In article , Michael Daly
wrote:

On 21-Mar-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

Take a pill, your blood pressure is spiking...

**** off, dickhead.


A killfile would work better

in article , Scott Weiser at
wrote on 4/5/05 5:28 PM:

A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Scott:
============
That falsely presumes that merely because a particular person is
intellectually limited, that this constitutes an actionable "hindrance"
of
the advancement of other students.
============

I made no such presumption. The context was a student (and many more
like her), who repeatedly interrupted classroom activities with violent
vocal and physical outbursts.

That's a hindrance!

Nope. It's an opportunity likely combined with a cry for help.

I agree with Scott.

The person is screaming "Why am I in this classroom with a curriculum that
has no relevance or consideration for my needs, where I am being humiliated
on a daily basis in front of the other kids who see that I am lost and full
of anxiety and I don't have one friend and only thing worse than this is
going to be when school is over for me and I haven't learned what I need to
learn to participate in the community and I will be alone in the basement of
my parent's house waiting to die for 50 years which is even worse than
sitting here and being humiliated."

in article , Scott Weiser at
wrote on 4/5/05 5:32 PM:

A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Scott recommends:
============
Hire another teacher or put the disabled students in a Grade 1 math
class.
============

Oh yeah, I totally forgot about the budget surplus.

It's not a matter of budgets, it's a matter of social priorities.

Cough. Sputter. Cough

Did SCOTT WEISER just say that?

He's becoming...gasp...a SOCIALIST right before our eyes!!!!

Put Scott in charge of the school system, and each person with an
intellectual disability will be mainstreamed with their own personal
teacher! If the school needs 483 teachers for 600 students, so be it! It's a
social priority!

Now howsabout ensuring access to health care for every child in
America...BEFORE your "a teacher for everyone" program kicks in?

in article , Scott Weiser at
wrote on 4/5/05 5:40 PM:

A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Scott, confusing multiple issues:
================
Note that this corporal punishment is not to be meeted out to
the
disabled student who is incapable of control, but to the OTHER
students
who
are allowing themselves to be distracted by what ought to be ignored.
================

So, you're suggesting that the cure for chemical or hormonal
"disabilities" are "smacks upside the head". Hmmmm...... And the kid
is
supposed to know, from the SMACK, why his mind doesn't work like
others' minds?

Did you fail to read the sentence beginning with "Note" and ending with
"ignored?"
===================

You recommned a SMACK for ADHD students.

No, I recommend appropriate corporal punishment for students who haven't
been taught by their parents to be quiet, respectful and obedient to
authority and who haven't learned to concentrate.

LOL!

How brilliant!

Take kids who have trouble at home and beat them at school! That'll learn
'em to concentrate! And also that violence is acceptable, after all, school
is a good and fine social institution, and they use violence, so it's OK for
me too!

I deny that just because a
student is disruptive and unwilling to concentrate or obey, that the student
is *unable* to concentrate or obey due to some phony, concocted "diagnosis"
that is little more than a marketing tool for Ritalin.

I agree with you on this point. Drugs are being unbelievably overprescribed.
By SMACKING the kids is not the answer. Obviously.

Overcoming "ADHD" is something you *learn* to do, not something you can be
medicated into. Sometimes children need to be caused to focus, and corporal
punishment, in appropriate measure, can be an effective tool for obtaining
obedience and stimulating focus.

Ridiculous. That's the recipe for a volcano that will erupt (internally,
externally, or both). It just teaches the kid that when you have a problem,
you lash out at it. Heck, even the teacher hits me, what's wrong with me
hitting a kid that I don't like?

Most of the time, "ADHD" is nothing more than a sugar high caused by poor
nutrition and breakfast cereal combined with lax, permissive parenting that
spills over into the classroom.

There are a proportion of kids diagnosed ADHD who experience a life-changing
experience with medication. The dosage needs to be monitored closely with
the intent of reducing it as soon as possible, and the goal of eliminating
it. The medication should be combined with strategies for the teacher,
parents, and child. The strategies should be tried first before medication
is even a consideration.

That said, I agree with much of what you say (regarding misdiagnosis and
slapping of labels on kids so they can be dealt with through medications)
but I think your focus on the need for the child to have a smack is way off.
They need people around them who can set boundaries and help establish
routines and structure that are appropriate.

in article , Scott Weiser at
wrote on 4/5/05 5:51 PM:

A Usenet persona calling itself frtzw906 wrote:


=======================
KMAN, your thoughts on these matters need to be published (are they?). WOW!

Everything you describe, I've seen.

frtzw906
====================

I don't have time to publish, but my wife and I will write a book...when and
if we retire.

But there's something better than what I might have to say, and that is a
fellow named David (Dave) Hingsburger. Another name is Dick Sobsey. Two
Canadians at the top of their field when it comes to people with
intellectual disabilities and issues ranging from schooling to self-advocacy
to sexuality. I had the pleasure of spending a few days with Dave and his
insights just blew me away.

in article , BCITORGB
at wrote on 4/5/05 5:53 PM:

Scott incorrectly states:
===============
You falsely assume that all disable students are equal, and that all of
them
are incapable of comprehending chemistry and that all of them do
nothing but
pick their noses. This is merely ignorant bigotry.
================

KMAN does nothing of the sort. You just keep reading it that way.
Surely from everything he's said thus far, you can't believe that of
him.

frtzw906

Quite so. I have stated, quite specifically (as Scott is aware) that there
are students with disabilities who have the same or better intellectual
capacity as non-disabled peers and obviously they belong in the same
classroom since they will benefit from the same curriculum.

As I have also explained, perhaps more than a dozen times, for those who do
not have the intellectual capacity to benefit from the "mainstream"
curriculum, it is a totally appropriate reaction to space out or act out
when being humiliated on a daily basis by having to sit through day after
day of curriculum that is for someone else and you are just there filling up
space.

in article , BCITORGB
at wrote on 4/5/05 5:58 PM:

Scott, intending to be argumentative, but detracting from the
discussion:
===================
Oh, what great socialization that is. So the rest of the class
follows the
teacher at the front doing their Grade 12 lessons, and the kid at the
back
sits in the corner with a TA doing his Grade 2 lessons. Yessir, that
will
develop a profound mutual respect and open up all sorts of social
opportunities.

You're the only one making such a suggestion, and it's demeaning and
bigoted
of you to do so because you use a blanket characterization (and a
largely
incorrect one at that) to disparage all disabled students.
======================

I think *everyone* knows exactly what KMAN is talking about. There's
nothing at all disparaging about his suggestions as they pertain to
individuals with profound intellectual disabilities.

frtzw906

Actually, even mild intellectual disabilities (which usually means a maximum
IQ of 70, IQ not being a great measure, but certainly good enough to explain
why they are not going to benefit from a curriculum designed for those of
average intelligence).

in article , Scott Weiser at
wrote on 4/5/05 10:15 PM:

A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Scott incorrectly states:
===============
You falsely assume that all disable students are equal, and that all of
them
are incapable of comprehending chemistry and that all of them do
nothing but
pick their noses. This is merely ignorant bigotry.
================

KMAN does nothing of the sort. You just keep reading it that way.
Surely from everything he's said thus far, you can't believe that of
him.

I merely analyze his statements here, which so indicate.

I've stated unequivocally that there are students with disabilities who
benefit from the same curriculum as non-disabled peers. You are deliberately
misconstruing my position, and started doing so the moment your own
arguments were shown to be lacking. This is around the time you got all
snark about the idea that you weren't getting enough credit for your
knowledge on this topic.

in article , Scott Weiser at
wrote on 4/5/05 10:16 PM:

A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Scott:
==============
You're the only one suggesting that disabled kids be "stuck in a class
that
is not intended for their learning needs." I've never even hinted at
such a
plan.
==============

And KMAN hasn't said you did. He's just reporting on the realities.

No, he's reporting on one, single reality while trying to extend the
reasoning to the general case.

Actually, I'm not. As you know, I've already agreed with you that (as an
example) a person with a physical disability with the same or better
intellectual capacity as their non-disabled peers belongs in the same
classroom as their non-disabled peers. Obviously and unquestionable.

I'm arguing the general case, not a specific reality.

You are being dishonest.

Scott:
===========
Wrong. I've always been arguing policy and the general case.
==============

Fine.

And KMAN and I haven't. And we've understood one another. Perhaps
because we speak Canajun and you don't

frtzw906.