Comparing apples and oranges and going to extremes


No surprise that AoA has jumped right on the report that stimulants may cause sudden deaths. Who can blame them, right? Ritalin and all other special cocktails they provide for autistic, bipolar, and add/adhd kids ought to be last resort meds and should never be taken without the awareness that all medicines have side effects. Got that? All meds have side effects. Am I in favor of medicating kids with stimulants, antidepressants, antipsychotics and blood pressure meds? Having been there in the early days of using these drugs with special needs kids, having five years of experience with my son taking them until the day he suffered a stroke, well, gee, I'm gonna go with a great big NO. Not unless it really is the last resort, not unless you get the risks inherent. And, so I've gone into my daughters' autism/Asperger with never a thought of medicating their symptoms. My son's been off all meds but aspirin to control his blood clotting disorder and hopefully prevent another episode of overclotting, but even the aspirin is used with the potentiality of side effects. We take aspirin breaks, especially when he has any sniffles.

Do I judge what other parents do regarding this, do I have an opinion? Notsomuch. There are studies on the efficacy of using these drugs to control certain symptoms. I personally won't go near it, not with the knowledge that there is some potentiality that the concoction he was on played a role in his stroke. I won't scream about it, but if studies came out showing the risk was real, I would reevaluate. So, should we drug kids with stimulants knowing that a small proportion of them will die? No. We shouldn't. We should be providing cognitive behavioral therapy for the child to help them learn to work around their impairments. And we should be arming parents with the tools to be effective special needs parents.

All this to get to my criticisms of Stagliano's article for AoA. Firstly, a little turtle decorated coffin REEKS of emotionalism and is a blatant attempt to inflame the readership. Nasty little trick. Not a surprising trick, but nasty.

Second, Kim Stagliano writes for Huff, not me, so where is her blog on it? Is she pissed that Huff is running some scientifically grounded pieces? She bitched about the bloggers not running with it either, so I'll be kind enough to speak out on it (which explains the above bit), but seriously, I don't do biomedical intervention with my children for their ASDs. They get their regular vitamin supplement but that's it. We did GFCF for four years. Stopped it a few months ago and didn't make a damn bit of difference, except we had happier children. I don't do DAN doctors and I am not going to obsess over my children's poops. I'm just glad they all end up in the toilet. Too many years with my oldest (until he was nine) of them not that I am not messing with it. I'm lucky, though, I'll admit, as my kids, other than the oldest's stroke and blood clotting disorder, do not have any health problems. So, if people have kids with "gut problems" (seriously, stupid sounding--- intestinal issues is much better), I having thirty plus years of personal experience with intestinal issues, can relate to the need to help the child feel better. Still wouldn't go all woo-ey, and that's what these folks are doing, for the most part, but hey, I understand the need to help the child feel better. Find the food allergies, get the child the fiber he/she needs, that's all good with me.

So, there, Kim, took care of your second bitch in your post, didn't I?

Let's go through the rest (you sound bitter, by the way):

"Let me get this straight. NOT putting mercury into your child (flu shot) is negligent." Flu shots are optional. Who's calling you negligent? Don't get the flu shot for your child. Or, hey, since you're still so concerned about mercury, get the thimerosal free version. There's a thought. I personally don't care one way or the other. In the back of my mind, though, would be the thought that if the child is one of the 100 or so unfortunate children to die from the flu and I opted out of the flu shot, I might not want that on my head. I mean, it's no picture of a coffin or anything, but it will do.

"Allowing your child to get lifelong immunity to the Chicken Pox, staying home with her, feeding her chicken soup and giving her soothing baths is bad parenting." Setting up your child for the potentiality of complications of chicken pox and later the chance of shingles by deliberately and intentionally setting out to get your child to contract an infectious disease that does in fact kill or maim? Yup, bad parenting. Accidental exposure. No. Huge frakking difference.

"Declining a second dose of a vaccine that caused seizures in your infant the first time around is proof that you're one brick shy of a load." No, actually giving your child a second dose of a particular vaccine that caused a suspected side effect would make you an idiot. See the difference?

"Giving your child a drug that may cause his heart to stop beating and has myriad other side effects is A-OK.How the bleep is that possible?" Already written how I feel about this. No, it's not. Not unless there's no other choice for the child. In the vast majority of cases, I think there's another choice. In my son's case, he came off the drugs when he had the stroke and he came home to be homeschooled. Any school personnel telling me to drug my child would be reported to the superintendent of the school system, as well.

There you go, Kim, a thoughtful response to your overly dramatic piece. A response I'd attempt to put at AoA except for the fact that I don't seem to be welcome there. I assure you, that just about breaks my heart, not to be welcome in the land of woo and bitter. I reckon I'll get over it, though. And I didn't even bring up the things you seem to think are perfectly acceptable practices, like chelation, HBOT, lupron, and megadoses of vitamins. Left those all alone, did you see that?

No comments: