« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

The Department of Illiteracy

the government monopoly in creating social pathologies

One of the tragic legacies of the Great Society is the violence inflicted upon the family as an institution. Through a series actions, calculated or not, the family has been devalued as the bedrock of civil society and replaced with the government acting in loco parentis for not only the children it comes into contact with but also for the parents.

While we are all familiar with the incentives provided by the government to discourage marriage by women living in poverty through the provision of various allowances and services so long as they are unemployed and unmarried and have children, fewer are aware of the incentives provided to the people living at the poverty level (though evidence indicates that 199% of federal poverty line may be the real ceiling) to have their children diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in order to boost their family income by about $8400 per year.

What makes this even more shocking is that the New York Times’ leftist columnist Nicholas Kristof has noticed it:

THIS is what poverty sometimes looks like in America: parents here in Appalachian hill country pulling their children out of literacy classes. Moms and dads fear that if kids learn to read, they are less likely to qualify for a monthly check for having an intellectual disability.

Many people in hillside mobile homes here are poor and desperate, and a $698 monthly check per child from the Supplemental Security Income program goes a long way — and those checks continue until the child turns 18.

“The kids get taken out of the program because the parents are going to lose the check,” said Billie Oaks, who runs a literacy program here in Breathitt County, a poor part of Kentucky. “It’s heartbreaking.”

This is painful for a liberal to admit, but conservatives have a point when they suggest that America’s safety net can sometimes entangle people in a soul-crushing dependency. Our poverty programs do rescue many people, but other times they backfire.

Some young people here don’t join the military (a traditional escape route for poor, rural Americans) because it’s easier to rely on food stamps and disability payments.

Antipoverty programs also discourage marriage: In a means-tested program like S.S.I., a woman raising a child may receive a bigger check if she refrains from marrying that hard-working guy she likes. Yet marriage is one of the best forces to blunt poverty. In married couple households only one child in 10 grows up in poverty, while almost half do in single-mother households.

I don’t want to quote more of the column because of Fair Use concerns but I encourage everyone to read it.

When the SSI program was created in 1974 (thank you, Richard Nixon) the idea was to replace a patchwork of federal-state programs with one program that would cover all claimants and have uniform eligibility criteria. At some point children, under age 18, were made eligible for payments as disabled

“if the individual has a medically determinable impairment or combination of impairments that causes marked or severe functional limitation(s), and can be expected to result in death, or has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months.”

Enter ADHD, stage left. I don’t want to engage in a discourse on the controversies about the existence and prevalence of ADHD other than to make this points. ADHD has no clinical diagnosis, that is, there is no physical test you can conduct on a patient that can diagnose ADHD. Rather it is an observational diagnosis governed by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, version IV (DSM IV).

This subdivision is based on presence of at least six out of nine long-term maladaptive symptoms (lasting at least 6 months) of either inattention, hyperactivity–impulsivity, or both. Thus, a child who is diagnosed with the inattention subtype may also show signs of hyperactivity–impulsivity, and vice-versa. To be considered, the symptoms must have appeared before the age of 6, manifest in more than one environment (e.g. at home and at school or work), and not be better explained by another mental disorder.

Two points need to be kept in mind here. People who live in long term poverty aren’t stupid. They may have made some profoundly stupid choices that have resulted in poverty but they aren’t stupid. The second is, as someone once said; there is a difference between being broke and being in poverty. Broke is the state of your bank account. Poverty is a state of the soul. When you combine financial incentives with an impoverished soul you cant reasonably be surprised when bad things happen.

A correspondent in Ben Domenech’s indispensable The Transom (if you aren’t subscribing to it you are missing tons of stuff) describes the process this way:

“A typical anecdote from any given day would go like this: A parent would arrive for the appointment, late, of course, leaving only 10 minutes to talk to the child. The child would have a small television or video game, something distracting, and wouldn’t be paying attention. The child would be asked to put it away, and the child would talk back. The parent would do nothing. Finally, the parent would be asked to take away the thing. The parent would get defensive and say they already know what the problem is, the kid has ADHD, evidenced by the child’s inability to listen to the parent, and proven to the doctor by the child’s inability to pay attention. Incredulous, the doctor would realize that the parent was raising this child alone, and so the child was frequently acting out, and that the easiest way for the parent to get the kid to behave was to put the kid on Ritalin. For the parent, it had the additional benefit of allowing her to get a check in the mail every month.

While Krisof’s story is focused on Breathitt County, KY, I am intimately familiar with the situation in the neighboring Perry County. My mother lives there (no I’m not from there originally though I have struggled against the effects of a rural Southern education my entire life) and I have never met a more canny group of consumers of government goods and services in my life. Until the mid 1990s USDA surplus processed cheese (think Velveeta with generic food markings) was used as a type of currency to pay for lawn mowing and other odd jobs in lieu of cash. I know, personally, of families who keep their children out of school or discourage academic achievement because lack of academic achievement can be used as a criterion for retaining the SSI check. The colloquial term you hear is that someone is receiving a “head pension.”

As we look at the morass of fiscal and moral problems facing the nation today, most can be directly traced to government acting to rectify something perceived as wrong. The egregious pollution of American rivers and indiscriminate use of pesticides has given rise to a regulatory regime that treats an isolated bog the same as an interstate waterway and encourages the spread of malaria. A desire to improve the “happiness” of the individual led to divorce on demand. Easy divorce, and I might add, the “right” to contraception, produced a bumper crop of children being raised by single mothers. The programs designed to keep them from starving had the perverse incentive of both encouraging out of wedlock births and discouraging marriage. Public housing, first conceived during the Depression as a stop gap measure, became a fixture in most American cities with a multigenerational base of clients.

While we have every right to be stunned by the impoverished single mother in rural Kentucky who is keeping her child – or children — out of school,  so she can receive an additional several hundred dollars per month per child and thereby condemning her children to continue the tradition of subsistence living we should recoil in horror from the government programs and subsidies that not only support such behavior but actively encourage it.

COMMENTS

  • reddog53

    Terrific post!

    “If the road to Hell is paved with good intentions then the federal government is the general contractor on the project” is my nominee for best line of the year.

    This needs to spur some really serious reviews of the money we ship to states to help individuals. We all understand that those in need should be helped, but when the system creates incentives that harm people, then we obviously have gone too far.

  • scvblwxq

    The various ant-poverty programs give people some benefits so the little money they have can be used to search for work. Unemployment insurance helps most of the time.

  • streiff

    the plural of undocumented ancedote is not “data.” Even if I accept your story at face value, and as a former infantry officer I have my doubts, that experience does not speak to the efficacy of the program.

  • streiff

    eh?

  • tomcatdriver

    No that is not correc on several fronts. I do not believe that either history or democracies in general ever reach “equilibrium” both are constantly in a state of flux and change.

    Single point solutions to complex programs almost never work other then to simply skew things badly.

    Finally in the scheme of things, if the US is to be “undone” or suffer “national failure” it wont be because of poverty programs.

  • irishgirl

    great post.

  • bobmark

    Kinda like this ?

    http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2012/11/branco-cartoon-bear-necessities/

  • tomcatdriver

    There is no data in this entire thread…the blog itself has no data. The singular of undocumented anecdote is not data either. The entire thing is simply opinion. I stated mine

  • streiff

    Are you really this stupid or do you just act it on RedState?

  • streiff

    mine is that you are a disagreeable ass who is trolling us with the alleged experiences of your mythical friends.

  • streiff

    I concur. The initial purpose was to alleviate problems. Unfortunately, over time they have become the metaphorical self-licking ice cream cone. There is a bureaucracy built around the administration of these programs involving billions of dollars and tens of thousands of jobs.

    The real purpose to day to less to get people out of poverty than to make them comfortable in poverty.

  • shr3dr

    Bloat, bureaucracy, losing sight of the people they were designed to help. Those are real problems for such programs.

    But I am less cynical about the hearts and generosity of my fellow Americans. Most people intend to do good. They believe they are helping. Sometimes it is misguided.

    It was a really nice post. Painful, but important.

  • reddog53

    I don’t think the point is that eliminating federal programs will eliminate poverty. I think the point is exactly what you’ve suggested – stop doing things that don’t work and start doing different things that do.

    Federal programs have the inherent problem of distance — they tend to be run by people with no connection or accountability to the result.

    We need to try and develop better programs with more local resources, while at the same time encouraging solutions that work elsewhere to be used.

  • http://twostepstotheright.blogspot.com/ D.T. Dickinson

    Certainly a sad situation. I often wonder if a great many of cases of ADHD and the like are really just a clinical cover for the “instant gratification syndrome” we seemed to have embraced as a society. There is less apparent instant gratification in working hard for a living, and being responsible in spending. Obviously, not having to do the work and not worrying as much on the spending side of things would be more gratifying. As a result we have generations of people acting in such a manner that is compounding the problem on their children, and a government willing to step in and lend a helping hand down that same road only makes it worse.

    Just my thoughts. Not a doctor, scientist, therapist, or the like, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

  • commonsenseobserver

    Obviously, there has to be a basic safety net, but now, instead of encouraging work, it is pulling people down into poverty again. We must help those who cannot help themselves, but those who can work must work, and those who can learn must learn.

  • commonsenseobserver

    At least you’d agree, then, that we should make work pay and make welfare simpler and smarter?

    I fail to see how more than 70 different programs spread out across the federal government can help an ordinary needy person.

    Every dollar spent on waste or fraud means a dollar not spent on food for a genuinely needy family.

  • commonsenseobserver

    Nah, he’s not really wrong. The Obama economy is indeed destroying jobs. Extended unemployment benefits are just a bonus to counteract natural private sector growth and smart local policies.

  • libertybelle61

    As a public school teacher (yes, there are conservative teachers) I often get requests from lawyers or the social security administration to fill out paperwork to help determine that a kid has ADHD and needs benefits. Ninety percent of these kids can function just fine and certainly don’t need more tax dollars. (A recent request was for an honor student, no less.). These parents are masters at getting government money. Often, all these kids need is a balanced diet, less sugar, more exercise, and more sleep.

  • http://conservativemountaineer.blogspot.com/ conservativemountaineer

    If some Agency of the Federal government designed a program that works, then eventually there would be no need for that program and that Agency, correct?
    That is one reason why programs don’t work. Not the only reason, but a big one.

  • joshinca

    “The people on food stamps are going to have to eat regardless of food stamps so this does little for the bottom line of either stores or farmers.

    The $100 billion per year used to fund food stamps is going somewhere. Where do you think that is if it’s not to stores and farmers?

    Even if what you say is true, how effective has the food stamp program been in moving people off food stamps?

    Your larger point about the abject failure of anti poverty programs, including food stamps, is spot on.

    The only program that can possibly claim to have worked in ending poverty for its recipients is Social Security.

  • joshinca

    Extended unemployment benefits are not the factor contributing to people stayin on unemployment.

    There are literally dozens of academic studies refuting this assertion.

  • joshinca

    Single point solutions to complex programs almost never work other then to simply skew things badly.

    Which is similar to the critique of federal anti poverty programs.

    That seemingly well intended simplistic solutions exasperate poverty via bad incentives and reinforcing negative lifestyles and choices.

  • Jack_Savage

    You have GOT to be kidding me. I would love to see a study of when those on extended unemployment finally found jobs. My guess would be about a week before extended benefits ran out.

    It has absolutely been used as a 99 week paid vacation.

  • joshinca

    The real purpose to day to less to get people out of poverty than to make them comfortable in poverty.

    Even that is more a side effect.

    The real purpose is to keep the gravy train rolling for the programs administrators and suppliers.

  • 29Victor

    The $100 billion per year used to fund food stamps is also coming from somewhere.

    The only way to give those farmers that money is to take it out of the economy somewhere else. And taking $100 billion out of the economy to support farmers and artificially raise the prices of food is not a good idea even in good times. It is less so now.

  • 29Victor

    The programs are worse than simply failing. Welfare checks have replaced men in the home and left millions of children fatherless & at higher risk for drug use, poverty and jail time. Federal housing programs (i.e. “The Projects) have created breeding grounds for gangs, drug use, violence & crime. And the dismantling of those projects and dissemination of their occupants into more affluent areas has spread those evils into unsuspecting, historically peaceful neighborhoods.

  • 29Victor

    Right. And since money is really all that the government has to offer, the “single point solution” offered by the government is money.

    Poor education — more money. Can’t find a job — more money. Gangs — more money. Housing — more money.
    The difficulty is that money was never the problem because, as the author said, poverty is not simply the lack of money. In fact, the quickest way to create more poverty in America is to incentivize it by throwing more money at it.

  • 29Victor

    Sadly, the DSM was politicized some time ago.

  • streiff

    the money doesn’t even go to the farmers, the foods people buy with food stamp money goes for processed foods, so mostly to the mega agri-corporations like Cargill.

  • diamondreo

    tomcatdriver, why is it that ALL liberal policies and opinions including yours deny human psychology?

  • diamondreo

    “When the SSI program was created in 1974… …the idea was to replace a patchwork of federal-state programs with one program that would cover all claimants and have uniform eligibility criteria.”

    This idea of ‘universalism’ of laws, programs plays directly against constitutional Federalism. The States should necessarily be a “patchwork”. Each on should be influenced by it’s own citizens to perfect a better way. Over-arching federal programs kill incentive to evolve effective programs at the state-level. The states are incentivized also by the fact that they have to do something that works within their budget. After all, all the Feds do when a program flounders is throw more ‘budget’ at it!

    Liberals, RINO’s, and most neocons don’t seem to get this.

  • davesinsanantonio

    True, but the Left will attack us, and defend their “caring” programs, emotionally, and thus they will win the public relations war. We can only win this war one convert at a time, but direct contact. We cannot and will not win it in the media, because the media are on the Left as well, and they will continue to tell the emotional message and not the factual one.

  • davesinsanantonio

    That is because they are not designed to eradicate poverty, but to perpetuate it. They may not have started out that way, but the bureaucrats who make their (very good) living off of them have seen to it that they do. And, in fact, they see to it that these programs actually grow so that they can receive raises and promotions. Jesus said we will always have the poor with us, and the bureaucrats guarantee it. An example of how they do this is that they get a provision inserted that a welfare recipient loses benefits if they go to school–claiming if you can afford schooling you don’t need welfare. Thus insuring that none will ever escape the trap that welfare becomes.

  • davesinsanantonio

    Only a portion goes to the food growers, processors and retailers. A huge portion goes to the bureaucrats who hand out the food stamps and create some of the silly rules about them. Anything the government does costs more than it would in the private sector, because they have no incentive to cut costs, and often have incentives to increase costs to they can justify increases in their salaries, benefits and perks.

  • davesinsanantonio

    And, as soon as they can qualify they will be right back on unemployment, In many cases that is as little as 90 days. So, they can get a job for three months and then live on the dole for almost two years, at a very comfortable level.

  • davesinsanantonio

    Because facts don’t fit in with their narrative. It is easier to ignore them, or lie about them, than to change themselves.

  • davesinsanantonio

    The really interesting thing is that the government seldom helps the truly needy. Those people often have to rely on churches or other charities for their food and other assistance. The urban and rural homeless are a good example of this, also battered women.

    My sister works in an ecumenical charity and many of her clients are battered women, often with children, who must wait six months before being eligible for government welfare benefits, but she gets them housing, food, and job leads.

  • davesinsanantonio

    History and democracies are constantly in a state of flux and change is true. The problem is that governments try their hardest to prevent that. Thus, they are always far behind the problem. Like generals who are most often preparing for the previous war, governments are trying to solve previous problems using previous solutions. The problem with that is that those previous solutions didn’t work then, and, of course, they won’t work now. But, that just makes the government try harder to make those failed “solutions” work this time, thus making conditions worse, not better.

    If the US is to be “undone”, poverty programs will be just as responsible as the other causes, because “if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem”! Governments do not solve as many problems as they create. Thus, the US will be “undone”, because the government is growing in scope and power, and will eventually crush itself and us unless we can rein it in and then reverse the trend.

  • diamondreo

    “The only program that can possibly claim to have worked in ending poverty for its recipients is Social Security.”

    Yes, and I agree with that but you(we all) might agree that it could be done much better. But ‘everything comes at a cost’. At the least, the cost of the bureaucratic system of Social Security not only in real dollars that will be paid, but in the unseen cost of waste and the unrealized alternatives is unacceptable.

    Let me coin a generalistic phrase relating to Social Security and most ‘safety-nets’ that may not even be original, and some would say it has to be somewhat inaccurate, and is too wide-sweeping. While one must extrapolate full-results of these programs to get to the full meaning of this, I’ll go ahead here and stand by this anyway:
    ‘YOU CAN’T SOLVE A PROBLEM WITH A BUREAUCRACY’

  • davesinsanantonio

    If the government is involved in something, even peripherally, that something will always become politicized. It is the nature of the beast. The problem then becomes that truth takes a back seat to politics, if it is allowed on the bus at all, and then the needy, and others, suffer more. And, once those erroneous policies become entrenched, the beneficiaries, including bureaucrats, unions, politicians, will move heaven and earth to keep them in place, and even to grow them. They don’t really care about the harm they cause, now or in the future, they only care about the benefits they accrue and perpetuating them as long as they can.

  • diamondreo

    tomcatdriver, I’m afraid of the ‘evolution’ of these bad poverty programs. Even you don’t know the final form flawed largesse takes.

  • davesinsanantonio

    The problem is that when some people don’t learn and don’t work, but seem to be prospering, sometimes even more than those who do learn and do work, it provides disincentives to learn and work, and perpetuates the government programs that push those situations. That is why young people today insist that they get high paying jobs doing nothing and are surly about it.

  • davesinsanantonio

    AMEN!!!

  • diamondreo

    …i’ll vote that up!

  • diamondreo

    You really need to read Bastiat’s “That which is seen and That which is unseen”. These bad federal poverty programs cover-up and starve-out good solutions that we never even get to see.

  • mishima

    I am a staunch Conservative and have had some experience about this topic.

    But YOU ARE SPREADING DISINFORMATION AND IT HURTS CONSERVATISM!!

    I really hate to see it. ADHD does not qualify people for SSI insurance. It could in some extremely rare cases, but unlike a child with diagnosed autism or severe mental retardation, ADHD does not. I think you should make a public retraction of this.
    I have been approached by parents who have actually wanted their child to be diagnosed with autism and their child was not a bit autistic – They wanted the SSI money. I know about these kinds of people.
    But again, YOU ARE DEAD WRONG ABOUT ADHD, and I hope you have the ethics to retract your statements. We conservatives cannot afford this kind of nonsense to be passed around; it makes us look bad.

  • streiff

    Sorry, you are wrong. I have no intention of retracting squat. Kristof reports on it. I’ve seen it.

  • celador2

    Lou Dobbs on O’Reilly’s, ‘The Factor’ spoke about the in-the- red- state of Michigan and its lavish welfare that deincentitizes recipients. Michigan has a problerm meeting these payments. A woman with two children earning 27,000 would need earn 57,000 to cover all the handouts and subsidies she receives were she paying herself. Children are a one way ticket to comfort levels that go on and on.

    Wisconsin may be worse in addicting perks, some may be federal.

    Cab fare is very high in my city, higher than in LA or NYC by over 1.25 a cab driver toldme as he apologized for the high fare. I could not figure out why until the news covered the Medicaid contracts. There are two major contracts and one cab company had a third of its business in Medicaid. One owner made news by ending the Medicaid contract and lowering fares but with a ride share proviision.

    The cabs are vital for survival in my cold city They move people from A to Z when the snow is deep and ice ten feet high for blocks Dec-March. People pay for the demand which is high. And the government pays higher rates that it does in big cities like LA and NYC. Maybe there are other reasons than large government contracts that keep fares high. But a third of consumers are not paying and offer no pressure to cabs to lower fares or compete.

    Once people get used to riding in cabs and do not pay for it the cabs can charge high fees to the government and all riders.

    I have no sympathy for the liberal case the gov payments keep cabs running with huge welfare subsidies. Tough. As a rider I prefer cabs at market demand with maybe lower fares that might produce more cabs on the road as a result of lower fares. I care about all consumers as much as how much tax money a cab company can collect by hiking rates.

    The cab drivers are rescue workers that keep the city moving when 102 inches snw turns to ice and will not melt but forms high walls in almost every hilly street. I do not mean to devalue their work or blame welfare riders for the high fares. But there may be a connection.

    And a welfare rider may not want to shift into a transition where she or he pays out of pocket for fares that have always been covered by a voucher. Were fares lower she might be more willing to leave welfare. Hence dependency.

  • ihateliberals

    The Democratic party has always been the Party of Slaverey. When the Civil war ended the Party had to re-align itself and it did that by creating programs to “Help” the blacks assemilate into society. ever since that time every entitlement program creats a slave to the governement. Once snared by oneof these programs the average person can’t break free. In these days the Democratic Party enslaves many races including the mexicans, Chinese, indians and even Whites. The trick with entitlement programs is that if you try to get off of them they end abruptly causing a gap in income that is hard for most to overcome. There is no overelapping of benefit and getting a better job. Socialism is a wonderful thing for a Democrat. it is the perfect foundatin for thier slavery.

  • cheesycon

    streiff is right, in *some* cases you *can* qualify for SSI if your child is diagnosed with ADHD. Here are the details from the SS website faq.

    Is my child’s ADD severe enough to qualify for disability benefits?

    The Social Security Administration maintains what they call the SSA Listing of Impairments (Part B for children) which is a list which outlines common conditions and diseases that the SSA has decided causes marked functional limitations in children.

    Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder is listed in Section 112.11. For a child to “meet or exceed the listing” they must manifest “developmentally inappropriate degrees of inattention, impulsiveness, and hyperactivity.”

    The SSA requires that the child’s condition be severe, which means they must exhibit the symptoms which are found in Part A and in Part B of the listing.

    Part A of the SSA Children’s Listing of Impairments

    To meet the criteria of Part A, your child must have medically documented findings of all three of the following:

    1. Marked inattention; and
    2. Marked impulsiveness; and
    3. Marked hyperactivity;

    Part B of the SSA Children’s Listing of Impairments

    The SSA has outlined two sets of conditions, one for children who are less than three years old and one for children who are three to eighteen years of age. Generally, it is very difficult for children who are under the age of three to win SSI for ADHD so we will focus our discussion on children who are ages three to eighteen.

    If your child is age three to eighteen they must possess two out of three of the following conditions:

    • Marked impairment in cognitive and communication function – This impairment must be measured and documented on standardized tests and supported by your child’s medical history.
    • Marked impairment in age appropriate social functioning
    • Marked impairment in age appropriate personal functioning

    It is important for your child to see a qualified physician or psychologist who has diagnosed the symptoms and documented them as appropriately severe. Other supporting documentation can include treatment notes, teacher’s reports and evaluations, achievement tests and IQ testing.

    What are the chances my child will receive SSI for ADD or ADHD?

    Many children are diagnosed with ADHD or ADD but the Social Security Administration decides that their condition does not cause “marked functional limitations” for the child. Unfortunately, when the SSA evaluates a child’s ADHD or ADD condition the analysis is generally subjective in nature and relies heavily on the observations of the child’s behavior by others, which by its very nature tends to be open for interpretation. This contrasts with a variety of other conditions which can be objectively determined through clinical observations such X-rays or blood tests.

    Honestly, for ADD the most important “evidence” is frequently information provided by the school and documentation that outlines how the ADD is affecting the academic status of a child. Children who have evidence that they have severe functional limitations and deficits in their school performance will have the greatest chance of receiving SSI benefits.

  • mishima

    I know about ADHD because I EVALUATE students for this! I have taken part in evaluations for literally HUNDREDS of students, using instruments like the Conner’s and have a lengthy review of Barkley’s tome on Amazon.

    It is “possible” that a student with some kind of EXTREMELY SEVERE form of ADHD, probably “Combined Type,” could qualify for SSI, but I have never either seen this nor heard of A SINGLE EXAMPLE.

    I am a staunch Conservative and published a book this summer concerning the Modern Liberal in America today. I do not like to see these claims that families of ADHD children get SSI. It is presented in a deceitful way by the author: An unsuspecting person would conclude from this article that most students with ADHD qualify. It is misleading and DISHONEST. It does a disservice to the cause of Conservatism, and it harms real Conservatives.

  • mishima

    I am in the field, and I have evaluated students with ADHD in four states for decades. I know the disorder in and out. You are wrong. It is possible that there are some rare cases in which a parent gets SSI. “Technically,” perhaps, someone could qualify somewhere. I have, in my decades of experience and testing of literally HUNDREDS of students for this disorder, never seen or HEARD of it even one single time.

    I am a staunch Conservative, and published a book a few months ago (not about ADHD). The presentation is misleading and deceitful. Read my post below.

  • streiff

    your experience aside, you are full of crap. You don’t know what you are talking about and your experience no only runs counter to what I personally know to be a fact, which is why I wrote about the Kristof article, but runs against rather legnthy stories in Atlantic and Washignton Post.

    I don’t intend to argue objective reality with your cute little fantasy world.

  • cheesycon

    your anecdotes are canceled out by streiff’s, but neither is defnitive. The information I posted is definitive though. it is pretty clear that yes, children will ADHD ****WILL***** qualify for SSI as long as certain conditions are met.And not “extremely severe” (which is a bogus diagnosis) but rather with specific types of “functional limitations” which are very clearly spelled out in the law as I posted:

    If your child is age three to eighteen they must possess two out of three of the following conditions:

    • Marked impairment in cognitive and communication function – This impairment must be measured and documented on standardized tests and supported by your child’s medical history.
    • Marked impairment in age appropriate social functioning
    • Marked impairment in age appropriate personal functioning

    you may evaluate students for ADHD but you have no experience in determining their eligible for SSI.

    anyway this is a pretty minor issue and i spent enough time on this and really your claim about damaging conservatives is silly as no one probably even cares or knows about this issue. if your’e genuinely serious about really not hurting conservatives and not just concern trolling, then focus your energy on anti-vaccine people (shameful that we had a GOP congressman leading hearings a few weeks ago about vaccine denial, I was hoping RS would take a public stand, but then again its better that we don’t draw attention to that stuff. The Editors are wise :)

  • Bill S

    No one you knew voted for Nixon either, right?

  • mishima

    Tell me your credentials and how many students you have diagnosed with ADHD. I have literally done HUNDREDS, either doing most of the data-gathering, testing and observations via Conner’s and Brown’s inventories from teachers, parents and students, observing using ABA methods of quantification, and also screening out of other disorders with a plethora of instruments and data-gathering. I also have used the TOVA which I personally bought when I was in private practice!

    Again, I am a staunch Conservative, and dedicated enough to have spent years to complete a book to help Conservatives. Therefore, the LAST thing I want to see is this spreading of disinformation.

  • mishima

    Please do not write the criteria. I have personally diagnosed HUNDREDS using the DSM-IV-TR, state educational criteria and even the criteria from the ICD. I have met Barkley in person and attended his seminar in Boston when I lived in the area.
    After decades in the field, and testing and overseeing multitudes of children, I can say that you are dissembling in the sense of presenting information that is highly misleading. Yes, I agree that it IS possible that someone, somewhere, can get SSI, but among the hundreds and hundreds of children that I have personally assessed and observed, I have NEVER – not a single time – EVER seen a family get this. And I know the system: I have seen them collect for autism and mental retardation and other physical handicaps.

    But this article and your defense of it is misleading and unethical.

  • mishima

    Almost no program – social program – by the government works, but there is a bureaucracy built up around it, and bureaucrats with jobs. They want to keep those jobs, so they really devote themselves to devising rationales to continue, even though they fail. The programs of the UNgrateful Society were like that: Useless or destructive, but the Left-wingers kept insisting that they were failing because they were UNDERFUNDED. Give us more, more, more – the rallying cry of the vociferous Left.

  • streiff

    Personally, I don’t believe a word you’ve posted. But because I am a naturally kind and magnanimous person and open to being corrected, I’ll make you a deal.

    You get Nicholas Kristof to withdraw his article and I’ll withdraw mine.

    You make one more attack on me or this article without achieving that and I ban you.

    Questions?

  • mishima

    Everything I wrote is true. I am nationally certified NCSP; please look it up. And I am published in the field of diagnosis.

    There would be no reason to get Kristof to withdraw his article because he only referred to the fact that people in poverty will try to get SSI and it can be destructive of family and so on. I have seen this myself, and I have been asked by people – specifically in a county in northeastern Florida – to diagnose their children as autistic when, in fact, their children did not show any symptoms on the autistic spectrum in the slightest. I am saying I know about people doing this. So, Kristof is accurate in his statement about people wanting to get SSI.

    But Kristof did not write about ADHD children. The next two quotes were from regulations and definitions of ADHD. The one after that was by Ben Domenech, a correspondent.

    You have the power to ban me, of course. If you want to be like the Left and stifle disagreement, go ahead. I thought Conservatives were different. I will speak the truth.

  • mishima

    The DSM grows and grows with each publication. There was speculation about having a new term of “social disorder” or social functioning impairment. Basically it means people have some problems getting along. The psychologists tried to label Clinton with a sexual disorder based on DSM definitions. I think “sexual degenerate” would have been just fine.

  • mishima

    Politicized? You mean around 1974, don’t you?

  • mishima

    Yes, excellent. Hazlitt describes and summarizes it quite well, too.

  • mishima

    The government has spent approximately $21 TRILLIION on “means-tested” welfare so far. Now it is up to about $1 TRILLION a year and Obama has plans to increase it on a yearly basis – beyond simple inflation.

  • mishima

    Jail?

  • diamondreo

    Is that Henry Hazlitt? I’ll never get to eiol on my list. But maybe now i’ll miss it by less…