To think no one was allergic to nuts in the 1970's or kids had that ADHT or whatever it is

[ipodmama]

I don,t remember anyone with these 'problems' , I only remember the odd smelly kid?

Your lives should be easier with all the recognition of the disorders that I never noticed back in the 1970s, treatment, understanding and a whole load of safety nets in place as prevention. Again, it was a genuine question and some of the points raised have been very interesting in terms of why it seems to me there was less of the issues I bought up thirty years ago. Some of you are quite vicious about the issue

Not quite sure what you want?complaining children died back then then unhappy you have epipens? Yes neither situation good, but progress has been made

yeh your right instead we had institutionalization of people who had behaviour or learning difficulites and peole who had asthma were told to go and stand on top of a hill to catch their breath!

get a clue eh!

Yes, BS, I did know. 900 pupils is a small school and I was on the pupil-teacher board. I was aware of every pupil health issue that might require special treatment in school - only for the year I was on the board (1972), but please don't trash everything I write out-of-hand.

Alongside others here, I have said:
[a] I do believe immune-related disorders have increased greatly in the past 40 years and can only suppose this is due to environmental factors;
[b] Improved understanding of psychological/behavioural disorders has led to new diagnoses, of conditions that were unknown 40 years ago.
[c] 20% seems an absurdly high level of psychological/behavioural disorders so, if the statistic is true, I suspect they must be being over-diagnosed. Maybe some people here need the hint that 20% means 1 child in every five.

I haven't made any judgements about the above. Neither have the majority of other respondents ... except those who, for reasons I don't wish to know, seem to read judgement into posts where there is none.

Rather worrying was the fact that someone working within the ss framework suggested how I could call in a social worker after my husband died to 'assist' me in writing a few letters about my sons 'special needs' to 'help' me get him into the local school I wanted. Surely this cannot be an isolated case of 'labelling' ?

I didn't do it

How can you 'label' me as ignorant? I pose a question about something that I didn't notice 30/40 years ago comparing it to something I have noticed in recent times. Never noticing change could be ignorance of the facts.

I know what you mean ipodmama. In my primary school class (1969-74) I remember sitting with one kid the same age as me and helping him read. He wasn't stupid but he really couldn't see the words on the page and I would say now that he was/is dyslexic. To be fair, they did send him for special reading lessons but I'm not sure dyslexia was even on the radar as a condition. As for allergies, you've defintely got a point that they're a lot more prevalent today. In the same primary school class we had one child that was allergic to milk but that was about it. (No-one died either)

I don't think you're ignorant but by putting 'problems' in inverted commas you've injected 'sarcasm'...

In answer to your question OP I think the greater number of children seen now are a result of better diagnosis. Yes there is big debate too about whether or not children are being "over-diagnosed".

My son has dual diagnoses of ASD and ADHD. I agree with both of these and didn't seek out the ADHD bit - in fact the paediatrician AND specialist speech and language therapist who saw and assessed DS over several months told ME that he had ADHD (and no - he does not need medication as I can manage him).

No doubt ADHD can be diagnosed where there is poor parenting but imo these children are quickly identified as they don't improve with "treatment". The rest of us muddle along doing the best we can for our children and fighting the prejudices which exist about the diagnosis.

What was the 'point' of your 'question'?

Do you honestly think it sounds 'innocent'?

Do you honestly think its not offensive towards people with these 'problems'?

Do you think its normal to know more as an adult than as a child, or not, taking into account the inherent self absorbed nature of children and the fact that people may choose not to talk about their 'problems' with a load of kids?

Would you have asked the same 'question' about any other 'trends' you have noticed? For example "AIBU that there weren't as many Foreigners or whatever around in the 1970s?", "AIBU that there weren't as many single mothers or whatever around in the 1970s?"?

"How can you 'label' me as ignorant?"

Because your thread title says "kids had that ADHT or whatever it is "

So you don't know that the condition is called ADHD, and if you don't know the initials you are unlikely to know what they stand for. You could have looked up the correct term but made the decision not to, and to use an incorrect one accompanied by "whatever."

Ignorant means 'lacking knowledge,' and also means 'behaving rudley through lack of knowledge of good manners.'

I think your thread title meets the criteria for both of those definitions quite nicely.

I would also label you as disingenuous due to your claims that you meant no offence and cannot believe any was taken.

rudely even

It's not massively easy to get a confirmed diagnosis though LeQueen. I used to work for a paediatric neurologist and he assessed many children for ADHD, among other things. He did not hand out diagnoses like sweets, even though I sometimes got the impression that the parents were angling for one. And even then, the parents that did seem keen for a diagnosis struck me as being more on the side of just wanting someone to tell them something concrete about what was going on with their child, rather than just waltzing in and hoping for some drugs and some extra money.

My ex-boss saw many, many children with a wide range of neurological issues. Until I worked for him, I didn't realise that there are conditions without a name or an explanation, conditions that can disable or kill a child. I am a lot more sympathetic now to parents who are desperate for a name and an explanation; I can't imagine much worse than watching your child struggle and being told by professionals that even they don't have a clue.

My aunt was born in 1937. She was a whiny miserable child, and her parents were told it was "because of the bombs". In the late 70s she was finally diagnosed coeliac.

One of my children has ADHD and dyspraxia. He is 20, and people meeting him now can see he isn't NT. With hindsight my brother (born in 1965) and DH's brother (born in 1953) also have it, as does my mum's brother (born in 1947). I suspect that if we were able to go back further we would find at least one male in every generation of our family similarly afflicted.

I don't normally bother to post on these threads because I'm so fed up with this attitude people have about "made up conditions". If you don't believe in ADHD just think yourself bl**dy lucky, because that means you obviously haven't experienced it first hand.

I went to school in the 70s. We had loads of kids who would probably be dx now. Then they were caned and expelled.

Dont know about nut allergies. i am certain the existed but I dont think I would have been that interested in those days. Possibly the children with severe allergies were kept out of school because their parents couldnt trust the school to keep them safe. Its bad enough now, what with so many people thinking its all made up (though how you make up anaphalaxis I dont know) imagine what it was like then.

And as BS said earlier, the kids would have died because treatment and testing was not as good then.

Children with severe ASD would have been locked up in long stay hospitals, quietly going mad.

Those who just about managed to get by would be the 'funny one'.

In the 70s it would still have been possible for children to be denied education because of disability 'uneducable' 'subnormal' etc.

You didnt see many kids in wheelchairs when I was a child - do you think they are made up too?

Just wondering how old you are ipod.

You must have been a hell of a child prodigy if you were taking note of complex neurological conditions 40 years ago

Unless you are in your 60s.

Can someone tell me if and what extra money a diagnosis for ADHD would mean and what other conditions would mean extra money.

I only ask because DD's teachers had hinted to me their observations when she was younger and I ignored it.

Its not the condition that 'means extra money'

It is how your child is affected by the conditon that detirmines if they are eligible for DLA. You can only get carers allowance if you child gets the mid rate (at least) of the care component. You can only claim carers allowance if you earn under a certain amount of money (dont know what that is now but its not much).

So hardly riches and not that easy to get anyway.

I tend to agree slightly with the OP that the terms ADHD etc are used way too loosely these days to justify lack of parenting and discipline...