R.I. mother to serve 20 years in daughter’s death (Article )

[Fraser_0762]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy12

No, adults don't always know best. No one does. We can all just try to inform ourselves as much as possible, make decisions based on the information we have and trust that they are in the best interest of the child.

If a child's life or long-term welfare depended on it, then I think you can and should force a child to take medication especially if the child isn't capable yet of understanding the consequences of not taking medication. Similarly, if parents are (knowingly or unknowingly) mistreating their children, the state should interfere if it's in the best interest of the child.

Forced medication is mistreatment of the child.

You know.... there was once a time when giving herion to your child was considered safe and normal.

When adults give their children medication, they do so by instruction of their GP. But what does their GP truly know? All they're doing is taking instructions from somebody else, who is taking instructions from somebody else.... and so on.

Adults don't really know themselves what they are putting into their childs body. They just believe that its safe, because somebody else told them it was safe, because they believe its safe because they've been told to believe that its safe..... and so the cycle goes on.

A child will know how their mind and body is reacting to a drug far better than somebody who isn't them!

[Fraser_0762]

Medications are supposed to "help" people. If a child doesn't want to take a certain medication, then its the adults responsibility to find out why they don't want to take it, instead of "forcing" them to take it.

If the medication was of benefit to the child, then the child would have no problem taking it.

[Fuzzy12]

Originally Posted by Fraser_0762

Forced medication is mistreatment of the child.

You know.... there was once a time when giving herion to your child was considered safe and normal.

When adults give their children medication, they do so by instruction of their GP. But what does their GP truly know? All they're doing is taking instructions from somebody else, who is taking instructions from somebody else.... and so on.

Adults don't really know themselves what they are putting into their childs body. They just believe that its safe, because somebody else told them it was safe, because they believe its safe because they've been told to believe that its safe..... and so the cycle goes on.

A child will know how their mind and body is reacting to a drug far better than somebody who isn't them!

I think most adults are aware of the fact that every medication has side effects. I don't think they give their kids meds because they think they are completely safe or without consequences. I think they make the decision to medicate based on a trade-off between possible risks/side effects and treatment benefits.

I don't think that knowledge is absolute but in the absence of absolute knowledge all you can really do is to inform yourself as much as possible (as GPs are supposed to do) and hope that it's enough to make the right decisions.

That's not to say that parents (or doctors) shouldn't listen to their child or consider their concerns but once they have, it's up to the parents (or a doctor, or the state) to make the final decision.

In that chain of people you mentioned (child -> parent -> GP -> etc.) the child is usually the worst informed. It's a different matter if the parents or GP are ignorant but children (especially very young ones) usually just don't have the capacity, knowledge or maturity required to make long term, trade-off decisions. The child might refuse meds if they taste or look bad. There is a reason why children are dependent on their care takers.

[Fraser_0762]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy12

I think most adults are aware of the fact that every medication has side effects. I don't think they give their kids meds because they think they are completely safe or without consequences. I think they make the decision to medicate based on a trade-off between possible risks/side effects and treatment benefits.

I don't think that knowledge is absolute but in the absence of absolute knowledge all you can really do is to inform yourself as much as possible (as GPs are supposed to do) and hope that it's enough to make the right decisions.

That's not to say that parents (or doctors) shouldn't listen to their child or consider their concerns but once they have, it's up to the parents (or a doctor, or the state) to make the final decision.

In that chain of people you mentioned (child -> parent -> GP -> etc.) the child is usually the worst informed. It's a different matter if the parents or GP are ignorant but children (especially very young ones) usually just don't have the capacity, knowledge or maturity required to make long term, trade-off decisions. The child might refuse meds if they taste or look bad. There is a reason why children are dependent on their care takers.

What gives another person the right to "risk" a life that doesn't belong to them?

Adults treat their children like "possessions". Children are not possessions, they are human beings.

If they feel like they are under threat from taking a certain drug, then they should not be made to take it.

Its their life that you're toying with.

[Fuzzy12]

Originally Posted by Fraser_0762

What gives another person the right to "risk" a life that doesn't belong to them?

Adults treat their children like "possessions". Children are not possessions, they are human beings.

If they feel like they are under threat from taking a certain drug, then they should not be made to take it.

Its their life that you're toying with.

Yes, exactly. It's their life that you are toying with. By giving in to their unreasonable demands of not wanting to take medication you are possibly risking their life or at least their health.

If a child has reason to believe that it is under threat from a certain drug, then yes of course, that has to be seriously considered. But usually children neither have the information nor the maturity to make the best long term decision.

Children are children. They are not adults. They think differently, they have different priorities and much like ADHDers, they aren't good at making long-term, balanced decisions. A lot of adults aren't great at it either but the likelihood of an adult making better decisions is just higher.

Children are not possessions but they are individual human beings that are in the care of their parents (or other care takers), whose responsibility it is to make decisions that are in the best interest of the child till the child is capable of making its own decisions (and carrying the responsibility for their decisions and deal with the consequences).

[Fraser_0762]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy12

Yes, exactly. It's their life that you are toying with. By giving in to their unreasonable demands of not wanting to take medication you are possibly risking their life or at least their health.

If a child has reason to believe that it is under threat from a certain drug, then yes of course, that has to be seriously considered. But usually children neither have the information nor the maturity to make the best long term decision.

Children are children. They are not adults. They think differently, they have different priorities and much like ADHDers, they aren't good at making long-term, balanced decisions. A lot of adults aren't great at it either but the likelihood of an adult making better decisions is just higher.

Children are not possessions but they are individual human beings that are in the care of their parents (or other care takers), whose responsibility it is to make decisions that are in the best interest of the child till the child is capable of making its own decisions (and carrying the responsibility for their decisions and deal with the consequences).

But is it always in the best interests of the child? Or could it be put down to adults being selfish and wanting things a little easier for themselves?

A lot of adults don't care how the medication effects their child on the inside, as long as it gives them a break.

If you ask most adults that give their children these medications how they work biologically in the mind and body, they wouldn't be able to give you an answer, because they honestly don't know.

[Fuzzy12]

Originally Posted by Fraser_0762

But is it always in the best interests of the child? Or could it be put down to adults being selfish and wanting things a little easier for themselves?

A lot of adults don't care how the medication effects their child on the inside, as long as it gives them a break.

If you ask most adults that give their children these medications how they work biologically in the mind and body, they wouldn't be able to give you an answer, because they honestly don't know.

Well, that's the big question. I don't have any sources to prove this but I can't imagine that the majority of parents feeds their kids medication just to keep them quiet. I don't think it's an easy decision and I would like to think that parents really have their children's best interests in mind.

Ideally, they would inform themselves on how the meds work, but if they aren't capable of that, the next best stop is the expert, ie. GP or psychiatrist in conjunction with the child's opinion. I still think that in this matter you can't just go by the child's opinion.

[sarahsweets]

Originally Posted by Fraser_0762

You should never "force" any child to take medication.

Adults are far too quick to give their children medication these days without actually being fully aware of what they are actually giving them.

Adults don't always know best.

If by force you mean holding a kids down and shoving it in their mouth then I would say youre right. However when children are very young and diagnosed it can be difficult to get them to take medication because they dont have the power to completely understand the benefits it may bring. A child may here the word adhd and associate it with their problems but not understand the devestation that can occur with untreated adhd. They dont understand executive function or impulsiveness..they dont always understand that a hot stove will burn them they just so badly want to touch the dials on it. If a childs welfare depends on proper treatment then it is wrong not to offer medication and in a non physical violent way force them or coerce them to take it. If they are a danger to themselves it is a parents duty to medicate if it helps. When they get older is another story.

My son was on medication for 12 years . At the age of 15, with full understanding of his diorder he said he didnt want to take it. He said he didnt like the way it made him feel. He acknowledges the benefits but refuses to take it. We chat about it often. I dont hound him about it I just have an open conversation with him. I suspect when hes older he will reconsider but part of growing up means letting him decide things for himself.

RE: murder, there is no excuse under any circumstances.

[Fraser_0762]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy12

Well, that's the big question. I don't have any sources to prove this but I can't imagine that the majority of parents feeds their kids medication just to keep them quiet. I don't think it's an easy decision and I would like to think that parents really have their children's best interests in mind.

Ideally, they would inform themselves on how the meds work, but if they aren't capable of that, the next best stop is the expert, ie. GP or psychiatrist in conjunction with the child's opinion. I still think that in this matter you can't just go by the child's opinion.

There are no "experts". An "expert" is a label that people give to themselves when they wan't to inforce their own opinions onto others.

"Hey, listen to what I say, i'm an expert".

An "experts" opinion is no more valid than a childs opinion.

As I stated earlier, everybody knows their body better than anybody else, that encludes people with the title "expert".

People have natural defence mechanisms. If I child feels that a certain substance entering thier body is not good for their long term health, their defence mechanism kicks in and rebels against taking that substance.

So what may appear as a "child with little knowledge" on the surface. It's actually their own bodies defence mechanism warning you that the substance is not beneficial to their long term health.

[Fraser_0762]

Originally Posted by sarahsweets

If by force you mean holding a kids down and shoving it in their mouth then I would say youre right. However when children are very young and diagnosed it can be difficult to get them to take medication because they dont have the power to completely understand the benefits it may bring. A child may here the word adhd and associate it with their problems but not understand the devestation that can occur with untreated adhd. They dont understand executive function or impulsiveness..they dont always understand that a hot stove will burn them they just so badly want to touch the dials on it. If a childs welfare depends on proper treatment then it is wrong not to offer medication and in a non physical violent way force them or coerce them to take it. If they are a danger to themselves it is a parents duty to medicate if it helps. When they get older is another story.

My son was on medication for 12 years . At the age of 15, with full understanding of his diorder he said he didnt want to take it. He said he didnt like the way it made him feel. He acknowledges the benefits but refuses to take it. We chat about it often. I dont hound him about it I just have an open conversation with him. I suspect when hes older he will reconsider but part of growing up means letting him decide things for himself.

RE: murder, there is no excuse under any circumstances.

I'm 21 and I don't understand executive function or impulsiveness either.

When I see somebody who stands out from the crowd, I don't see them as "broken" or "disordered". I see them exactly for "who they are".

People are the way they are supposed to be. Nobody is broken or disordered. You are just "you".

[Fuzzy12]

Originally Posted by Fraser_0762

There are no "experts". An "expert" is a label that people give to themselves when they wan't to inforce their own opinions onto others.

"Hey, listen to what I say, i'm an expert".

An "experts" opinion is no more valid than a childs opinion.

As I stated earlier, everybody knows their body better than anybody else, that encludes people with the title "expert".

People have natural defence mechanisms. If I child feels that a certain substance entering thier body is not good for their long term health, their defence mechanism kicks in and rebels against taking that substance.

So what may appear as a "child with little knowledge" on the surface. It's actually their own bodies defence mechanism warning you that the substance is not beneficial to their long term health.

There are people that know more than others about a particular subject. If I need to get my boiler at home fixed, I'd rather call a plumber than a vet.

People have natural defense mechanisms but our instincts aren't always reliable, especially if you've got ADHD. Right now my body is telling me that I need to starve myself at any cost. It's been saying that for most of my life. When I was younger I thought that starving myself was a legitimate and healthy way to lose weight. Now I know better but my instincts haven't caught up. If I continue starving myself, at some point I might have to be force fed (if anyone notices) and I'm pretty sure that even then my body will tell me to fight it even if my life depended on it. Right now, I prefer that when (and if) that time comes that I will be force fed rather than left to die but I don't trust my body to cooperate.

Please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that you should ignore your child's concerns, wishes and opinions. On the contrary. You have to take them into consideration but parents also have to know that sometimes their children can be wrong and that they tend to be more impulsive and aren't sufficiently equipped to make important long term decisions.

Like Sarah said, once the child is old and mature enough to understand the consequences of their actions then parents have to respect their wishes.

Originally Posted by Fraser_0762

I'm 21 and I don't understand executive function or impulsiveness either.

When I see somebody who stands out from the crowd, I don't see them as "broken" or "disordered". I see them exactly for "who they are".

People are the way they are supposed to be. Nobody is broken or disordered. You are just "you".

People are different. I feel different and I feel broken and disordered. Not just in comparison with others (though that drives home the point even more). Even if I lived on my own on a deserted island, I still wouldn't be happy. Maybe this is the way I was intended to be but I don't want to be this way. I don't want to be me, whatever me is.

I agree that you shouldn't judge or stereo type people but if you can help them to be more functional and happier in the long term, then it isn't wrong to try.

Very few kids like to brush their teeth but as a parent does that mean you should allow that since they know best and risk them losing their teeth at an early age? Similarly, I don't think that kids necessarily understand the implications and consequences of living with untreated ADHD. They don't know yet how it can impact your life and how unhappy and miserable that impact can make you. I'd want to protect my child from that, even if it means going against their immediate wishes.

[Lunacie]

Originally Posted by qanda

Many kids with bipolar refuse to takes baths, brush teeth, etc. I wonder if this girl had a mood disorder. When my daughter felt really bad emotionally I did not make her take a bath. There's always swimming, or baby wipes, spray to freshen the hair. A 2 hour tantrum over a bath is not a battle I am willing to fight. I really wonder if there was more than Adhd. So sad for this little girl that she did not have a stable mom.

Your daughter sounds different than my granddaughter. She would also
refuse to be wiped down or to have her hair sprayed and then brushed.
And since she would ALWAYS refuse to bathe and wash her hair, there
were times when it was necessary to make her do it against her wishes.

We don't, enjoy the battle, but we don't punish her for it like the mom
in this story did.

Originally Posted by Fraser_0762

What gives another person the right to "risk" a life that doesn't belong to them?

Adults treat their children like "possessions". Children are not possessions, they are human beings.

If they feel like they are under threat from taking a certain drug, then they should not be made to take it.

Its their life that you're toying with.

You have to weigh the risks of giving the child medication they may not
want to take versus what can happen if they don't take the medication.

When my oldest granddaughter got strep throat there was no question
that she would take an antibiotic, because the risks of not treating the
infection was just too high. When my youngest granddaughter needed to
have cavities drilled and filled, that's what we had to do. We arranged for
sedation to reduce the trauma for her, but the treatment was unavoidable
as the risks of not treating were too great.

Not every kiddo with ADHD is more at risk by their behavior than the risk
of side effects from medication ... but some are. This is a decision that
parents need to make with the doctor, taking into account the feelings of
the child. Kids may not want to do something like taking meds or taking a
bath, but we ALL have to do things we don't want to do. We can try to
reduce the trauma, but some things just need to be done.