Wall Street Journal on rampant growth in percentage of college students with “disabilities”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because it is illegal to discriminate against people with disabilities.

And if you don't think many people bear negative misconceptions about people who need testing accommodations (i.e. those with learning disabilities), read the previous posts in this thread.

Disclosure does not equal discrimination. Discrimination remains illegal when disclosure is required. Students usually disclose a variety of other facts that could lead to discrimination like race, religion, gender identity, and it is illegal to discriminate based on those factors.

But it not illegal to disclose race, gender, etc. Medical diagnoses are protected by HIPPA. It’s illegal to disclose these without a waiver.

But if your child had diabetes instead of ADHD, would you mind if colleges knew that they were permitted breaks during testing to check their blood sugar and have a snack? If your child had dyslexia, would you mind if colleges knew that they used audio recordings for the reading passages? Why does it only seem to be the parents of kids with ADHD diagnoses who are scared that someone will find out? Someone with ADHD is no different than anyone else with a chronic illness, and support and accomodations will be required throughout life. Why perpetuate the stigma and teach your kids to be ashamed?

Clearly you are completely unaware of the stigma associated with these learning disabilities. Would you be willing to take a risk that your child will be discriminated against?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most parents get their kids tested because they SEE them struggling, not before that happens. It is not a decision made quickly or easily.

Yes, this "advantages" upper SES families. That is a deep flaw in our system, not something awful that those families are doing to get an edge on lower income kids. They have more resources to help their children. No crime there.

I think the posters on this thread who have been talking about their child's "real" disability diagnosed in elementary versus those supposedly shady diagnoses made in high school are pretty gross and morally bankrupt. They come across as annoyed that lower-income kids (who are far more likely to be diagnosed later in their lives) are horning in on some privilege they unlocked.

You can't simultaneously support accommodation for your own child while decrying those for kids whose diagnoses were made on a timeline different than your own child's. Either you support accommodation for disability or you don't.

Who said anything about lower income kids? The ones I know who did this are upper class.

That's because you hang out with wealthy people, FFS. It is your selection bias However, in general it is poorer kids who are more likely to get diagnosed later, so what you are really complaining about when you complain about accommodation for high school diagnoses is accommodation for kids less advantaged than your own, and that is gross.

Why would you say it is gross if I had no idea I was complaining about that? Like you said, I hang out with wealthy people and that is who I was complaining about. You seem uptight.

Gross and thoughtless, then.

Uptight and unhappy then.

You are really not doing much to dispel the idea that many parents are just seeking to game the system. Why are you so threatened by the idea that a child other than yours might get an accommodation? If caring about what happens to kids other than my own makes me uptight and unhappy in your eyes, I can deal with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because it is illegal to discriminate against people with disabilities.

And if you don't think many people bear negative misconceptions about people who need testing accommodations (i.e. those with learning disabilities), read the previous posts in this thread.

Disclosure does not equal discrimination. Discrimination remains illegal when disclosure is required. Students usually disclose a variety of other facts that could lead to discrimination like race, religion, gender identity, and it is illegal to discriminate based on those factors.

But it not illegal to disclose race, gender, etc. Medical diagnoses are protected by HIPPA. It’s illegal to disclose these without a waiver.

But if your child had diabetes instead of ADHD, would you mind if colleges knew that they were permitted breaks during testing to check their blood sugar and have a snack? If your child had dyslexia, would you mind if colleges knew that they used audio recordings for the reading passages? Why does it only seem to be the parents of kids with ADHD diagnoses who are scared that someone will find out? Someone with ADHD is no different than anyone else with a chronic illness, and support and accomodations will be required throughout life. Why perpetuate the stigma and teach your kids to be ashamed?

There are all sorts of illnesses with a stigma. It's unfortunate, but it's the case. My diabetic child might not have a problem with disclosing that diagnosis, but my child with AIDS or hepatitis might care since those illness are more stigmatized than diabetes is. A child with depression might be more willing to have his diagnosis disclosed than a child with anorexia or OCD.

My child is choosing to get accommodations based solely on a diagnosis of dyslexia and is preferring to keep the anxiety diagnosis un-disclosed, even though the anxiety is probably a bigger player in the accommodations DC needs. My DC is "lucky" to be able to do this - as anyone who read this thread can see, there are plenty of people who seem to think anxiety isn't real or is something a child should just suck up and boot strap the way to success. Rather than as deserving of support and tools to find success as dyslexia is.

[Anonymous]

I would be okay with testing accommodations if the student's test score and academic transcripts indicated that testing accomodations were used. What isn't fair is that people want both the advantage of testing accomodations and the privacy of pretending that those accomodations were not used and that their child was able to take the same exact test in the exact same conditions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most parents get their kids tested because they SEE them struggling, not before that happens. It is not a decision made quickly or easily.

Yes, this "advantages" upper SES families. That is a deep flaw in our system, not something awful that those families are doing to get an edge on lower income kids. They have more resources to help their children. No crime there.

I think the posters on this thread who have been talking about their child's "real" disability diagnosed in elementary versus those supposedly shady diagnoses made in high school are pretty gross and morally bankrupt. They come across as annoyed that lower-income kids (who are far more likely to be diagnosed later in their lives) are horning in on some privilege they unlocked.

You can't simultaneously support accommodation for your own child while decrying those for kids whose diagnoses were made on a timeline different than your own child's. Either you support accommodation for disability or you don't.

Who said anything about lower income kids? The ones I know who did this are upper class.

That's because you hang out with wealthy people, FFS. It is your selection bias However, in general it is poorer kids who are more likely to get diagnosed later, so what you are really complaining about when you complain about accommodation for high school diagnoses is accommodation for kids less advantaged than your own, and that is gross.

Why would you say it is gross if I had no idea I was complaining about that? Like you said, I hang out with wealthy people and that is who I was complaining about. You seem uptight.

Gross and thoughtless, then.

Uptight and unhappy then.

You are really not doing much to dispel the idea that many parents are just seeking to game the system. Why are you so threatened by the idea that a child other than yours might get an accommodation? If caring about what happens to kids other than my own makes me uptight and unhappy in your eyes, I can deal with that.

I am not threatened at all. My kid has accommodations and got them legitimately as a 2nd grader. Its the ones who want to get a good score on the SAT who suddenly feel the need to get a diagnosis. That is clearly gaming the system and just hurting those of us who are playing by the rules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would be okay with testing accommodations if the student's test score and academic transcripts indicated that testing accomodations were used. What isn't fair is that people want both the advantage of testing accomodations and the privacy of pretending that those accomodations were not used and that their child was able to take the same exact test in the exact same conditions.

Why do you feel the need to have your kid compete against a kid with special needs. You are basically saying you want your kid to have an advantage with this statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most parents get their kids tested because they SEE them struggling, not before that happens. It is not a decision made quickly or easily.

Yes, this "advantages" upper SES families. That is a deep flaw in our system, not something awful that those families are doing to get an edge on lower income kids. They have more resources to help their children. No crime there.

I think the posters on this thread who have been talking about their child's "real" disability diagnosed in elementary versus those supposedly shady diagnoses made in high school are pretty gross and morally bankrupt. They come across as annoyed that lower-income kids (who are far more likely to be diagnosed later in their lives) are horning in on some privilege they unlocked.

You can't simultaneously support accommodation for your own child while decrying those for kids whose diagnoses were made on a timeline different than your own child's. Either you support accommodation for disability or you don't.

Who said anything about lower income kids? The ones I know who did this are upper class.

That's because you hang out with wealthy people, FFS. It is your selection bias However, in general it is poorer kids who are more likely to get diagnosed later, so what you are really complaining about when you complain about accommodation for high school diagnoses is accommodation for kids less advantaged than your own, and that is gross.

Why would you say it is gross if I had no idea I was complaining about that? Like you said, I hang out with wealthy people and that is who I was complaining about. You seem uptight.

Gross and thoughtless, then.

Uptight and unhappy then.

You are really not doing much to dispel the idea that many parents are just seeking to game the system. Why are you so threatened by the idea that a child other than yours might get an accommodation? If caring about what happens to kids other than my own makes me uptight and unhappy in your eyes, I can deal with that.

I am not threatened at all. My kid has accommodations and got them legitimately as a 2nd grader. Its the ones who want to get a good score on the SAT who suddenly feel the need to get a diagnosis. That is clearly gaming the system and just hurting those of us who are playing by the rules.

If you aren't threatened, then why do you care so much? Clearly you are threatened, and you don't want those kids who got diagnosed later in their lives to get accommodation because the accommodations you pushed for earlier in your child's life might not be such an advantage anymore. That is indeed gross behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most parents get their kids tested because they SEE them struggling, not before that happens. It is not a decision made quickly or easily.

Yes, this "advantages" upper SES families. That is a deep flaw in our system, not something awful that those families are doing to get an edge on lower income kids. They have more resources to help their children. No crime there.

I think the posters on this thread who have been talking about their child's "real" disability diagnosed in elementary versus those supposedly shady diagnoses made in high school are pretty gross and morally bankrupt. They come across as annoyed that lower-income kids (who are far more likely to be diagnosed later in their lives) are horning in on some privilege they unlocked.

You can't simultaneously support accommodation for your own child while decrying those for kids whose diagnoses were made on a timeline different than your own child's. Either you support accommodation for disability or you don't.

Who said anything about lower income kids? The ones I know who did this are upper class.

That's because you hang out with wealthy people, FFS. It is your selection bias However, in general it is poorer kids who are more likely to get diagnosed later, so what you are really complaining about when you complain about accommodation for high school diagnoses is accommodation for kids less advantaged than your own, and that is gross.

Why would you say it is gross if I had no idea I was complaining about that? Like you said, I hang out with wealthy people and that is who I was complaining about. You seem uptight.

Gross and thoughtless, then.

Uptight and unhappy then.

You are really not doing much to dispel the idea that many parents are just seeking to game the system. Why are you so threatened by the idea that a child other than yours might get an accommodation? If caring about what happens to kids other than my own makes me uptight and unhappy in your eyes, I can deal with that.

I am not threatened at all. My kid has accommodations and got them legitimately as a 2nd grader. Its the ones who want to get a good score on the SAT who suddenly feel the need to get a diagnosis. That is clearly gaming the system and just hurting those of us who are playing by the rules.

There is also a school of thought that the more suspect diagnoses are those made earlier because they are more likely to be the result of pushy and educated parents. Maybe you could stop trying to make every diagnosis other than your own child's suspect and accept that you aren't the arbitrator of disability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most parents get their kids tested because they SEE them struggling, not before that happens. It is not a decision made quickly or easily.

Yes, this "advantages" upper SES families. That is a deep flaw in our system, not something awful that those families are doing to get an edge on lower income kids. They have more resources to help their children. No crime there.

I think the posters on this thread who have been talking about their child's "real" disability diagnosed in elementary versus those supposedly shady diagnoses made in high school are pretty gross and morally bankrupt. They come across as annoyed that lower-income kids (who are far more likely to be diagnosed later in their lives) are horning in on some privilege they unlocked.

You can't simultaneously support accommodation for your own child while decrying those for kids whose diagnoses were made on a timeline different than your own child's. Either you support accommodation for disability or you don't.

Who said anything about lower income kids? The ones I know who did this are upper class.

That's because you hang out with wealthy people, FFS. It is your selection bias However, in general it is poorer kids who are more likely to get diagnosed later, so what you are really complaining about when you complain about accommodation for high school diagnoses is accommodation for kids less advantaged than your own, and that is gross.

Why would you say it is gross if I had no idea I was complaining about that? Like you said, I hang out with wealthy people and that is who I was complaining about. You seem uptight.

Gross and thoughtless, then.

Uptight and unhappy then.

You are really not doing much to dispel the idea that many parents are just seeking to game the system. Why are you so threatened by the idea that a child other than yours might get an accommodation? If caring about what happens to kids other than my own makes me uptight and unhappy in your eyes, I can deal with that.

I am not threatened at all. My kid has accommodations and got them legitimately as a 2nd grader. Its the ones who want to get a good score on the SAT who suddenly feel the need to get a diagnosis. That is clearly gaming the system and just hurting those of us who are playing by the rules.

There is also a school of thought that the more suspect diagnoses are those made earlier because they are more likely to be the result of pushy and educated parents. Maybe you could stop trying to make every diagnosis other than your own child's suspect and accept that you aren't the arbitrator of disability.

PP here. To be clear, I think the idea of any diagnosis getting assessed as "legitimate" or not is awful. But since that PP seems to think getting a diagnosis early somehow makes her child's disability more valid than others, I wanted to point out that there are people who view early diagnoses more skeptically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because it is illegal to discriminate against people with disabilities.

And if you don't think many people bear negative misconceptions about people who need testing accommodations (i.e. those with learning disabilities), read the previous posts in this thread.

Disclosure does not equal discrimination. Discrimination remains illegal when disclosure is required. Students usually disclose a variety of other facts that could lead to discrimination like race, religion, gender identity, and it is illegal to discriminate based on those factors.

But it not illegal to disclose race, gender, etc. Medical diagnoses are protected by HIPPA. It’s illegal to disclose these without a waiver.

But if your child had diabetes instead of ADHD, would you mind if colleges knew that they were permitted breaks during testing to check their blood sugar and have a snack? If your child had dyslexia, would you mind if colleges knew that they used audio recordings for the reading passages? Why does it only seem to be the parents of kids with ADHD diagnoses who are scared that someone will find out? Someone with ADHD is no different than anyone else with a chronic illness, and support and accomodations will be required throughout life. Why perpetuate the stigma and teach your kids to be ashamed?

PP back. I have a kid at TJ and am very open IRL about my kid being 2e. Because not enough people there are, and when you start connecting with other parents, and sharing resources and supporting each other, it is so much easier, and you feel so much less isolated. I am also the PP who said that I think my kid should disclose ADHD on his college applications. But that is my choice as a parent. And is transitioning into being my kid’s choice as he matures. I am not ashamed of my kids’ (plural) ADHD diagnoses.

But, ADHD is a medical diagnosis. For which my kid sees a medical doctor on a regular basis and takes medication. HIPPA is their for a reason. And as your post shows, discrimination is real. I choose to be open about ADHD for exactly the reasons you cite. There should be no stigma. And the more people who talk about their experience, the less stigma there will me. I want other parents of of 2e kids to know, TJ can work for 2e kids. Here is how we made it work, if you are looking for resources. Other parents and kids have the right to handle the disclosure of their medical information. And if you think that every kid who applies to college is open about dyslexia, you don’t know many dyslexics who apply to college. They face a similar dilemma on disclosure. People with diabetes should also be allowed to decide whether to disclose. And I am sure all of them don’t. HIPPA is there for a reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most parents get their kids tested because they SEE them struggling, not before that happens. It is not a decision made quickly or easily.

Yes, this "advantages" upper SES families. That is a deep flaw in our system, not something awful that those families are doing to get an edge on lower income kids. They have more resources to help their children. No crime there.

I think the posters on this thread who have been talking about their child's "real" disability diagnosed in elementary versus those supposedly shady diagnoses made in high school are pretty gross and morally bankrupt. They come across as annoyed that lower-income kids (who are far more likely to be diagnosed later in their lives) are horning in on some privilege they unlocked.

You can't simultaneously support accommodation for your own child while decrying those for kids whose diagnoses were made on a timeline different than your own child's. Either you support accommodation for disability or you don't.

Who said anything about lower income kids? The ones I know who did this are upper class.

That's because you hang out with wealthy people, FFS. It is your selection bias However, in general it is poorer kids who are more likely to get diagnosed later, so what you are really complaining about when you complain about accommodation for high school diagnoses is accommodation for kids less advantaged than your own, and that is gross.

Why would you say it is gross if I had no idea I was complaining about that? Like you said, I hang out with wealthy people and that is who I was complaining about. You seem uptight.

Gross and thoughtless, then.

Uptight and unhappy then.

You are really not doing much to dispel the idea that many parents are just seeking to game the system. Why are you so threatened by the idea that a child other than yours might get an accommodation? If caring about what happens to kids other than my own makes me uptight and unhappy in your eyes, I can deal with that.

I am not threatened at all. My kid has accommodations and got them legitimately as a 2nd grader. Its the ones who want to get a good score on the SAT who suddenly feel the need to get a diagnosis. That is clearly gaming the system and just hurting those of us who are playing by the rules.

There is also a school of thought that the more suspect diagnoses are those made earlier because they are more likely to be the result of pushy and educated parents. Maybe you could stop trying to make every diagnosis other than your own child's suspect and accept that you aren't the arbitrator of disability.

Hello again. We got our diagnosis at age 7 when teachers expressed concern. No pushy parent antics here. In fact the teacher provided accommodations before our official diagnosis as it took time to get the appointment with the psychologist, etc. And we re-evaluated again in middle school -- same diagnosis. So no reason for any suspicion with this early diagnosis. Nice try.

College Board and ACT are the ones who find late diagnoses suspect. And rightly so. I don't believe for a second that so many students can suddenly at age 15 discover that they have ADHD. Yes there are a few instances where it can happen, but not at the level it is occurring. I do buy the middle school diagnoses, however, because I know that with my DS, middle school became a much bigger challenge with having multiple classes/teachers, so I can see how the symptoms can be more obvious all of a sudden. And in 6th grade, SAT tests are not on parents' radar as much as in 9th or 10th grade.

Finally, with regard to financially disadvantaged families. If they are truly disadvantaged, they are likely in a public school. Public schools will provide testing for kids who truly have issues. I know if it were my son (who was in a private), he would have gotten the free testing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be okay with testing accommodations if the student's test score and academic transcripts indicated that testing accomodations were used. What isn't fair is that people want both the advantage of testing accomodations and the privacy of pretending that those accomodations were not used and that their child was able to take the same exact test in the exact same conditions.

Why do you feel the need to have your kid compete against a kid with special needs. You are basically saying you want your kid to have an advantage with this statement.

Not the pp, but why should a kid with typical ability who has worked hard to achieve an SAT score of 1350 and a GPA of 3.7 under standard time constraints, often running out of time on tests (because, you know, that actually happens to typical kids too) lose a spot at a college to a kid who had extra or unlimited time to turn their 1350 into a 1500 and their 3.7 into a 4.0? There is no such thing as a level playing field when kids who are perfectly capable are getting accomodations to get ahead. The college has no idea who needed or didn’t need accomodations, or who got or didn’t get accomodations, and therefore can’t judge who will be most successful in their program.

[Anonymous]

If 20% to 25% are diagnosed w disability plus let’s add another 10% to 15% for the undiagnosed, wouldn’t this be the new ‘normal’ and hence no one should be given accomodations or everyone should be? It is also perplexing to hear those whose kids get accomodation to be so against everyone getting extended time also.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be okay with testing accommodations if the student's test score and academic transcripts indicated that testing accomodations were used. What isn't fair is that people want both the advantage of testing accomodations and the privacy of pretending that those accomodations were not used and that their child was able to take the same exact test in the exact same conditions.

Why do you feel the need to have your kid compete against a kid with special needs. You are basically saying you want your kid to have an advantage with this statement.

Not the pp, but why should a kid with typical ability who has worked hard to achieve an SAT score of 1350 and a GPA of 3.7 under standard time constraints, often running out of time on tests (because, you know, that actually happens to typical kids too) lose a spot at a college to a kid who had extra or unlimited time to turn their 1350 into a 1500 and their 3.7 into a 4.0? There is no such thing as a level playing field when kids who are perfectly capable are getting accomodations to get ahead. The college has no idea who needed or didn’t need accommodations, or who got or didn’t get accomodations, and therefore can’t judge who will be most successful in their program.

Well to bad. The kids who actually have the diagnosis have a condition that prevents them from demon strating their true capabilities. Your kid does not have that disadvantage. Hence the extra time for the disadvantaged kid to create the level playing field. I am sorry your kid is too dumb to get a good SAT score. That is just the way it is. Mine happens to be gifted and the extra time gives him the opportunity to demonstrated that he is.

[Anonymous]

A friend’s kid has diabetes and got 2x time accomodation at SAT. Even my friend was perplexed about why the kid got time accomodation - what should have happened was that the kid should instead get extra time between tests to check blood levels etc but did not need extra time to finish the test. Needless to say kid got perfect score.