Nearly half the kids in my kids private have a diagnosis

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it's not about services. who cares if kids get services who need them?
it's about a complete redefinition of what and is not 'typical' and what must be 'accommodated'.
If half your class needs to be accommodated then maybe your school is wrong.

I kind of agree with you but this is really only true if half the class needs the SAME accommodation. If some need extra time and others need breaks and others need seating close to the teacher and others need seating somewhere else then these diagnoses/evals are actually helping folks to identify kids' individual needs and the real problem is some kids get their needs identified much later than others due to lack of access to services.

This is key. Instead of spending millions on standardized testing in elementary schools, we should be giving neuropsych evaluations to all kids in public schools. Early intervention will allow those kids to perform better when they hit middle school. Start the academic standardized testing after you identify and support learning differences for all.

I don’t know. It just makes the kid look more functional than they are. No one will accommodate them in the work force. And everyone will want to hire the kid who didn’t need accommodations. Having testing without accommodations probably resulted in more accurate results.

Mixed feelings about this.

My kid has testing accomodations. He definitely qualified for his IEP (autism with disruptive behavior) but initially I believed he has no cognitive issues per that mean he needs more time. I also felt like the skill of timed test taking was something he should learn. And he’s a pretty competitive kid, so I thought that a timed test might actually focus him better than an untimed test.

He’s now in 6th grade and I’ve kind of given up on resisting the test accomodations. In part that IS because such a big percentage of kids have them any it’s hard to see why he shouldn’t. It’s also because I realized that in the absence of homework and textbooks to study from at home, a lot ends up riding on tests at school, and I wasn’t willing to let him tank his grade given other struggles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is in a SN private where everyone has a diagnosis of some type but "appears" superficially pretty typical. The reality is that none of us have been able to find an alternative to the SN school where we thought the needs could be served, and public was a disaster for all. The kids with diagnoses at most of these mainstream privates have pretty low-key needs in most cases. The kids at our school couldn't get into these places.

Oftentimes, kids who have milder displays also have a really hard time getting supports in public, and the only option is to send them to private in hopes it will be a better environment for them. That's why you see a lot of these kids there.

This is a really good explanation why so many good privates have so many kids with diagnoses.

No it’s no. PP’s kid is at a *SN* private. Kids with IEP-level issues generally do not get admitted to top mainstream privates.

But hey - I would LOVE to be wrong! If your kid got admitted to a mainstream private with an IEP from public, please post here.

[Anonymous]

[list]

Anonymous wrote:I switched from a MoCo public to a top private school in 1998. In the MoCo school I wasn’t aware of anyone with an ADD accommodation or meds (although I’m sure there were some). At the private school, there were numerous kids with extended time and/or adderall. Later in a top college, tons of adderall and lots of people deploying it strategically to enhance academic performance.

Bottom line I don’t think top private schools are a good sample in any way, because the factors and pressures that come with that population are so much bigger than any actual population changes in neurodiversity.

Growing up and attending different schools, I observed that the kids who had “minor” learning disabilities were usually the not super smart children of high achieving wealthy parents. Maybe things are different now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it's not about services. who cares if kids get services who need them?
it's about a complete redefinition of what and is not 'typical' and what must be 'accommodated'.
If half your class needs to be accommodated then maybe your school is wrong.

I kind of agree with you but this is really only true if half the class needs the SAME accommodation. If some need extra time and others need breaks and others need seating close to the teacher and others need seating somewhere else then these diagnoses/evals are actually helping folks to identify kids' individual needs and the real problem is some kids get their needs identified much later than others due to lack of access to services.

This is key. Instead of spending millions on standardized testing in elementary schools, we should be giving neuropsych evaluations to all kids in public schools. Early intervention will allow those kids to perform better when they hit middle school. Start the academic standardized testing after you identify and support learning differences for all.

I don’t know. It just makes the kid look more functional than they are. No one will accommodate them in the work force. And everyone will want to hire the kid who didn’t need accommodations. Having testing without accommodations probably resulted in more accurate results.

Reasonable accomodations are the law. We will see more flexibility in the workforce as diagnoses increase, not fewer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have ADHD and my kid does too and I often have the thought that maybe none of this is actually "neurodiversity" but just that society is set up for a certain type of brain and everyone else either struggles or needs outside assistance to cope. Like I know ADHD is real, I have experienced it, but sometimes I question whether it's actually a divergence from "typical" neurology or if actually it's fairly typical but just not optimal for a society structured the ways ours is.

I also think it's highly likely that my dad and my DH have undiagnosed ADHD but I think especially with my dad it looks different because he had a SAHM who ran his life for most of his working years so he looked brilliant and high functioning but if he'd had to pay his bills and dress himself and feed himself and take care of his kids and god forbid learn how to use email and text and remember 700 passwords he would have absolutely lost it

Just a thought

I think you’re right about all of this. Definitely applies to low support needs autism too. I’m a lawyer, and A LOT of my law school class would get an autism diagnosis if we took an assessment, I’m certain. But black and white thinking works out ok as a lawyer, and you can get away with having subpar social skills when everyone blames it on you being super smart (I went to Yale Law). It all depends on context.

Oh come on. People who make it to Yale Law, with some very few exceptions, do not actually have developmental disorders that seriously impact their ability to learn or socialize. The ones who do actually have ADHD or autism visibly struggle - drop out; get kicked out; or are the one kid who mysteriously cannot get a job. Being awkward and rude doesn’t mean you are autistic. Possibly they would nevertheless get a diagnosis today - but for those of us who actually have 2e kids whose behaviors and challenges mean they would never be accepted to a mainstream private, it’s extremely grating to hear these kinds of claims. (And yes, we have worked with private school admissions consultants who have told us this, so we know.)

op - my point is that the criteria for diagnosis is changing such that diagnoses are becoming wildly common among kids who in many ways blend in neurotypically.

Ie, they actually are neurotypical. There’s research on this: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34077611/

Oh and it doesn't say anyone is neurotypical.

when 30% of an elite private school claims to be neurodiverse the term has lost all meaning. that’s the point.

No it doesn’t, it just means that school has been attractive to the parents of children with neurodiversity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is in a SN private where everyone has a diagnosis of some type but "appears" superficially pretty typical. The reality is that none of us have been able to find an alternative to the SN school where we thought the needs could be served, and public was a disaster for all. The kids with diagnoses at most of these mainstream privates have pretty low-key needs in most cases. The kids at our school couldn't get into these places.

Oftentimes, kids who have milder displays also have a really hard time getting supports in public, and the only option is to send them to private in hopes it will be a better environment for them. That's why you see a lot of these kids there.

This is a really good explanation why so many good privates have so many kids with diagnoses.

No it’s no. PP’s kid is at a *SN* private. Kids with IEP-level issues generally do not get admitted to top mainstream privates.

But hey - I would LOVE to be wrong! If your kid got admitted to a mainstream private with an IEP from public, please post here.

My son has dyslexia and was admitted to St. Albans, Gonzaga, st. Andrews, Bullis, and Good Counsel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[list]

Anonymous wrote:I switched from a MoCo public to a top private school in 1998. In the MoCo school I wasn’t aware of anyone with an ADD accommodation or meds (although I’m sure there were some). At the private school, there were numerous kids with extended time and/or adderall. Later in a top college, tons of adderall and lots of people deploying it strategically to enhance academic performance.

Bottom line I don’t think top private schools are a good sample in any way, because the factors and pressures that come with that population are so much bigger than any actual population changes in neurodiversity.

Growing up and attending different schools, I observed that the kids who had “minor” learning disabilities were usually the not super smart children of high achieving wealthy parents. Maybe things are different now.

that definitely happens. then the school “places” them at a mid-tier SLAC. but that does not describe 1/3 of the kids at a top private.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it's not about services. who cares if kids get services who need them?
it's about a complete redefinition of what and is not 'typical' and what must be 'accommodated'.
If half your class needs to be accommodated then maybe your school is wrong.

I kind of agree with you but this is really only true if half the class needs the SAME accommodation. If some need extra time and others need breaks and others need seating close to the teacher and others need seating somewhere else then these diagnoses/evals are actually helping folks to identify kids' individual needs and the real problem is some kids get their needs identified much later than others due to lack of access to services.

This is key. Instead of spending millions on standardized testing in elementary schools, we should be giving neuropsych evaluations to all kids in public schools. Early intervention will allow those kids to perform better when they hit middle school. Start the academic standardized testing after you identify and support learning differences for all.

I don’t know. It just makes the kid look more functional than they are. No one will accommodate them in the work force. And everyone will want to hire the kid who didn’t need accommodations. Having testing without accommodations probably resulted in more accurate results.

Reasonable accomodations are the law. We will see more flexibility in the workforce as diagnoses increase, not fewer.

No, actually we will see the law change. I hate to bring Disney into it, but it’s pretty clear that intentionally or out of an exaggerated sense of frailty, people abuse disability accomodations. The workplace is not going to suddenly allow all workers to blow through deadlines and produce cr*p work product just because 1/3 of employees claim they are “neurospicy.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is in a SN private where everyone has a diagnosis of some type but "appears" superficially pretty typical. The reality is that none of us have been able to find an alternative to the SN school where we thought the needs could be served, and public was a disaster for all. The kids with diagnoses at most of these mainstream privates have pretty low-key needs in most cases. The kids at our school couldn't get into these places.

Oftentimes, kids who have milder displays also have a really hard time getting supports in public, and the only option is to send them to private in hopes it will be a better environment for them. That's why you see a lot of these kids there.

This is a really good explanation why so many good privates have so many kids with diagnoses.

No it’s no. PP’s kid is at a *SN* private. Kids with IEP-level issues generally do not get admitted to top mainstream privates.

But hey - I would LOVE to be wrong! If your kid got admitted to a mainstream private with an IEP from public, please post here.

My son has dyslexia and was admitted to St. Albans, Gonzaga, st. Andrews, Bullis, and Good Counsel.

with an IEP? what kind of accomodations were in the IEP in 8th grade that you showed the schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it's not about services. who cares if kids get services who need them?
it's about a complete redefinition of what and is not 'typical' and what must be 'accommodated'.
If half your class needs to be accommodated then maybe your school is wrong.

I kind of agree with you but this is really only true if half the class needs the SAME accommodation. If some need extra time and others need breaks and others need seating close to the teacher and others need seating somewhere else then these diagnoses/evals are actually helping folks to identify kids' individual needs and the real problem is some kids get their needs identified much later than others due to lack of access to services.

This is key. Instead of spending millions on standardized testing in elementary schools, we should be giving neuropsych evaluations to all kids in public schools. Early intervention will allow those kids to perform better when they hit middle school. Start the academic standardized testing after you identify and support learning differences for all.

I don’t know. It just makes the kid look more functional than they are. No one will accommodate them in the work force. And everyone will want to hire the kid who didn’t need accommodations. Having testing without accommodations probably resulted in more accurate results.

Reasonable accomodations are the law. We will see more flexibility in the workforce as diagnoses increase, not fewer.

No, actually we will see the law change.

Zero percent chance of this, especially as diagnoses increase. I’ll be willing to take this bet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is in a SN private where everyone has a diagnosis of some type but "appears" superficially pretty typical. The reality is that none of us have been able to find an alternative to the SN school where we thought the needs could be served, and public was a disaster for all. The kids with diagnoses at most of these mainstream privates have pretty low-key needs in most cases. The kids at our school couldn't get into these places.

Oftentimes, kids who have milder displays also have a really hard time getting supports in public, and the only option is to send them to private in hopes it will be a better environment for them. That's why you see a lot of these kids there.

This is a really good explanation why so many good privates have so many kids with diagnoses.

No it’s no. PP’s kid is at a *SN* private. Kids with IEP-level issues generally do not get admitted to top mainstream privates.

But hey - I would LOVE to be wrong! If your kid got admitted to a mainstream private with an IEP from public, please post here.

Does an IEP have to be disclosed during the application process?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it's not about services. who cares if kids get services who need them?
it's about a complete redefinition of what and is not 'typical' and what must be 'accommodated'.
If half your class needs to be accommodated then maybe your school is wrong.

I kind of agree with you but this is really only true if half the class needs the SAME accommodation. If some need extra time and others need breaks and others need seating close to the teacher and others need seating somewhere else then these diagnoses/evals are actually helping folks to identify kids' individual needs and the real problem is some kids get their needs identified much later than others due to lack of access to services.

This is key. Instead of spending millions on standardized testing in elementary schools, we should be giving neuropsych evaluations to all kids in public schools. Early intervention will allow those kids to perform better when they hit middle school. Start the academic standardized testing after you identify and support learning differences for all.

I don’t know. It just makes the kid look more functional than they are. No one will accommodate them in the work force. And everyone will want to hire the kid who didn’t need accommodations. Having testing without accommodations probably resulted in more accurate results.

Reasonable accomodations are the law. We will see more flexibility in the workforce as diagnoses increase, not fewer.

No, actually we will see the law change. I hate to bring Disney into it, but it’s pretty clear that intentionally or out of an exaggerated sense of frailty, people abuse disability accomodations. The workplace is not going to suddenly allow all workers to blow through deadlines and produce cr*p work product just because 1/3 of employees claim they are “neurospicy.”

You don’t know what the term “reasonable accommodation” means. School is not a job, it is a mandate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it's not about services. who cares if kids get services who need them?
it's about a complete redefinition of what and is not 'typical' and what must be 'accommodated'.
If half your class needs to be accommodated then maybe your school is wrong.

I kind of agree with you but this is really only true if half the class needs the SAME accommodation. If some need extra time and others need breaks and others need seating close to the teacher and others need seating somewhere else then these diagnoses/evals are actually helping folks to identify kids' individual needs and the real problem is some kids get their needs identified much later than others due to lack of access to services.

This is key. Instead of spending millions on standardized testing in elementary schools, we should be giving neuropsych evaluations to all kids in public schools. Early intervention will allow those kids to perform better when they hit middle school. Start the academic standardized testing after you identify and support learning differences for all.

I don’t know. It just makes the kid look more functional than they are. No one will accommodate them in the work force. And everyone will want to hire the kid who didn’t need accommodations. Having testing without accommodations probably resulted in more accurate results.

Reasonable accomodations are the law. We will see more flexibility in the workforce as diagnoses increase, not fewer.

No, actually we will see the law change.

Zero percent chance of this, especially as diagnoses increase. I’ll be willing to take this bet.

100% chance employers successfully defend terminating employees whom claim they cannot keep up with normal work duties due to “adult ADHD.” that’s the point - not the disability determination, but the accomodations they claim to need.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it's not about services. who cares if kids get services who need them?
it's about a complete redefinition of what and is not 'typical' and what must be 'accommodated'.
If half your class needs to be accommodated then maybe your school is wrong.

I kind of agree with you but this is really only true if half the class needs the SAME accommodation. If some need extra time and others need breaks and others need seating close to the teacher and others need seating somewhere else then these diagnoses/evals are actually helping folks to identify kids' individual needs and the real problem is some kids get their needs identified much later than others due to lack of access to services.

This is key. Instead of spending millions on standardized testing in elementary schools, we should be giving neuropsych evaluations to all kids in public schools. Early intervention will allow those kids to perform better when they hit middle school. Start the academic standardized testing after you identify and support learning differences for all.

I don’t know. It just makes the kid look more functional than they are. No one will accommodate them in the work force. And everyone will want to hire the kid who didn’t need accommodations. Having testing without accommodations probably resulted in more accurate results.

Reasonable accomodations are the law. We will see more flexibility in the workforce as diagnoses increase, not fewer.

Disability accommodation in the workforce does not include allowing someone twice as much time to complete tasks though. Employers are allowed to "discriminate" against candidates who does not meet fundamental job requirements. This means that a candidate in a wheelchair cannot sue the fire department for making the ability to walk without assistance a fundamental job requirement. A law firm will never be required to hire a lawyer who takes twice as long to write a memo or who expects extra time from a judge to respond to a filing. A bank is not required to accommodate dyscalculia if it keeps someone from performing the basic aspects of their job. And so on.

So yes people can request reasonable accommodations for things like ADHD from employers but this will be stuff like permitting an employee to use headphones in the office to block out distractions or ensure they have access to their meds while working. It does not include changing the basic requirements of a job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is in a SN private where everyone has a diagnosis of some type but "appears" superficially pretty typical. The reality is that none of us have been able to find an alternative to the SN school where we thought the needs could be served, and public was a disaster for all. The kids with diagnoses at most of these mainstream privates have pretty low-key needs in most cases. The kids at our school couldn't get into these places.

Oftentimes, kids who have milder displays also have a really hard time getting supports in public, and the only option is to send them to private in hopes it will be a better environment for them. That's why you see a lot of these kids there.

This is a really good explanation why so many good privates have so many kids with diagnoses.

No it’s no. PP’s kid is at a *SN* private. Kids with IEP-level issues generally do not get admitted to top mainstream privates.

But hey - I would LOVE to be wrong! If your kid got admitted to a mainstream private with an IEP from public, please post here.

Does an IEP have to be disclosed during the application process?

My understanding is that schools generally request results of any testing and accomodations. People talk on here about not disclosing the IEP but generally the feeling is that you need to know the school can provide that level of support. Now we ARE in an age of over-diagnosis so there may be cases where the IEP was dropped in elementary or by MS is just on paper and doesn’t really provide any supports.