Ritalin - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-28-2008, 09:05 PM   #31
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,290
Local Time: 01:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Maybe you should address yourself to the topic of why family law courts routinely deny fathers access to their kids and routinely favour mothers over fathers.
Maybe in your country, but if you want me to pull out the Canadian statistics, I can guarantee you that you will look quite uninformed. Times are a-changing.
__________________

__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:09 PM   #32
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
but if you want me to pull out the Canadian statistics
Would be genuinely interested if you could. No rush, naturelement.
__________________

__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:10 PM   #33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 02:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
I see no pot-shot. I see a teacher offering a legitimate perspective on an issue relevant to the thread.

I fail to see how stating that pediatricians should prescribe less ritalin has any relevance whatsoever to a plan to label uninsured Americans as "insured by an emergency room."

I also find it oddly coincidental that this irrelevant statement, which could be taken by a pediatrician to be offensive, comes in a thread in which I clearly state that I am a pediatrician. And that it comes from Dreadsox mere hours after I implied that Dreadsox might be an idiot (without actually calling him that, of course).

Yup, I think too highly of myself. A discussion of ritalin prescription has everything to do with not calling the uninsured "uninsured."
__________________
Utoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:10 PM   #34
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 01:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
You mean they're more likely to need said practices and strategies, or that they aren't more likely to need them, but we just think they do? I'm a little confused by your wording here...
I think that my profession contributes to the problem by not adapting teaching practices that meet the needs of all children in general. I will use my son for example....

He HATES what he is reading in school. Put a graphic comic novel in front of him and he can read. Bring him to the museum of natural history, and he will read about fossils....but the materials that are inside of the books we use to instruct children, time and time again, are not material that he would want to read.

Lets look at culture. Time and time again, we see that subgroups, of some minorities score lower. We know that there are cultural barriers, and learning styles that help overcome these barriers. But, they are not consistently implemented.

And I honestly believe that there are NOT enough fathers being role models. There are not enough male teachers at younger ages.

I also think that parenting, has a major major influence on this. It is easier to put a kid on a video game and have peace and quiet than to parent.

It all contributes to the problem.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:13 PM   #35
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utoo View Post
I fail to see how stating that pediatricians should prescribe less ritalin has any relevance whatsoever to a plan to label uninsured Americans as "insured by an emergency room."

....A discussion of ritalin prescription has everything to do with not calling the uninsured "uninsured."
I'd argue that it could possibly be connected.

Who benefits from over-prescription of these drugs? When you think about it, it's probably the drug companies, and they could be the ones lobbying for minimising public healthcare in the US, conceivably.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:14 PM   #36
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 01:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Why though?

They weren't seen as inadequate in dealing with the needs of boys 40 or even 20 years ago, why are they inadequate now? What changed?
Divorce, Computers, Video Games, Single Parent Homes, Text Books, declining male role models.....
__________________
Dreadsox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:15 PM   #37
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,290
Local Time: 01:20 AM
The last on-record year in Canada where sole-custody (maternal) outpaced joint custody was 2002, where the numbers were 49% - 42% with the remainder being sole-custody (paternal). The reason that the joint custody cases are now "in the lead" so to speak is because the courts have rejected some of the older case law. One example is the tender-years doctrine which basically encouraged sole-custody to mothers for all children under the age of 6. The belief was that mothers were psychologically better equipped to deal with the needs of small children. Nowadays, we no longer hold these views, but I would caution that while it sounds harsh, it isn't necessarily a malevolent idea. Remember that for a long time, mothers stayed home with children before they went to school, so that the bond between mother and child was different (not better necessarily, but different) than that of the father and so many child psychologists would testify to this. In any event, this doctrine is outdated and has been struck down by the courts, except in the obvious examples, like babies and toddlers who are still being breastfed in which case the mother almost always gets sole custody on a temporary basis to be revisited based on a specific timeline.

There are other burning issues now - for example, you have more women reporting incidents of domestic violence than ever before. The question is, if the father did not physically abuse the children, but the children watched him abuse the mother, should that be a determinant in custody cases?
__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:17 PM   #38
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadsox View Post
Divorce, Computers, Video Games, Single Parent Homes, Text Books, declining male role models.....
Do you think that any of these factors could conceivably be linked to the liberal agenda or the influence of left wing ideas in general?
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:19 PM   #39
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
The last on-record year in Canada where sole-custody (maternal) outpaced joint custody was 2002, where the numbers were 49% - 42% with the remainder being sole-custody (paternal). The reason that the joint custody cases are now "in the lead" so to speak is because the courts have rejected some of the older case law. One example is the tender-years doctrine which basically encouraged sole-custody to mothers for all children under the age of 6. The belief was that mothers were psychologically better equipped to deal with the needs of small children. Nowadays, we no longer hold these views, but I would caution that while it sounds harsh, it isn't necessarily a malevolent idea. Remember that for a long time, mothers stayed home with children before they went to school, so that the bond between mother and child was different (not better necessarily, but different) than that of the father and so many child psychologists would testify to this. In any event, this doctrine is outdated and has been struck down by the courts, except in the obvious examples, like babies and toddlers who are still being breastfed in which case the mother almost always gets sole custody on a temporary basis to be revisited based on a specific timeline.

There are other burning issues now - for example, you have more women reporting incidents of domestic violence than ever before. The question is, if the father did not physically abuse the children, but the children watched him abuse the mother, should that be a determinant in custody cases?
Thanks for this information.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:19 PM   #40
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 01:20 AM
I do not think this a left or right issue. Not that I can see. What liberal agenda may you be referring to?
__________________
Dreadsox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:20 PM   #41
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 02:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
I'd argue that it could possibly be connected.

Who benefits from over-prescription of these drugs? When you think about it, it's probably the drug companies, and they could be the ones lobbying for minimising public healthcare in the US, conceivably.


Sketchy relevance, at best.

I can make a valid argument that it's the influence of the military. The military, vile cretins who prey on impressionable minds in high school cafeterias across the country, need teens on ritalin to improve the performance and concentration of brainwashed drones in the field of battle. McCain, who apparently is the epitome of a good soldier and in the palm of the US military brass, needs to minimise public healthcare in order to keep kids on ritalin to make his hawkish cronies happy.

Golly, I should bring up ritalin and pediatricians whenever I see a thread about the military! Bastards!
__________________
Utoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:21 PM   #42
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 07:20 AM
OK, I've split the two threads--please let it go now.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:23 PM   #43
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 02:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
OK, I've split the two threads--please let it go now.
Thanks.
__________________
Utoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:33 PM   #44
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 07:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadsox View Post
I do not think this a left or right issue. Not that I can see. What liberal agenda may you be referring to?
Well, for the sake of argument, no-fault divorce.
__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2008, 09:34 PM   #45
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 01:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by A_Wanderer View Post
I nootropics

I support the right to use drugs to improve cognition,.
Sure, until your brain won't focus on even a normal level without ritalin, due to dependency.

As far as I see it, there's no free lunch.
__________________

__________________
melon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com