages of humor and growing. (Like a malignant tumor!)
Cheryl Mathison
On Fri, 06 Sep 96 04:20:29 GMT, ne...@ix.netcom.com (Nessa) announced:
>YO! Glenn! Seriously...can you explain to me very gently and
>clearly how a person can be 'hyperactive' yet not ADD or ADHD but be
>considered with a disorder?
Have you seen "Real Genius"? There's a girl in that
movie..."Jordan"...she's "hyperkinetic"... She talks fast, moves
fast, doesn't sleep, is highly intelligent, and doesn't think about
"social mores" sometimes since she's moving too fast to notice
(there's a scene where she runs into a boys' bathroom to hold a
sweater up to a boy...she made the sweater overnight...he's trying to
pee). She's definitely *NOT* a "space cadet" whatsoever...either
she's learned how to funnel any other ADD-type symptoms into "never
never land", or she just plain doesn't have them.
She doesn't strike me as ADHD at all...though Val Kilmer's character
does...but merely hyperactive/hyperkinetic.
I've known a couple people like that. They have *GREAT*
memories...they're *EXTREMELY* organized and efficient. But their
brains and bodies work *WAY* faster than "normal". You'd think you
were watching a film in fast motion. They don't sleep, they talk so
fast that New Yorkers would have problems following them <grin>, but
show no other symptoms of ADHD at all.
>How can you say a person has a hyperactivity disorder but not
>ADD/ADHD... to me that means the person is an average active person.
I guess when the "activeness" gets to the point that they no longer
need sleep and that even ADHDers get tired just watching them, they
can't really be considered "average active people" anymore...there's
definitely something "wrong", but hey, if it *WORKS*, go for it,
right? Unfortunately, a lot of times, these people can't hold jobs
because people can't deal with their activeness. *THAT* could be
considered a "disorder" even though it's not *THEIR* fault.
ADHD doesn't usually "work" for people except in *VERY* rare
circumstances...or maybe meds...<grin> These people honestly have no
problems other than people being driven crazy because they're so
hyper.
>If your saying a person has 'abnormal levels' of hyperactivity then
>ADD/ADHD is very relevant. If you are saying that 'typical' tomboy
>type female children are taught that 'it's not ladylike to climb
>trees and scream like a banshee' or "play tackle football with the
>boys" and she aquieses(sp?) then yes I agree that ADD/ADHD has NO
>PLACE in this discussion. However if you are talking about women
>like myself who as a child was diagnoised (in 1969 mind you) with
>"MBP-Hyperactivity" and placed on Ritilan then I disagree. That
>differentiaion makes it most relevant to ADD/ADHD...
Or the tomboy girl who is told to be more "lady-like" and
*CAN'T*...she's too active, and just plain can't understand why anyone
would want to wear confining, idiotically illogical clothes that
literally keep them from acting *HUMAN* (ever bend over in a dress?
ever try to *RUN* and *JUMP* in high heels?? ever try to fit a Barbie
Doll in a TONKA TRUCK???)... To quote Robin Williams about women's
shoes, "if I ever find the misogynistic bastard that invented these
things I'll kill him"... Girls are taught to be "demure". *DEMURE*
is easily seen as *STUPID* if a boy does it...yet girls are *TAUGHT*
to behave that way, not to use their brains but allow the boys to
think. Girls are taught to be shy...to walk quietly and in tiny
steps. To throw from the elbow (lest they show their armpits)...to
run from the knees (lest they lift their dresses in running). Ever
hear the terms "he runs like a girl" or "he throws like a girl"? How
derogatory! Why would a girl want to "run like a girl" or "throw like
a girl"???
I never could understand any of that... As to the Barbie issue...I
liked tonkas...my mom kept forcing Barbies on me. They just didn't
fit unless you took the head off...I went through *MORE* Barbies that
way...<snicker>
>You seem to be questioning whether females have this disorder less
>than males.. From my understanding it is that there are more males
>with ADHD but more females with ADD. Which of couse is so much
>harder to diagnoise...
>She's lazy... she doesn't pay attention, she stares out the window,
>she daydreams... That's ADD...undiagnosed (possibly).
>She never stops talking, she always interupts, she never listens,
>she never thinks, she's never on time, she's never organized, she's
>loud and unladylike, she's always moving.. can't sit still.., always
>has her hands in something, or something in her mouth (when she's
>not talking).. she chews her hair or bites her nails.. Thats... ME
> oh no sorry that's ADHD in a female child which is how they figured
>out I had this...disorder..affliction, syndrome..challenge..etc etc
>etc..
You sure we're not long-lost sisters? I'm adopted y'know...<grin>
Girls, unfortunately, are more often misdiagnosed as "borderline
personality disorder" when they're hyperactive...and then given
anti-psychotics instead of psychostimulants, which make them more
"demure" and "ladilike" (how about "vacuous" and "vacant"???).
>How can you say that you can teach a hyperactive girl to behave in a
>non-hyperactive fashion... if she complies then she's not
>hyperactive is she???
Exactly.
>I mean if you tell a girl..stop banging your shoe on the chair leg
>and she does..for 2 minutes and then she twirls her hair or does
>some other acceptable fidget type behavior is this saying she has
>been taught to be non-hyperactive or has she been taught to be
>'quietly hyperactive'?
You've hit the nail on the head here! My mom would always be telling
me to stop fidgetting. She'd literally grab my knees and try to hold
them still when we were in public...
>Ok guys.. now somewhere in this currently nonmedicaited ADHD addled
>brain I am SURE I missed something.....so be kind.. be very kind..
<snicker> Should I get snide now? Nah...
>An Error is not a Mistake until you Refuse to Correct it.
Yeay, verily!!!
Hugs!
Cheryl
kal...@randomc.com
Cheryl Mathison
On Sun, 08 Sep 1996 16:37:11 -0300, GD 1 <ND1I...@cris.com>
announced:
>> well close enough that
>> if BPD and ADHD were songs or pieces of art, then BPD would have a
>> "copyright infringement" lawsuit slapped on it...close like "My Sweet
>> Lord" is to "He's So Fine"...
> I love the reference! Of course I'm a Dennis Miller/Bob Costas
>fan who loves obscure references. This one may not qualify as obscure,
>but I bet only a small percentage got it. (By the way, as much as I
>loved All Things Must Pass, and was upset with the suit, I have to agree
>that the similarities were too great to be coincidence.)
Idunno...I always thought it was obvious...though I'll admit that I'm
a "music lover" of a very *BIZARRE* kind...
> I agree again. I don't see why you continue to try to counter my
>position by helping to prove me right. Can't you see that your situation
>counters Kira's claim that girls with hyperactivity disorder aren't noticed
>(in her example it's because they are in such great control).
But Glenn, I haven't been trying to prove Kira *RIGHT*...she's not.
But neither are you, since your statements about more boys being hyper
than girls isn't factual. They're not being *UN*diagnosed, and
they're not *NONEXISTANT*...they're being *MIS*diagnosed and drugged
into stupors (as in STUPIDS)...
> As I explained I know BPD and despise it's catch-all diagnostic
I used to think it was a catch-all...till I looked at the web page and
the gender statistics and ran them along side of ADHD. Try
it...you'll either laugh or cry because it's so close to ADHD. Laugh,
since the mental health community is so bull-headed and stupid about
not diagnosing these folks properly, and Cry, for the same reason.
Hugs!
Cheryl
kal...@randomc.com
nancy g.
Cheryl Mathison wrote:
> Have you seen "Real Genius"? There's a girl in that
> movie..."Jordan"...she's "hyperkinetic"... She talks fast, moves
> fast, doesn't sleep, is highly intelligent (snip)
> She's definitely *NOT* a "space cadet" whatsoever... (snip)
> She doesn't strike me as ADHD at all...merely hyperactive/hyperkinetic.
Has she had her thyroid checked? (grin) Seriously, though, in case
there's anyone out there reading this thread and thinking it sounds just
like them, or just like someone they know ... people who have thyroid
problems will sometimes exhibit behaviors exactly like you're talking
about ... the ENERGY and ACTIVITY level are outrageously high, with none
of the other associated symptoms of ADHD.
My mother-in-law is like that. She can't sit still. She channels her
excess energy into housework, meaning that she's the type who irons
her sheets and her husband's undershorts. You can't drink a cup of
coffee around her, because if you set the cup down between sips, she's
got it picked up and washed and dried and put away by the time you
reach for it again to take the next sip. She simply doesn't go to
movies, because she "can't stand to sit still" for that long.
And she's also got some complicated kind of thyroid disorder that
involves taking a couple of different kinds of medication each day.
>> How can you say a person has a hyperactivity disorder but not
>> ADD/ADHD... to me that means the person is an average active person.
> I guess when the "activeness" gets to the point that they no longer
> need sleep and that even ADHDers get tired just watching them, they
> can't really be considered "average active people" anymore...there's
> definitely something "wrong"
They kind of act the way so-called "normies" would act if they took
some of our ADD/ADHD medications! Again, a (grin) but with a serious
note to it. You see occasionally in a comedy movie how a character
will take some form of "speed" and then go into a cleaning binge or a
studying binge or ... well, whatever works for the comedy setup in the
movie, but the point is always that they get a sort of super-speed and
can accomplish ten times as much as a normal person could in the same time
frame. People who are hyperactive or hyperkinetic without the ADD are
kind of like that. It's painful to watch.
> ADHD doesn't usually "work" for people except in *VERY* rare
> circumstances...or maybe meds...<grin>
I agree but disagree at the same time with this remark. I'd say rather
that *some* aspects of ADD/ADHD can definitely "work" for *some* people,
in *some* circumstances, but the times when it does are quite often
offset by other sets of circumstances where it does *NOT* work. If
you're lucky enough to have the personality and the job opportunities
to carry on successfully while allowing your ADD/ADHD parts to do their
thing ... they you're a very fortunate person. Most people just can't
find a life that allows such a good fit.
> Or the tomboy girl who is told to be more "lady-like" and
> *CAN'T*...she's too active, and just plain can't understand why anyone
> would want to wear confining, idiotically illogical clothes that
> literally keep them from acting *HUMAN* (ever bend over in a dress?
> ever try to *RUN* and *JUMP* in high heels??
Girls growing up these days will *NEVER* understand what we went
through. Remember CRINOLINES? Remember NOT BEING ALLOWED to wear
pants to school, no matter what the weather was like? I recall
spending the first class period of every day in the winter simply
trying to thaw out my legs (along with every other girl in the class)
after walking to school in the below freezing weather wearing a
mini-skirt and fishnets (oops, did I just date myself here? Dang.)
Ummm ... but my point was, it's not even only the AD *H* D girls who had
trouble with this. Even us ADD-no-H types often have that excess
sensitivity to textures, feelings of clothing against our skin, etc.
Having to wear idiot clothes is as physically UNCOMFORTABLE to us as it
is to the ADHD'ers, even though it might not be as RESTRAINING.
Sweatpants and a t-shirt certainly feel much better to us than wearing
pantyhose (the waistband always is uncomfortable, no matter how expensive
the brand name), heels (yeah, I *love* to walk with half my body tilting
one way or another) a slip (static! aagh! and you slip and slide around
when you sit down wearing pantyhose and a slip, because there's no
friction between the two to help you stay on the seat) ... and let's
not even TALK about bra's!
> Ever hear the terms "he runs like a girl" or "he throws like a girl"?
> How derogatory! Why would a girl want to "run like a girl" or "throw
> like a girl"???
Hey! Let's approach *this* one from another perspective ... let's make
it so that "throwing like a girl" is a *GREAT* thing and that *EVERYONE*
wants to do such a thing!!!
...ok, ok, I admit it wouldn't work. Hey, I can TRY, right?
> ... As to the Barbie issue...I liked tonkas...my mom kept forcing
> Barbies on me. They just didn't fit unless you took the head off...
> I went through *MORE* Barbies that way...<snicker>
I always preferred just to read. Finally I got so I'd set up all the
damn Barbie dolls in some sort of scene around the damn Barbie playhouse
and then pretend one of them was reading to the other ones.
>> From my understanding it is that there are more males
>> with ADHD but more females with ADD. Which of couse is so much
>> harder to diagnose...
Yep. I've read so often, so many reliable places, that more males have
ADHD and more females have ADD-no-H, that I fully accept it as established
fact. Haven't seen much telling *why* this happens, but I definitely
believe it is true.
>> She's lazy...she doesn't pay attention, she stares out the window,
>> she daydreams... That's ADD...undiagnosed (possibly).
Yep. That's me until my dx (and still what people who don't know about
my dx are thinking about me, depending on when and how they see me.
>> She never stops talking, she always interupts, she never listens,
>> she never thinks, she's never on time, she's never organized, she's
>> loud and unladylike, she's always moving.. can't sit still.., always
>> has her hands in something, or something in her mouth (when she's
>> not talking).. she chews her hair or bites her nails.. Thats... ME
>> oh no sorry that's ADHD in a female child which is how they figured
>> out I had this...disorder..affliction, syndrome..challenge..etc etc.
Yep. And talk about cultural acceptance ... it's funny how most of the
above behaviors are negative ones to most adults, and yet the TALKING
aspect of it seems to be accepted in girls ... it's the GIRLS who are
SUPPOSED to be the "little chatterboxes" for some reason ... and one of
the symptoms of my ADD that I got criticized most for was not that I was
always daydreaming or unfocused, but rather that BECAUSE of the daydreaming
and lack of focus, I would often disengage from conversation ... the
criticism thus was -- from the teachers -- that I was "too quiet" or
"wouldn't take part in group interactions" or "did not participate in
class discussions" and -- from the other kids -- that I was "stuck up"
or "snobbish." Sheesh.
>> How can you say that you can teach a hyperactive girl to behave in a
>> non-hyperactive fashion... if she complies then she's not
>> hyperactive is she???
Well, yeah, she still is. She's just a hyperactive girl who's being
repressed. And the same thing would happen to a BOY if he was forced to
restrain his physical movements to the same extent. But typically (and
yes, I realize this is a stereotyped statement) boys *ARE NOT* required
to do so, and girls more often are.
I'd like to think this is changing with the modern times, and I think
I will have a chance to find out, because my six-year-old (girl) is
showing many signs of being hyperactive as well as ADD. She's not as
wild as her brother was at her age, so I really don't have a good basis
for comparison, but that's my feeling, supported by her kindergarten
teacher's comments from last year. This year (first grade) is the first
time she'll really NEED to be ABLE to sit still for any length of time
"on demand" (as opposed to at HER timing, like watching a movie or
coloring or something) so we shall see ... of course, she's also got
the most incredibly feisty personality I've ever known (red hair, and
the chip on the shoulder that goes right along with it) so I pity the
person that **TRIES** to repress her!!!
Nancy G
this is the kid who, at age TWO, was told to stop doing something (and
now, thinking back on the incident, it may have been a hyperactive-ish
fidgety thing she was doing!) Anyway, when she didn't stop, I said to
her: "Meghan, Mommy said no!" and she looks me in the eye, puts her hands
on her hips, and replies: "Mommy ... MEGHAN says YES!"
Hmmmph.
GD 1
nancy g. wrote:
>
> Cheryl Mathison wrote:
> >> How can you say that you can teach a hyperactive girl to behave in a
> >> non-hyperactive fashion... if she complies then she's not
> >> hyperactive is she???
>
> Well, yeah, she still is. She's just a hyperactive girl who's being
> repressed. And the same thing would happen to a BOY if he was forced to
> restrain his physical movements to the same extent.
I'm curios as to what you mean by repressed? Physically? Beaten into
submission? Or just told not to behave that way (as Cheryl is talking about)?
I agree that the first two are possible, but not the third. If a child can
be *taught* not to be hyperactive then that child didn't have a hyperactivity
*disorder*. Most kids are energetic and hyperactive. They can be *taught* to
control that. Those with the disorder remain hyperactive despite knowing they
will get in trouble. They can't control it. That's why it's a disorder. That's
the difference between tourettes and Sarah & Stan (sorry guys, you are the only
two who come to mind and I'm trying to be jocular here). Tourettes patients
swear because they can't control it, others do it for effect. One is a disorder
and the other isn't. Social pressures may control *most* people's language but
it can't control those with a disorder.
nancy g.
GD 1 wrote:
>
> nancy g. wrote:
>>
>> Cheryl Mathison wrote:
>> >> non-hyperactive fashion... if she complies then she's not
>>
>> Well, yeah, she still is. She's just a hyperactive girl who's being
>> repressed. And the same thing would happen to a BOY if he was forced to
>> restrain his physical movements to the same extent.
>
> submission? Or just told not to behave that way (as Cheryl is talking about)?
Well, sort of a combination of all of those, I guess. Maybe not actually
beaten so that they're physically hurt, but ... more than just "told not to."
Parents *can* make a kid's life horribly unpleasant without actually leaving
bruises. If they constantly stay on the kid, nagging, yelling, without
letup, jumping on them for EVERY occurrence of what THEY consider to be an
"unacceptable" behavior ... something's got to give, somewhere. It might be
the parents that give up the nagging, it might be the kid goes totally
bonkers, it might be that if the kid's old enough, they run away from home ...
or it *might* be, as has been discussed in this thread, that the kid simply
REPRESSES the actual typically hyperactive behavior and instead expresses it
in other, more "socially acceptable" ways.
I'm not saying this is right. It may on the surface accomplish the "goal"
of getting the kid to "stop" the hyperactive behaviors, but the price the
kid has to pay is most likely way too high, just to conform to the parent's
idea of what a "normal" kid should be like.
I'd imagine it's a lot like what happens in worst-case scenarios of kids
who are thumb suckers and their parents do creepy things like tying their
thumb behind their back, or putting gross-tasting stuff on it, or otherwise
bullying and either physically or psychologically abusing the kid into
"giving up" the habit -- some kids will still be OK. Some will turn into
the kids who always chew their hair or the ends of their pencils. Some
will become quivering neurotic wrecks.
> Most kids are energetic and hyperactive. They can be *taught* to
> control that. Those with the disorder remain hyperactive despite knowing they
> will get in trouble. They can't control it. That's why it's a disorder.
Yep. Mostly. I think, though, that although they can't STOP the behavior,
they can CONTROL it -- somewhat. To a certain extent. Maybe they can't
stop being in constant motion, but they can learn to jiggle their crossed
foot rather than to incessantly kick the chair of the kid in front of them.
Maybe they can't stop fidgeting with objects and doing something with their
hands at all times, but they could learn to carry something small and quiet
in their pocket and play with that when they need to fidget instead of
tapping their pencils or bending the frames of their eyeglasses all to
pieces (thank goodness for Pearle Vision and their one-year no-questions
guarantees!!)
The issue then becomes, at what cost to the kid's psychological makeup
does this "control" occur? How much *should* we expect from these kids
with a legitimate disorder, when every person having this order is capable
of something DIFFERENT than every other person with it?
Don't look to me for answers!
Nancy G.
some days I barely understand the questions...
John Palmer
GD 1 (ND1I...@cris.com) wrote:
: nancy g. wrote:
: I'm curios as to what you mean by repressed? Physically? Beaten into
: submission? Or just told not to behave that way (as Cheryl is talking about)?
: I agree that the first two are possible, but not the third. If a child can
: be *taught* not to be hyperactive then that child didn't have a hyperactivity
: *disorder*.
Umm. I believe you, but what if there was a way to sublimate the
hyperactivity into something else? I mean, like the child has learned not
to get out of his or her seat, but has substituted other actions that serve
the same purpose? (This ties into my other post in, I think, this thread
about how I might sublimate would-be hyperactivity into depression.)
Sara Freeman
In <516mem$3...@news1.infinet.com> jpa...@infinet.com (John Palmer)
writes:
--
"If you think of reality as the software for the universe,
all it would take is for someone to change a comma in the
program, and the chair you are sitting on wouldn't be a
chair at all."--Jacques Vallee
Glenn Danforth
Cheryl Mathison wrote:
> > I agree again. I don't see why you continue to try to counter my
> >position by helping to prove me right. Can't you see that your situation
> >counters Kira's claim that girls with hyperactivity disorder aren't noticed
> >(in her example it's because they are in such great control).
>
> But Glenn, I haven't been trying to prove Kira *RIGHT*...she's not.
> But neither are you, since your statements about more boys being hyper
> than girls isn't factual. They're not being *UN*diagnosed, and
> they're not *NONEXISTANT*...they're being *MIS*diagnosed and drugged
> into stupors (as in STUPIDS)...
First, I hate to do this, but since you are making such a huge
"I know this to be a fact" statement, please give me the scientific
studies that show this. (Unless you just forgot to put in the words "in
my opinion.")
Second, I suggest you go back and read my post again, since I made
it VERY clear that I'mn not saying what you claim here. I saved the post,
but am so incredibly bored with this, I know others are too, so I won't bother
reposting the snipits to prove the above statement is totally wrong. (The part
about me saying boys are more hyper than girls.)
But, I'm really interested in you showing more proof for your statement
than "you should read about BPD." This is an incredibly strong statement, and
if you would like to back it up I'm interested. Until then it's pure guesswork,
either true or false.
Glenn Danforth
John Palmer wrote:
>
> GD 1 (ND1I...@cris.com) wrote:
> : nancy g. wrote:
>
> : I'm curios as to what you mean by repressed? Physically? Beaten into
> : submission? Or just told not to behave that way (as Cheryl is talking about)?
> : I agree that the first two are possible, but not the third. If a child can
> : be *taught* not to be hyperactive then that child didn't have a hyperactivity
> : *disorder*.
>
> Umm. I believe you, but what if there was a way to sublimate the
> hyperactivity into something else? I mean, like the child has learned not
> to get out of his or her seat, but has substituted other actions that serve
> the same purpose?
I believe it depends on what the other actions are. If it's fidgeting
or other "nervous" behaviors they are still clearly hyperactive. If people
are claiming it's anything but a physical response I say it isn't hyperactivity
disorder. *My* hyperactivity feels as if I was plugged into an electric socket.
In my case at least it's a purely physical disorder. I can temporarily control
it, or change it to foot tapping, etc. If you can control it to the extent
where there's no physical manifestation, then I say it isn't a hyperactivity
disorder. I'd be interested in seeing any cites where psychologists or
doctors say a calm person can possibly have a hyperactivity disorder.
(This ties into my other post in, I think, this thread
> about how I might sublimate would-be hyperactivity into depression.)
The key may be "would-be." If you go into a doctor and tell him
you have depression because you have hyperactivity disorder and have taught
yourself to be calm, I *believe* the psychologist would probably chuckle.
If you are depressed with no outward signs of hyperactivity I believe they
would say your depression has other causes (maybe ADD). If you sublimated
hyperactivity then I still say it wasn't a disorder. The fact that you
could sublimate it shows that it wasn't a disorder. Hell, if anyone has
learned to do this, please tell me. I'd love to do it myself! I've tried
all my life. I've been in serious trouble, suspended from school, punished,
screamed at, offered rewards, and fired from jobs because I can't always
control my hyperactivity disorder. I've been as motivated as humanly possible.
How can I learn to control it wiythout Ritalin? All the societal pressure
in the world didn't work for me. If it's worked for someone out there, please
share the secret with me.
Glenn Danforth
Sara Freeman wrote:
> Hyperactivity is easily sublimated into daydreaming.
This is where everyone keeps taking this, but I still say
it's wrong. A hyperactive mind (ADD) definitely does this. Hyperactivity
disorder is purely physical. By definition it shows manifests itself
physically. A mind that daydreams or races at a zillion miles an hour is
not hyperactivity disorder unless it has physical manifestations. Take a
person with ADHD and remove the H and you'll still have a hyperactive
mind going off in a zillion directions and daydreaming.
Cheryl Mathison
On Wed, 11 Sep 1996 19:27:49 -0300, Glenn Danforth <ND1I...@cris.com>
announced:
> First, I hate to do this, but since you are making such a huge
>"I know this to be a fact" statement, please give me the scientific
>studies that show this. (Unless you just forgot to put in the words "in
>my opinion.")
You seem a bit contrary on this thread...but no matter. First off, I
did mention (I think...) that it was an observation. I did mention
the "interesting" statistics on how close the two disorders are
described...and the gender relationship.
Here's the article I found at
http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~corelli/shortworks.htm that was posted
in this group back in Mayish (I had to re-find the article in Deja
News).
-----
A person with a borderline personality disorder often experiences a
repetitive pattern of disorganization and instability in
self-image, mood, behavior and close personal relationships. This can
cause significant distress or impairment in friendships and
work. A person with this disorder can often be bright and intelligent,
and appear warm, friendly and competent. They sometimes
can maintain this appearance for a number of years until their defense
structure crumbles, usually around a stressful situation like
the breakup of a romantic relationship or the death of a parent.
Relationships with others are intense but stormy and unstable with
marked shifts of feelings and difficulties in maintaining
intimate, close connections. The person may manipulate others and
often has difficulty with trusting others. There is also
emotional instability with marked and frequent shifts to an empty
lonely depression or to irritability and anxiety. There may be
unpredictable and impulsive behavior which might include excessive
spending, promiscuity, gambling, drug or alcohol abuse,
shoplifting, overeating or physically self-damaging actions such as
suicide gestures. The person may show inappropriate and
intense anger or rage with temper tantrums, constant brooding and
resentment, feelings of deprivation, and a loss of control or
fear of loss of control over angry feelings. There are also identity
disturbances with confusion and uncertainty about
self-identity, sexuality, life goals and values, career choices,
friendships. There is a deep-seated feeling that one is flawed,
defective, damaged or bad in some way, with a tendency to go to
extremes in thinking, feeling or behavior.
-----
> But, I'm really interested in you showing more proof for your statement
>than "you should read about BPD." This is an incredibly strong statement, and
>if you would like to back it up I'm interested. Until then it's pure guesswork,
>either true or false.
It's a strong statement to say that you should read about BPD? I
don't think so. I also think you should read about ADHD, and probably
on depression and OCD, but it doesn't mean that you have it, or that I
mean anything hostile by it...nor is it a "strong statement".
As to guesswork, yes, it is. But it's based on reading the stats on
both disorders and comparing them. Put it this way: If it quacks
like a duck, looks like a duck and acts like a duck, why do they keep
swearing it's an elk? Whatever you want to call it, it appears to be
the same disorder...with emphasis on different symptoms, but
alphabetized, the lists are roughly the same. But what ho! you say.
Girls react differently with ADHD than boys... That would explain the
different emphasis of symptoms, wouldn't it. Plus, they seem to have
added in a "pre-menstral" factor that, since ADHD was only recently
allowed to be used to describe females, has been left out. But odds
are that it's common to ADHD females to have those symptoms. I didn't
quote the whole article...but I did give the URL. It's the part I
didn't quote (silly me...) that covers the premenstral part and starts
emphasizing depression.
Yes, it's opinion. But it was logically based.
Hugs.
Cheryl
kal...@randomc.com
Glenn Danforth
Cheryl Mathison wrote:
> It's a strong statement to say that you should read about BPD? I
> don't think so. I also think you should read about ADHD, and probably
> on depression and OCD, but it doesn't mean that you have it, or that I
> mean anything hostile by it...nor is it a "strong statement".
Here's your statement in its entirity:
But Glenn, I haven't been trying to prove Kira *RIGHT*...she's not.
But neither are you, since your statements about more boys being hyper
than girls isn't factual. They're not being *UN*diagnosed, and
they're not *NONEXISTANT*...they're being *MIS*diagnosed and drugged
into stupors (as in STUPIDS).
I don't see how that could be mistaken as opinion by anyone. That's
as strong a statement of "fact" as you could make. Before attempting
to softpedal, I suggest you look back at what you wrote. Your statement
stands on its own.
> Yes, it's opinion. But it was logically based.
And this is the third time I've told you I have no reason to question
its veracity. It may be 100% right. Again, what does it have to do with
what I have been saying? Would you like me to repost the past two posts I
made (going back 10 days) that tell you I have no argument with you? Why
do you continue to counter what I'm saying?
Glenn: I agree
Cheryl: No you don't
Glenn: You make sense
Cheryl: No I don't
Glenn: You may be right, I wasn't even talking about that
Cheryl: You say I'm wrong and keep talking about that
What must I do to tell convince you we have no argument. The only
thing I said in my last post is that your theory went suddenly to fact (as
in your statement above) and if you were going to make such claims I'd
like proof. You went through an entire post before you finally said "Yes,
it's opinion." Those three words would have been sufficient without you
denying the strong statement and posting an entire article. I already
told you I don't buy the concept of BPD. If people are diagnosed with that,
it probably is ADD. So why are you trying to convince me of something I keep
telling you I don't disagree with?
Besides, the article on BPD is close to ADD, but wouldn't be sufficient
for a diagnosis of ADHD anyway. Go look at the DSM IV requirements for
hyperactivity and you'll see that BPD symptoms aren't ADHD symptoms. They are
ADD though. So your entire point of saying girls may be diagnosed BPD
instead of ADHD doesn't hold water. But I do agree that BPD can be confused
for ADD. Heck, that's why I said I don't think BPD is a real diagnosis in the
first place.