Just confirming what has always been suspected:
Parents are giving their children internet-bought “smart drugs” to boost their performance in the exam room, a psychologist has claimed.Anti-hyperactivity medicines like Ritalin are being used as a “study aid”, says Leicester University’s director of education Paul Cooper.
Related posts:
- Parents’ smoking: "It’s low-grade childhood abuse"
- A woman dies after receiving 8 grams of Dilantin
- A nursing mother wants extra exam time
- The curse of praise
- Should doctors fire young patients if their parents refuse to vaccinate them?
- The DEA has a soft side
- Man sues hospital for a "forced" rectal exam
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 14 comments }
This shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone graduating from college recently. This sort of behavior on campuses is fairly common with students who want to party and then cram, or gunners who want that extra little bit of edge over the competition. Problem is, this drug abuse isn’t as easily linked to crime, which is why there hasn’t been a public outcry about it. Even so, we may one day have to pee in a cup to take the SAT.
Ritalin is also a controlled drug. Used by anyone for whom it was not specifically prescribed is illegal. Parents obtaining this drug for their kids in violation of the controlled substances act run the risk of narcotics charges. Any kid found with this in their system without a valid prescription to explain its presence could jeopardize an athletic scholarship, and who knows, even an academic scholarship.
The bigger question is as a society, do we want to create an environment where our children and grandchildren cannot compete without taking mind altering drugs? Are we ready for drug use to be functionally compulsary?
When I refered to crime, I meant violent crime. I don’t think authorities see “study drug abuse” as a big problem. I think the many students that abuse them and it seems from the article many parents view using Ritalin in this fashion similar to abusing caffeine to stay awake at work. This casual abuse of drugs in our society is fairly common. When a drug becomes so ubiquitous, like caffeine, Tylenol, Advil, and now Ritalin, people abuse it without even thinking that there could be consequences. Abusing Ritalin is obviously a crime, obviously dangerous, and unhealthy in the sense of any drug abuse. I’m just wondering aloud if it might be a while before we see a regulatory or executive response to this issue because of the people involved, and that the societal side effects of the abuse are not fully understood or appreciated.
there will always be those people who look for an extra edge. maintaining our civil liberties is antithetical to proving one’s innocence in the absence of just cause i.e. peeing in a cup. that means there is only one way to make sure that we are all competing equally…make the drug available to anyone who wants it. it can still remain a controlled substance so that a person can receive education and monitoring. but i see no reason why this drug should be only dispensed if it is “medically indicated”. that only encourages patients to lie to physicians and promotes blackmarket drugs that come without physician education or followup. the detrimement that this drug war mentality causes to our liberties is just an added bonus.
mike
So “mike” above thinks we should just give it to whoever wants it.
These are KIDS!!! How do they supply infromed consent? We just let their parents give them drugs on the hope they do better in school? And then if toxic arrhythmias occur we just say “Aw shucks, bad parenting”???
Mike, what would you say to the pediatrician in a case like that? “Hey, its not my problem”
Very shortsighted. Legalizing marijuana is one thing. But just selling ritalin makes as much sense as giving amphetamines out to truck drivers (hey, they’re doing it anyway, right?) or ephedra to those 16 year olds working out in the gym.
Hey, lets get rid of the steroid ban in sports also. Great idea. (sarcasm)
I can respect such libertarian views such as legalizing drugs instead of waging some sort of a crusade against them. However, in this case I think it sets a poor precedent. It may always be the “choice” of each person to utilize such a drug, but should it be made readily available it could easily become the standard. Then every high achieving student would be faced with the choice of using the drug or constantly being at a disadvantage. Many would see this kind of pressure as persuading young adults to abuse. It’s a similar case in sports, where legalizing steroids would make it all but impossible to compete unless you doped.
There’s people in my medical school class using Ritalin as a “study aid”. *shrug*. I’ll pass without it, thank you very much. Although it does bother me a bit to think that pharmaceuticals may give them an unfair performance advantage.
yea…it is much much better for these kids to get these drugs without a physician’s care…that is certainly the better scenario.
how is that for sarcasm? at least if you are seeing a physician then you are being counseled on the adverse effects and perhaps monitored durng routine visits.
mike
“Parents obtaining [ritalin] for their kids in violation of the controlled substances act run the risk of narcotics charges.”
Since when is speed a “narcotic”?
Honest to God. Does anyone really think this is NEW news??
MIke… again you do not address the issue that kids have NO way to say no. Doctors should not be put in a position where they are hostages to those parents who edemand their kids be on ritalin without medical need. Pediatricians should not be forced to monitor kids for toxic side effects of drugs they didnt even prescribe.And kids should not be forced to take ritalin just to keep up with their schoolmates.
I agree its not news. But that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be addressed over and over again.
anon mike says: “at least if you are seeing a physician then you are being counseled on the adverse effects and perhaps monitored durng routine visits. “
isn’t the point that, if readily available WITHOUT a rx, parents giving it to their CHILDREN will not likely be seeing a pediatrician in the first place??? After all, they know better than any “professional” what they need to do to get their kid into harvard (sarcasm).
Kids using stimulants to elevate their test scores exposing themselves to small risks of direct harm and with the risks to them and to society that accrue from artificially elevated test scores that are not a accurage reflection of their relative ability to perform: A problem? Perhaps. Serious? Maybe.
Is it really a bigger problem however than all the kids properly “diagnosed” with ADHD who get Ritalin properly prescribed and monitored, with the same result of artificial elevation of performance beyond what they will be expected to exhibit in real world situations of the working world, further distorted by a label that confers special priveleges such as extra testing time to erode the validity of the comparative value of testing even further? Isn’t this as great or greater a problem? Furthermore, one has the errosive effects of the label itself on the emotional developement of the child, reinforcing feelings of inferiority as well as entitlement to special treatement and externalization of responsibility for ones own performance.
I always wonder how schools and individuals ethically justify giving extra time for examination to, for example, “special” law students, who have absolutely no intentions of giving a discount to clients on their hourly rate for any extra time they take to do their legal work. How do you compensate the patient for the extra time the “special” surgeon needs to do the case? What happens when the ADHD med student who got special testing conditions (extra time, isolation from distrations) is on call at 2 am, off the daily Ritalin cycle, and dealing with clinical drama that unfolds in it’s own time and without regard for his need for a distraction free environment?
I am not opposed to the diagnosis of ADHD, the development of special instructional methods, or the judicious use of stimulants to optimize functioning. I am adamantly opposed however assessing perfomance and aptitude under different conditions such as test setting or timing. Special instructional methods are a way of helping the child to adapt to the condition and optimize performance. Special testing conditions are an attempt to get society to adapt to the childs failure to adapt by accepting lower standards while pretending otherwise. The victims are their future customers, clients, and employers. They are also victims as they are cheated of that glorious feeling that comes from knowing that one has overcome a short hand.
–uncompromising, unapologetic, accomodation rejecting and untreated ADHD MD
Anon 9:18
What does that have to do with the diagnosis of ADHD???
Its not just attention defecit. In kids, its the hyperactivity. And often, as the kids grow (like my brother) they have ego dystonic reactions. They can’t keep out the competeing thoughts and it makes them angry at themselves and sad.
Why are you confusing that with giving extra time on tests??? You might as well say antidepressents are just masking a defective human being, so why give them? It’s because those patients (ostensibly) want to feel better.
ADHD is overdiagnosed, and once an adult, its even less believable. But the emotional state and baseline brain functioning with the regular timing of society is certainly a goal one can take medicine for.
However, once you are at that level, trying to enhance performance is a whole different thing. So the tow are different issues, though related to the same class of drugs. It is difficult for doctors to make the distinction right now, I’ll give you that.
But there is a difference.
Comments on this entry are closed.