U.S. task force recommending anxiety screening in kids 8 and older(wbur.org)
wbur.org
U.S. task force recommending anxiety screening in kids 8 and older
https://www.wbur.org/news/2022/05/16/anxiety-children-adolescents-screening-school-psychologist-explains
136 comments
Anecdote: (first of all, my family and I still get along fine) I was a regular happy 8 year old child who wasn't very interested in hours of homework after school. My very academic family found this highly troubling and diagnosed me with ADD before any doctor did, as is fashion for some types. In the process of justifying this, I was given EEG scans, and quizzed by a strange man in a dark room with my parents, repeatedly asking "do you ever feel anxiety?" I did not know what this word meant, so they carefully explained to me what anxiety was, worrying about something you're not sure what the cause is, a feeling of dread, being scared of the unknown... I stumbled to say no, I have no experience of that, I can always tell what I worry about and am otherwise happy. The conversation continued essentially along the lines of "are you surrre? are you really sure?" Cue 8 years of meds which made me very anxious of failure in school and eliminated my appetite, causing my growth to nearly halt and fall within the bottom percentile of height and weight within a couple years, despite growing at a very average rate beforehand.
I had a similar experience. I was heavily medicated by 6 or 7. Interestingly also had the same exact issues with low height and weight. I think if I hadn't forced my way off of meds around 13 I would have been permanantly stunted. I'm still shorter than almost every other male in my family but not much.
I believe that I was basically a functioning meth addict for most of my childhood who thought I had never done drugs.
Ironically I think the kind of thinking that decides all kids need intensive psychological screening at 8 is an example of the types of patterns for how we run our society that cause lots of people to develop anxiety issues.
Or who knows, maybe we are just one bureaucratic process away from everyone finally being happy.
I believe that I was basically a functioning meth addict for most of my childhood who thought I had never done drugs.
Ironically I think the kind of thinking that decides all kids need intensive psychological screening at 8 is an example of the types of patterns for how we run our society that cause lots of people to develop anxiety issues.
Or who knows, maybe we are just one bureaucratic process away from everyone finally being happy.
OPs description sounds less like "intensive psychological screening" and more like "intensive sales pitch".
I would hate my parents for this. It sounds like you were a very normal child.
I would keep children away from doctors whose only solution is medication. Much better that they weather through mental issues and come out a normal adult. Medication when taken young, which is almost certainly what this would cause, can be very hard to get off of
Perhaps rather than medication we could take a closer look at why children are so anxious in the first place.
I envy countries that focus on Gross National Happiness vs GDP.
I envy countries that focus on Gross National Happiness vs GDP.
The only country that focuses on GNH is Bhutan. The same country which exiled an entire ethnicity constituting 20% of its population in the 1990s. [1] UN happiness report ranks Bhutan at 97th, Finland being first and the US at 17.[2] Bhutan’s GNH campaign is a clever marketing strategy by an autocratic government to boost its tourism revenue (main source of income), cover up its frequent human right violations, and abject poverty of the common people all at the same time. Romanticising Bhutan is a new form of orientialism.
1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhutanese_refugees
2. https://worldhappiness.report/ed/2022/happiness-benevolence-...
1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhutanese_refugees
2. https://worldhappiness.report/ed/2022/happiness-benevolence-...
I didn’t realize only Bhutan had this metric. I was referring to Scandinavian countries which seem to be the context I’ve heard it in, but must be mistaken. In any event, I envy the concept and wish more countries adopted it.
You might have a very skewed view of those countries. Things happen there too, you just don't hear about it. Policies proposals that would draw bipartisan condemnation in the US and be unanimously rejected across the aisle might not even get any meaningful opposition in the "happy nordics".
Here's a very troubling example that is happening right now:
Denmark is currently deporting back to syria all of its syrian refugees. They revoked their residency almost overnight and declared that Syria is now safe even if the Civil war is far from over. Considering that the groups that those refugees originally escaped from are still in power (whether it's Assad or the islamists), it basically means certain death for a lot of them (even those lucky enough to avoid reprisals will probably end up forcibly conscripted). They also argue that Damascus is completely safe for refugees who specifically escaped the syrian government security services (gestapo lite)... because that same government is now fully in control and has pacified the entire region.
>In 2019, the Danish prime minister declared that Denmark wanted ‘zero asylum seekers’. That was a really strong signal* >That's really good news," Mr Tesfaye said in February. "Corona, of course, plays a role, but I think first and foremost, it's because of our strict foreign policy. Many of those who come here do not need protection at all." >The government has set a target of zero, arguing that the money saved can go towards welfare[0]
The most troubling part is that all of this is happening under a "moderate" left wing government with pretty wide support and little to no actual backlash. So yeah, I'd be hesitant to use nordic countries as a model for everything. It's a lot of tradeoffs and the welfare state can be sweet for some, but I know that personally as a muslim I'd much rather live elsewhere
Here's a very troubling example that is happening right now:
Denmark is currently deporting back to syria all of its syrian refugees. They revoked their residency almost overnight and declared that Syria is now safe even if the Civil war is far from over. Considering that the groups that those refugees originally escaped from are still in power (whether it's Assad or the islamists), it basically means certain death for a lot of them (even those lucky enough to avoid reprisals will probably end up forcibly conscripted). They also argue that Damascus is completely safe for refugees who specifically escaped the syrian government security services (gestapo lite)... because that same government is now fully in control and has pacified the entire region.
>In 2019, the Danish prime minister declared that Denmark wanted ‘zero asylum seekers’. That was a really strong signal* >That's really good news," Mr Tesfaye said in February. "Corona, of course, plays a role, but I think first and foremost, it's because of our strict foreign policy. Many of those who come here do not need protection at all." >The government has set a target of zero, arguing that the money saved can go towards welfare[0]
The most troubling part is that all of this is happening under a "moderate" left wing government with pretty wide support and little to no actual backlash. So yeah, I'd be hesitant to use nordic countries as a model for everything. It's a lot of tradeoffs and the welfare state can be sweet for some, but I know that personally as a muslim I'd much rather live elsewhere
> You might have a very skewed view of those countries. Things happen there too, you just don't hear about it. Policies proposals that would draw bipartisan condemnation in the US and be unanimously rejected across the aisle might not even get any meaningful opposition in the "happy nordics".
This is silly. The US didn't take remotely close to the same amount of refugees per capita in the first place. They just let them die at the border instead.
> all of its syrian refugees.
I'm glad you brought up this topic, but saying "all" is quite an exaggeration, although that doesn't make it any less horrible.
This is silly. The US didn't take remotely close to the same amount of refugees per capita in the first place. They just let them die at the border instead.
> all of its syrian refugees.
I'm glad you brought up this topic, but saying "all" is quite an exaggeration, although that doesn't make it any less horrible.
A huge number thinks they will die because of global warming. Relentless propaganda aimed at kids takes its toll.
I ask this genuinely and non-rhetorically: are they wrong? Everything seems to say that we are running out of time to avert climate disaster, and they're the ones who will have to live with the consequences if we fail.
Climate change will kill more people than serial killers or sharks that people also get seriously afraid off. But it’s not going to cause the kind of society ending harm that people often fear.
It’s hard to communicate bad stuff can be bad without it being WWIII kinds of bad. Imagine time traveling before the pandemic to your younger self in say late 2018 and describing what’s going to happen in detail, in such a way that your younger self feels the same way about it as you do right now.
It’s hard to communicate bad stuff can be bad without it being WWIII kinds of bad. Imagine time traveling before the pandemic to your younger self in say late 2018 and describing what’s going to happen in detail, in such a way that your younger self feels the same way about it as you do right now.
There is certainly nothing in the IPCC reports suggesting a disaster anywhere close to level.
It will be a serious problem that will take big efforts to solve, but on a civilizational level, it will be much more of an inconvenience than a disaster.
>"Everything seems to say..."
What I just wrote above doesn't go viral or generate millions of clicks. For that you need predictions of epic disaster. So epic disaster stories are what go viral, show up everywhere, makes it easy to conclude that "everything seems to say" that.
It will be a serious problem that will take big efforts to solve, but on a civilizational level, it will be much more of an inconvenience than a disaster.
>"Everything seems to say..."
What I just wrote above doesn't go viral or generate millions of clicks. For that you need predictions of epic disaster. So epic disaster stories are what go viral, show up everywhere, makes it easy to conclude that "everything seems to say" that.
How many times can we be running out of time before it's reasonable to be doubtful of the message? I think there have been at least 4 "end of the world" scenarios in my rather short lifetime and there's always a new proposed date after each one is proven false.
If you’re thinking of CFCs, we banned CFCs to solve the problem.
If you’re thinking of nukes, we had New START, SALT, NPT, etc. and a shit ton of activism which significantly reduced the threat.
If you’re thinking of past claims that we’re “past the point of no return” for climate change, those claims were correct. We passed the point of no return for avoiding extreme weather due to climate change. Then we passed the point of no return for 1C of warming. Now we are nearing the point of no return for 1.5C of warming. Things are getting worse for the climate, which is why people keep saying that things are getting worse for the climate.
That said, apathy is counterproductive. We need hopeful children and adults to drive political and technological change. Therapy or other tools for reducing anxiety (e.g. exercise) could help people be hopeful.
If you’re thinking of nukes, we had New START, SALT, NPT, etc. and a shit ton of activism which significantly reduced the threat.
If you’re thinking of past claims that we’re “past the point of no return” for climate change, those claims were correct. We passed the point of no return for avoiding extreme weather due to climate change. Then we passed the point of no return for 1C of warming. Now we are nearing the point of no return for 1.5C of warming. Things are getting worse for the climate, which is why people keep saying that things are getting worse for the climate.
That said, apathy is counterproductive. We need hopeful children and adults to drive political and technological change. Therapy or other tools for reducing anxiety (e.g. exercise) could help people be hopeful.
Kids should learn something tangible and useful, that could help them develop tools to meet the challenges of the future. Instead they are just constantly being told that they are doomed and in how many ways they could help by eschew consuming things and not having kids themselves.
"Out of time to avert climate disaster" means beyond the point of no return where no reasonable act can reverse it. It does not mean we are suffering from extreme consequences currently..
I think what parent is getting at is: Year after year, we're always only a few years away from Climate Change being irreversible. The constant "We're almost beyond the point of no return, but not quite" declarations remind me of the Truck Almost Hits A Pole meme[1]. Or like preachers predicting "Jesus's return is just around the corner" every year for the last 2000 years. At some point message fatigue sets in and you start tuning it out. I know it's impossible to predict exactly when that point is, but why is it always "a few years away"?
1: https://imgur.com/r/gifs/kuplW0m
1: https://imgur.com/r/gifs/kuplW0m
It's not a few years away, you're just confounding different messages. It's past the point of no return for 1C and for getting extreme weather. NOW what's not that far away is 1.5C.
[deleted]
There were many claims that we would be suffering from extreme consequences by now already, zero of which have materialized.
That is not to say that ALL predictions are necessarily wrong, but enough to be wary of the fear mongering. Especially since dramatic predictions probably yield more government money.
That is not to say that ALL predictions are necessarily wrong, but enough to be wary of the fear mongering. Especially since dramatic predictions probably yield more government money.
>zero of which have materialized.
Uh, really? There are any number of natural disasters that have been made many times worse by climate change, but ignorance is bliss I guess...
Uh, really? There are any number of natural disasters that have been made many times worse by climate change, but ignorance is bliss I guess...
I still stand by my point.
"How many times can we be running out of time before it's reasonable to be doubtful of the message? I think there have been at least 4 "end of the world" scenarios in my rather short lifetime and there's always a new proposed date after each one is proven false."
It can be compared to, "How many times can we change the solar system model before it's reasonable to be doubtful of the message? I think there have been at least 4 changes in what we believe to be the center of our universe in my rather short lifetime and there's always a new proposed center after each one is proven false."
It is a science. It is scientifically proven that the damage we have done to our climate is going to eventually cause very bad consequences. The only question is when, which is very difficult to pin down with constantly changing conditions. It's like trying to identify when the next tornado will hit. You don't know precisely when, you might have some false positives, but you know it will happen. You don't get to say, "Well this is the fifth time the meteorologist has told me to evacuate, I have reason to believe this is politically motivated".
It can be compared to, "How many times can we change the solar system model before it's reasonable to be doubtful of the message? I think there have been at least 4 changes in what we believe to be the center of our universe in my rather short lifetime and there's always a new proposed center after each one is proven false."
It is a science. It is scientifically proven that the damage we have done to our climate is going to eventually cause very bad consequences. The only question is when, which is very difficult to pin down with constantly changing conditions. It's like trying to identify when the next tornado will hit. You don't know precisely when, you might have some false positives, but you know it will happen. You don't get to say, "Well this is the fifth time the meteorologist has told me to evacuate, I have reason to believe this is politically motivated".
We’re perfectly inline with exxons predictions of warming made in the 80s [0]. From the science, the predictions are unwavering, clear and project difficult times for the latter 21st century. It’s a constant that the news will report doom whenever it can, but the fundamental science never changes.
[0] https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EyKnDRfUYAAp4Nt.jpg
[0] https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EyKnDRfUYAAp4Nt.jpg
They really aren’t. It took global political action to avert several past global disasters (CFCs and nuclear weapons for example - although we aren’t totally in the clear on that one yet). Climate change is simply harder because oil is more useful than spray cans and nukes.
Even the top estimates have less than a hundred million dead, mostly in developing nations, but kids in Houston have anxiety over that? Sounds unlikely. Surely sounds even more unlikely that kids living with MAD over their heads had less anxiety.
It won't be like a global holocaust but it will cause massive economic and social disruption mostly in places that didn't cause it.
Yeah it’s jarring when you see what teenagers post online about this. They really believe that they and their friends are going to drop dead from climate change.
Given the number of "Once in a lifetime events" I as an early 20 year old have lived through, I entirely understand the feeling of everything is going to collapse.
The house is made of cards, and there are people running around trying collect more cards than everyone else - even when those are at the base. Meanwhile, someones turned up the AC at one end of the house and the heater at the other, and we've got weird air currents blowing every which way.
The house is made of cards, and there are people running around trying collect more cards than everyone else - even when those are at the base. Meanwhile, someones turned up the AC at one end of the house and the heater at the other, and we've got weird air currents blowing every which way.
Except you haven't really lived through anything serious at all, compared to previous generations. I find that kind of notion rather embarrassing.
(I mentor highschool students)
I have seen it a lot more of "why even try because our quality of life is going into the toilet" and less of "we are all going to die"
I have seen it a lot more of "why even try because our quality of life is going into the toilet" and less of "we are all going to die"
Reminds me of high school in the cold war: "Why bother? The bombs are coming any day!"
That is why I disapprove of all the fear-mongering. I lived through that as a teen, and it was very depressing. I honestly thought I would never see my 30ieth birthday, either because of nukes or because of the hole in the ozone layer.
[deleted]
Is there any substantiation to this claim?
You mean about the relentless propaganda, or the kids living in fear? Not sure how you could not notice it so far? I have also seen articles citing a significant number of kids being psychologically impacted by it.
Not sure how active for example "Fridays For Future" is in your country?
Relentless propaganda: if you have kids in school, odds are any event they plan will be littered with climate change stuff, for example. My kids school decided cakes for the next event will have to be vegan because it is better for the climate, for example. Science projects will be about climate something. And that is just school, media is on a whole other level.
The only thing more popular atm is the transgender craze.
Not sure how active for example "Fridays For Future" is in your country?
Relentless propaganda: if you have kids in school, odds are any event they plan will be littered with climate change stuff, for example. My kids school decided cakes for the next event will have to be vegan because it is better for the climate, for example. Science projects will be about climate something. And that is just school, media is on a whole other level.
The only thing more popular atm is the transgender craze.
Yes, big (checks notes) renewable energy, using their (checks notes) global economic dominance over energy companies to manufacture consent to (checks notes) reduce pollution, prevent ecosystem collapse for (checks notes) communism
Renewable energy IS big business, and most of the money comes from governments.
I didn't even make such references, but your snark claiming renewable energy couldn't possibly have ulterior motives makes no sense.
It is also not a given that it reduces pollution. Until very recently, solar panels cost more energy to make than they would yield. I've hear claims it is different now, but I can not yet buy a solar panel for my house that would make economic sense. That seems odd, because if they would yield a net win in energy, it should be available to buy.
In my country they will now also cut down a historic wood to make space for wind power.
Hydrological dams are also famous for wrecking havoc with ecosystems.
Most ecological issues that are attributed to climate change these days are actually caused by humans destroying nature directly - cutting down woods, eliminating safe spaces for animals and insects, messing with rivers, building cities that let the ground sack into the see, stuff like that.
I didn't even make such references, but your snark claiming renewable energy couldn't possibly have ulterior motives makes no sense.
It is also not a given that it reduces pollution. Until very recently, solar panels cost more energy to make than they would yield. I've hear claims it is different now, but I can not yet buy a solar panel for my house that would make economic sense. That seems odd, because if they would yield a net win in energy, it should be available to buy.
In my country they will now also cut down a historic wood to make space for wind power.
Hydrological dams are also famous for wrecking havoc with ecosystems.
Most ecological issues that are attributed to climate change these days are actually caused by humans destroying nature directly - cutting down woods, eliminating safe spaces for animals and insects, messing with rivers, building cities that let the ground sack into the see, stuff like that.
How puzzling that the notes you need to keep checking don't include the explicit agenda of depopulation and halting economic development that is coming out of Davos.
Overpopulation is mostly just a way to hand-wring about developing countries that aren't responsible for most historic emissions and have much lower per-capita emissions. It often overlaps with racist neocolonialism (see: Bill Gates directing global health policy and being really concerned about black birth rates)
As for economic development I think the past few years have shown us very well (though whether or not people want to hear the message will remain to be seen) is that optimizing for economic growth and development (namely GDP) means you're not optimizing for things like redundancy and resilience and stability. Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of a cancer cell; it doesn't have to be ours. How many more "once in a lifetime" economic crisis do we get before we take that to heart?
As for economic development I think the past few years have shown us very well (though whether or not people want to hear the message will remain to be seen) is that optimizing for economic growth and development (namely GDP) means you're not optimizing for things like redundancy and resilience and stability. Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of a cancer cell; it doesn't have to be ours. How many more "once in a lifetime" economic crisis do we get before we take that to heart?
You think anyone at Davos has any control!? you're sadly mistaken. The malthusian aims of that cult is just a distraction from the real goal of hyperpopulation. Why else do you think they made the metaverse. First step into our matrix pods. They plan to use our bodies as bio reactors and foodstuffs.
MSNBC hasn’t told me anything about that. That’s the neutral projection of reality I trust.
> However, studies also estimate that upward of 10% to 21% of children and adolescents struggle with an anxiety disorder
If 10% to 21% of kids had some sort of minor physical aliment we wouldn't be content to just treat it and not question why it is happening.
If 10% to 21% of kids had some sort of minor physical aliment we wouldn't be content to just treat it and not question why it is happening.
> If 10% to 21% of kids had some sort of minor physical aliment we wouldn't be content to just treat it and not question why it is happening.
It's almost like the article should highlight the need for prevention as well as screening which (checks) it does.
It's almost like the article should highlight the need for prevention as well as screening which (checks) it does.
Teenagers are undergoing a flood of hormones, with a fast growing intellect (as their brains continue to develop), while their emotions are playing catch up.
Teenagers are supposed to be awkward and feel anxiety, amongst endless other emotions in excess. It's a normal part of growing into an adult.
Take away the act of learning how to deal with all this new emotion, and emotional intensity, and a human's growth will be stunted.
Teenagers are supposed to be awkward and feel anxiety, amongst endless other emotions in excess. It's a normal part of growing into an adult.
Take away the act of learning how to deal with all this new emotion, and emotional intensity, and a human's growth will be stunted.
> Teenagers are undergoing a flood of hormones
Most children are not teenagers.
> Teenagers are supposed to be awkward and feel anxiety
Diagnosable anxiety is not “feeling anxiety” in the common sense any more than diagnosable depression is “feeling sad”.
> Take away the act of learning how to deal with all this new emotion
No one, ever, has argued for that. Where treatment is required for childhood anxiety, talk therapy — often CBT — seems to me the first-line treatment. Which is exactly learning how to recognize and deal with problematic feelings.
Most children are not teenagers.
> Teenagers are supposed to be awkward and feel anxiety
Diagnosable anxiety is not “feeling anxiety” in the common sense any more than diagnosable depression is “feeling sad”.
> Take away the act of learning how to deal with all this new emotion
No one, ever, has argued for that. Where treatment is required for childhood anxiety, talk therapy — often CBT — seems to me the first-line treatment. Which is exactly learning how to recognize and deal with problematic feelings.
I agree with the core of what you are saying.
However, space needs to be provided to do that growth safely, and in order to that there would need to be massive changes in Sign-up-for-everything parenting culture, A's-or-die school culture, and a myriad of other things in order for this to work. As it is, this culture takes the fire and throws gasoline on it, preventing healthy growth.
Even outside of that, there is a balance to be struck - while some amount of anxiety/awkwardness is expected, if it leads to suicidal thoughts, self harm, lashing out at others, or other destructive behavior, it has gone to far.
However, space needs to be provided to do that growth safely, and in order to that there would need to be massive changes in Sign-up-for-everything parenting culture, A's-or-die school culture, and a myriad of other things in order for this to work. As it is, this culture takes the fire and throws gasoline on it, preventing healthy growth.
Even outside of that, there is a balance to be struck - while some amount of anxiety/awkwardness is expected, if it leads to suicidal thoughts, self harm, lashing out at others, or other destructive behavior, it has gone to far.
thats just bhutan
bhutan's an absolute autocratic kingdom, it's just that the king is oxford-educated and does a lot of the usual enlightened monarchy stuff and seems a decent enough man. if his son is a little shit or he gets a stroke or something, that all goes down the toilet
bhutan's an absolute autocratic kingdom, it's just that the king is oxford-educated and does a lot of the usual enlightened monarchy stuff and seems a decent enough man. if his son is a little shit or he gets a stroke or something, that all goes down the toilet
as one of the sibling comments noted, the king's father was kinda a little shit too, so you really don't know on that rolling of the dice, basically
The US doesn't do child labor anymore. Kids often don't even have their first job until their twenties.
From the article:
>Nearly 80% of chronic mental health conditions emerge in childhood
"Normal adult" is relative. Just because a prior generation had to "weather through mental issues" doesn't mean the next one should too.
I also don't know where you got the "doctors whose only solution is medication" idea from. You can click through to the survey linked in the article. Here is the high level summary:
> In particular, CBT [Cognitive Behavioral Therapy] and exposure-based therapy continue to be the most well-established treatments for child and adolescent anxiety. These findings suggest that the class of interventions comprising CBT and exposure-based interventions are supported by a strong and diverse literature base and that clinicians selecting a first-line intervention for youth anxiety might search here first. Within the CBT and exposure-based interventions reviewed here, the treatment protocol that best meets a given client's presentation will likely be based upon multiple unique considerations such as youth and family characteristics, service setting, and treatment format.
Nothing about medication in there.
>Nearly 80% of chronic mental health conditions emerge in childhood
"Normal adult" is relative. Just because a prior generation had to "weather through mental issues" doesn't mean the next one should too.
I also don't know where you got the "doctors whose only solution is medication" idea from. You can click through to the survey linked in the article. Here is the high level summary:
> In particular, CBT [Cognitive Behavioral Therapy] and exposure-based therapy continue to be the most well-established treatments for child and adolescent anxiety. These findings suggest that the class of interventions comprising CBT and exposure-based interventions are supported by a strong and diverse literature base and that clinicians selecting a first-line intervention for youth anxiety might search here first. Within the CBT and exposure-based interventions reviewed here, the treatment protocol that best meets a given client's presentation will likely be based upon multiple unique considerations such as youth and family characteristics, service setting, and treatment format.
Nothing about medication in there.
> Much better that they weather through mental issues and come out a normal adult.
I once held this view, which changed when I watched my 8yo daughter, who was showing some _very_ troubling anxiety-related behaviors, be almost immediately helped when she was diagnosed with ADHD+Aspergers and given ADHD meds. We'd previously tried child therapists and pretty much everything else under the sun.
Do I wish that she didn't need medication? Of course. But for her the benefit has far outweighed the downsides, at least so far.
I once held this view, which changed when I watched my 8yo daughter, who was showing some _very_ troubling anxiety-related behaviors, be almost immediately helped when she was diagnosed with ADHD+Aspergers and given ADHD meds. We'd previously tried child therapists and pretty much everything else under the sun.
Do I wish that she didn't need medication? Of course. But for her the benefit has far outweighed the downsides, at least so far.
Yep, I tell most people to avoid the "overdiagnosis" alarmism.
Go to your doctor, ask questions, get second opinions. Don't trust random commenters on the internet. I wish I had my ADD treated much sooner. Some disorders are very treatable. Ask for non-drug options.
Go to your doctor, ask questions, get second opinions. Don't trust random commenters on the internet. I wish I had my ADD treated much sooner. Some disorders are very treatable. Ask for non-drug options.
It’s tricky when it comes to something like ADHD. Researchers in the field (Russell Barkley comes to mind), describe ADHD as a developmental disorder, with stunting that may be lifelong. Many problems associated with the slower executive control development are alleviated by starting medication early and building behaviors to manage time blindness and inattention. Also, in terms of effect size, there isn’t a better change in expected outcome for any medication/therapy in psychiatric care than using stimulants to treat ADHD.
The pendulum of public opinion on stimulant use with ADHD treatment has always been too fast, resulting in periods of over and under diagnosis. The lifelong negative effect of being treated for ADHD when unnecessary is much less than being undiagnosed, but the delay in the change of outcome makes it difficult to see. People with untreated ADHD tend to perform worse in _every_ aspect of life, from relationship maintenance, financial stability, professional and academic development, and personal happiness.
While it is wrong to simply give a patient the meds without therapy and observation, it is much worse to not do so when the medication is needed.
The pendulum of public opinion on stimulant use with ADHD treatment has always been too fast, resulting in periods of over and under diagnosis. The lifelong negative effect of being treated for ADHD when unnecessary is much less than being undiagnosed, but the delay in the change of outcome makes it difficult to see. People with untreated ADHD tend to perform worse in _every_ aspect of life, from relationship maintenance, financial stability, professional and academic development, and personal happiness.
While it is wrong to simply give a patient the meds without therapy and observation, it is much worse to not do so when the medication is needed.
Medication is generally not the first treatment option for anxiety. Psychiatrists probably overprescribe some medications for some disorders but there are a lot of non-chemical treatment options which are super effective for kids with anxiety.
I was therapists for anxiety as a kid. My parents were never recommended meds but I did learn a bunch of skills to help me be more patient and calm.
I was therapists for anxiety as a kid. My parents were never recommended meds but I did learn a bunch of skills to help me be more patient and calm.
> I would keep children away from doctors whose only solution is medication.
Not sure how that's relevant, neither the article’s nor the more general modern approach is that the “only solution is medication”.
Not sure how that's relevant, neither the article’s nor the more general modern approach is that the “only solution is medication”.
Oh wow a task force. I wonder if they'll ever get to a point where they solve the problem and no longer feel the need to exist.
It worked out that way for the Disinformation Governance Board.
I would be more concerned the risks associated with over diagnosis, or dredging up problems where there aren't any.
A preliminary analysis has shown that the above comment exhibits symptoms of at least seven mental disorders, according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition. Would you like to commit giantg2? [Y] [N]Haha
My dad had a class with a psychiatrist. One day the psychiatrist came in late, paced back and forth, and told the class that the only reason someone becomes a psychiatrist is to find out what's wrong with themself. Then he walked out. That was the class for that day.
My dad had a class with a psychiatrist. One day the psychiatrist came in late, paced back and forth, and told the class that the only reason someone becomes a psychiatrist is to find out what's wrong with themself. Then he walked out. That was the class for that day.
I would also be very troubled of the possibility that mass testing in children would, itself, cause some degree of anxiety. I know I don't enjoy being tested.
I feel this is an overreaction. Nothing wrong with having a quick mental checkup along with your physical.
My point is that taking a physical does not change your physical attributes; being asked "are you nervous?" can't give a proper answer because the question, by itself, changes the outcome. Like the "whatever you do, don't think of a pink elephant" thing.
I'd assume that a mental health screening would be designed to work with children and their caretakers to avoid these scenarios. In any case, this is only an argument for the lower half of kids. They're starting at 8 years old. They aren't toddlers.
If there are enough troubling signs, you look into it a little more. It might be nothing, it might be something to work on.
If there are enough troubling signs, you look into it a little more. It might be nothing, it might be something to work on.
Doesn't every medical student discover that he's dying from at least 3 fatal diseases?
Testosterone level is inversely correlated with neuroticism. And average testosterone has dropped one standard deviation from 2000 to 2017.
Since nobody is prescribing testosterone for anxiety I'm guessing it isn't as simple as this explanation suggests.
> However, studies also estimate that upward of 10% to 21% of children and adolescents struggle with an anxiety disorder and as many as 30% of children experience moderate anxiety that interferes with their daily functioning at some time in their life.
Probably my toxic masculinity showing, but if 1 in 3 children has anxiety, then I'd chalk it up to "that's life". We cannot possibly offer therapy to that many children and medicating the problem away is a chilling suggestion.
Probably my toxic masculinity showing, but if 1 in 3 children has anxiety, then I'd chalk it up to "that's life". We cannot possibly offer therapy to that many children and medicating the problem away is a chilling suggestion.
If therapy means “teaching kids how to cope with difficult things and calm down” then why not? Especially if offered via an app (many apps to teach CBT techniques are available and appropriate for mild anxiety) or in a group session, where it could be fairly economical.
I really meant giving each kid a therapist is not feasible. You can have a class on how to handle anxiety, I actually had those when I was in high school and it helped.
We can't give each kid one-on-one tutoring[1] which would improve children's education by 2 standard deviations. Yet, we still teach kids in classrooms. Let's not let perfect be the enemy of good(or better).
1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom%27s_2_sigma_problem
1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom%27s_2_sigma_problem
> giving each kid a therapist is not feasible.
Why not? We expect a healthy child to have a doctor, a healthy child to have a friend group. Why not expect them to have a mental doctor/therapist?
Why not? We expect a healthy child to have a doctor, a healthy child to have a friend group. Why not expect them to have a mental doctor/therapist?
very different models of care? if you have a doctor, the expectation is that you see them for a yearly checkup plus a few times for random illnesses. if you have a therapist, the expectation is that you see them every week or two.
maybe there's value in occasionally seeing a therapist for a "mental health checkup", but weekly one-on-ones obviously doesn't scale to every single child.
maybe there's value in occasionally seeing a therapist for a "mental health checkup", but weekly one-on-ones obviously doesn't scale to every single child.
> but weekly one-on-ones obviously doesn't scale to every single child.
An appropriate course of treatment for each child with a diagnosable condition for which it is appropriate certainly does. Maybe weekly sessions 52 weeks a year, every year, for every child regardless of need doesn't, but why would you do that anyway?
An appropriate course of treatment for each child with a diagnosable condition for which it is appropriate certainly does. Maybe weekly sessions 52 weeks a year, every year, for every child regardless of need doesn't, but why would you do that anyway?
I suspect giving therapists to healthy children would make them less healthy on average.
Basically for every treatment a certain percentage of patients will get worse, not better. So just like you'd only prescribe drugs when needed due to the risks, prescribing therapy when not needed is a bad idea.
Basically for every treatment a certain percentage of patients will get worse, not better. So just like you'd only prescribe drugs when needed due to the risks, prescribing therapy when not needed is a bad idea.
> We cannot possibly offer therapy to that many children
Why not? A 12-16 week course of CBT for even 20% of children, sometime during childhood (so about 1-2% of children per year) would be a rounding error in total healthcare expenditures. It would be a substantial increase in current mental health expenditure, and probably take a several years to get up to capacity for, but its not something radically impossible.
Why not? A 12-16 week course of CBT for even 20% of children, sometime during childhood (so about 1-2% of children per year) would be a rounding error in total healthcare expenditures. It would be a substantial increase in current mental health expenditure, and probably take a several years to get up to capacity for, but its not something radically impossible.
A course might be counterproductive. In the 90s and 2000s, guidance counselors would show tapes concerning problems of the day: stranger danger, bullying, "negative" emotions, etc. Of course, none of those tapes solved the problems they addressed. If anything, many of them focused on the wrong problems or on symptoms rather than causes.
If the source of one's anxieties isn't going to change (like one's neighborhood or family), no amount of coursework or medication is going to help. Exceptional circumstances notwithstanding, there is no way to psychologize, meditate, or drug a kid's problems away. There is no one-size-fits-all solution
I might not have the solution to the problems themselves are, but the chances of proactive intervention damaging a child's life are much higher than if you left them alone. The last thing I would like to see coming back is mass institutionalization, and unfortunately these kinds best-intention suggestions become springboards for later abuses
If the source of one's anxieties isn't going to change (like one's neighborhood or family), no amount of coursework or medication is going to help. Exceptional circumstances notwithstanding, there is no way to psychologize, meditate, or drug a kid's problems away. There is no one-size-fits-all solution
I might not have the solution to the problems themselves are, but the chances of proactive intervention damaging a child's life are much higher than if you left them alone. The last thing I would like to see coming back is mass institutionalization, and unfortunately these kinds best-intention suggestions become springboards for later abuses
Interestingly enough, I'm not so sure this is the case.
I've been mentally toying with the idea of an in-house pre-paid school psychologist and mandatory annual screenings for all students. We already do this for hearing and vision screening, and sometimes even dental screening and care.
That or there are other ways to create intervention opportunities. There are many proven mental health therapeutic interventions that could be implemented in a classroom format. Lots of self-journaling to various prompts, etc. The class can focus on stress management strategies, organization, and other sorts of long term planning, reflection, conflict resolution and other life-success skills. Self-assessment quizzes could be administered to screen for depression, anxiety, dark-triad type stuff and then results evaluated by an actual psychologist with appropriate followup as needed. I just about guarantee that would do more to prevent school shootings than any gun control proposals on the table.
For the amount we spend on schools to have school resource officers (like providing extra opportunities for students to have run-ins with the law is helpful?), and all the security and surveillance infrastructure, and ridiculous admin costs, I think it wouldn't be nearly as expensive as you might think.
I've been mentally toying with the idea of an in-house pre-paid school psychologist and mandatory annual screenings for all students. We already do this for hearing and vision screening, and sometimes even dental screening and care.
That or there are other ways to create intervention opportunities. There are many proven mental health therapeutic interventions that could be implemented in a classroom format. Lots of self-journaling to various prompts, etc. The class can focus on stress management strategies, organization, and other sorts of long term planning, reflection, conflict resolution and other life-success skills. Self-assessment quizzes could be administered to screen for depression, anxiety, dark-triad type stuff and then results evaluated by an actual psychologist with appropriate followup as needed. I just about guarantee that would do more to prevent school shootings than any gun control proposals on the table.
For the amount we spend on schools to have school resource officers (like providing extra opportunities for students to have run-ins with the law is helpful?), and all the security and surveillance infrastructure, and ridiculous admin costs, I think it wouldn't be nearly as expensive as you might think.
not a bad idea, although it basically sounds like a beefed-up version of the "school counselor" role.
> Self-assessment quizzes could be administered to screen for depression, anxiety, dark-triad type stuff and then results evaluated by an actual psychologist with appropriate followup as needed.
this part seems misguided. especially if administered through school, I suspect a lot of students would perceive this as an attempt to get them to "tell on" themselves. which it is, at least some of the time.
> Self-assessment quizzes could be administered to screen for depression, anxiety, dark-triad type stuff and then results evaluated by an actual psychologist with appropriate followup as needed.
this part seems misguided. especially if administered through school, I suspect a lot of students would perceive this as an attempt to get them to "tell on" themselves. which it is, at least some of the time.
Cancer is also "just life" yet affects much fewer than anxiety but we spend billions on it
Cancer is not "just life", you die from it. Not figuratively, you actually die from it. Anxiety is chronic, it's more like headaches or eczema. It still sucks to have it and some people have a very bad case that requires medication.
If we had a good cure (or even a mediocre cure) for mild headaches why would we not give that to every kid with headaches? Isn’t talk therapy (CBT/DBT/etc) that cute?
It's not "life". It's the school-world that adults have constructed and forcibly inserted children into. It's hard to think of a single aspect of children's lives that isn't directly or indirectly created by adults.
I get that it's a large-scale project (assuming it is a real problem), but isn't it akin to saying, "this software is too buggy to improve. We should give up and live with the bugs instead?"
The cure can be worse than the disease, the software analogy is actually pretty good.
> This software is too buggy to improve. We should give up and live with the bugs instead?
1. You can do a full costly rewrite, probably still end up with bugs because we don't have a real solution to inherent complexity. (we don't have a cure for anxiety)
2. You can target the few very bad bugs and fix those (helping the ~5% of children with crippling anxiety, let the "moderate" anxiety learn to live with it).
Article is pointing towards doing 1, I think it's ridiculous and how we end with a significant proportion of kids on antidepressants.
> This software is too buggy to improve. We should give up and live with the bugs instead?
1. You can do a full costly rewrite, probably still end up with bugs because we don't have a real solution to inherent complexity. (we don't have a cure for anxiety)
2. You can target the few very bad bugs and fix those (helping the ~5% of children with crippling anxiety, let the "moderate" anxiety learn to live with it).
Article is pointing towards doing 1, I think it's ridiculous and how we end with a significant proportion of kids on antidepressants.
I agree; I don't think mass meditating children is a viable solution, but that's not the only solution.
Anytime there is a pattern to bugs, I stop and think about the systemic changes that got us there in the first place. And that's what I'm advocating for here too.
Anytime there is a pattern to bugs, I stop and think about the systemic changes that got us there in the first place. And that's what I'm advocating for here too.
> I don't think mass meditating children is a viable solution,
That's actually probably a very good and cost effective solution to part of the problem, despite probably being a typo.
That's actually probably a very good and cost effective solution to part of the problem, despite probably being a typo.
> Article is pointing towards doing 1
No, it's not.
> I think it's ridiculous and how we end with a significant proportion of kids on antidepressants.
The most common treatment for diagnosable childhood anxiety seems to be talk therapy, not medication (and, anti-anxiety and anti-depreasant are different sets of drugs, anyway.)
No, it's not.
> I think it's ridiculous and how we end with a significant proportion of kids on antidepressants.
The most common treatment for diagnosable childhood anxiety seems to be talk therapy, not medication (and, anti-anxiety and anti-depreasant are different sets of drugs, anyway.)
Why is anxiety as an emotion so commonly conflated with anxiety disorder? Having anxiety is a very normal thing that everyone has from time to time, just like every other emotion. Having an anxiety disorder is very different.
Because it's hard to draw the line between the two
> The good news is that we have decades of high-quality research demonstrating how to effectively intervene to reduce symptoms and to help anxious youth cope and function better. These include both medical and nonmedical interventions like cognitive behavioral therapy, which studies show to be safe and effective.
That's the good news? I guess hoping for a deep dive into the causes and some reasoning about how we got ourselves into this is too much? The pattern of only addressing symptoms is pathologically abundant.
That's the good news? I guess hoping for a deep dive into the causes and some reasoning about how we got ourselves into this is too much? The pattern of only addressing symptoms is pathologically abundant.
Have dealt with anxiety disorder for a long time. I don’t believe screening is the answer, likely leads to over-diagnosis and then medication to handle the volume. Education might be a good start.
Early on my severe and reoccurring anxiety was dismissed as normal anxiety. It’s still common for people to think the normal worrying we all experience is the same as having anxiety disorder.
Knowing what I was experiencing and how it’s different would have been great for me and my peers.
Early on my severe and reoccurring anxiety was dismissed as normal anxiety. It’s still common for people to think the normal worrying we all experience is the same as having anxiety disorder.
Knowing what I was experiencing and how it’s different would have been great for me and my peers.
When did it occur to you that it was a "disorder" and not "normal" anxiety? How would you differentiate between the two?
I would be worried about labeling. Anxiety comes and goes, usually in waves, you can have periods where you're not anxious and periods where you are not
I would be worried about labeling. Anxiety comes and goes, usually in waves, you can have periods where you're not anxious and periods where you are not
I saw a doctor after the second time I went to the ER thinking I was having a heart attack.
I still have regular anxiety and nervousness. The panic attacks are something completely different though.
I still have regular anxiety and nervousness. The panic attacks are something completely different though.
> you can have periods where you're not anxious and periods where you are not
I'd say in that case there's not much to worry about ;)
I'd say in that case there's not much to worry about ;)
Typo of course :-)
You get the point
You get the point
I remember all throughout school having constant stomach ache, which was anxiety but the doctors misdiagnosed it as IBS.
It wasn’t until uni that I realised what was going on.
How did you cope with it?
It wasn’t until uni that I realised what was going on.
How did you cope with it?
I’ll let you know when I figure it out for sure. I also had a doctor suggest it might be IBS.
Anxiety for me also affects my stomach. When I’m really anxious I have to avoid certain foods because they make it worse. Other than that I found coping with my anxiety more generally improved the stomach symptoms as well.
Anxiety for me also affects my stomach. When I’m really anxious I have to avoid certain foods because they make it worse. Other than that I found coping with my anxiety more generally improved the stomach symptoms as well.
[deleted]
Having watched anxiety-related problems rampage through my daughter's cohort, especially (but not only) in the last two years, I think this is a good thing. Anxiety is insidious. It leads to other problems that can be deadly, but anxiety itself never shows up as the cause of death. Other times it just hampers young people's ability to thrive in school or grow into adulthood, which can lead to a life-long pattern of under-achievement and unhappiness. Detecting and intervening early would be a great help. Yes, we should also look at the causes of all this excess anxiety. Yes, we should avoid over-diagnosing and (especially) over-medicating. All that said, equipping kids and young adults with healthier outlooks and strategies would still be great.
[deleted]
Link to the draft recommendation from the US Preventive Services Task Force: https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/draft-r...
Past USPTF recommendations can be found here: https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/recomme...
Past USPTF recommendations can be found here: https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/recomme...
[deleted]
My eight year old daughter is dealing with anxiety.
She had it from birth basically.
Very sensitive, avoids social interactions, negative thoughts ("what is the feeling doesn't go away?") And other hallmarks of anxiety.
We try not to label her, get to speak about what she's feeling, try to give her tools to cope.
But as a parent, seeing this unfold time and time again, each time with some new trigger is tough.
Has anyone gone through something similar with their children and has some advice about what helps and what doesn't help, would love to hear
Very sensitive, avoids social interactions, negative thoughts ("what is the feeling doesn't go away?") And other hallmarks of anxiety.
We try not to label her, get to speak about what she's feeling, try to give her tools to cope.
But as a parent, seeing this unfold time and time again, each time with some new trigger is tough.
Has anyone gone through something similar with their children and has some advice about what helps and what doesn't help, would love to hear
I dont mean to criticize, but how is this different from a normal kid? Being shy as an 8 year old seems normal. The "negative thoughts" could be because she's picked up that you're concerned about her feelings which makes her think about them more.
My veterinarian wanted to prescribe my cat Prozac for anxiety.
There's this weird idea that thinking is the pinnacle of existence. It's a really popular idea.
Therefore we should all think as much as possible. And childhood should be spent getting good at thinking.
But thinking isn't the pinnacle of existence. In fact it's just a very tiny part of existence. So when we spend all our time thinking, in exclusion of all else, we suffer. A kind of starvation.
And it messes us up body and mind.
Therefore we should all think as much as possible. And childhood should be spent getting good at thinking.
But thinking isn't the pinnacle of existence. In fact it's just a very tiny part of existence. So when we spend all our time thinking, in exclusion of all else, we suffer. A kind of starvation.
And it messes us up body and mind.
While this strikes me as off-target from the post, it also strikes me as a professional thinker as absolutely true.
Kids are in school, which is all about intense thinking.
The messed-up-ness might manifest as anxiety.
The messed-up-ness might manifest as anxiety.
What are they going to do if they discover anxiety? I wouldn't be surprised to hear how endemic it is, but as an adult with anxiety, there's not a silver bullet fix aside from dramatic life changes. Meditation and drugs just cover it up IMO.
Learning box breathing actually changed a lot for me, not a silver bullet but now I can do the things that before would shut down my brain into severe fight or flight mode.
> What are they going to do if they discover anxiety?
Probably, initially, therapy like CBT and school-based awareness and accommodations, if particular geographic, demographic, or other discernable trends show up that indicate systemic rather than merely individual random issues, probably dig deeper to understand the process and causes and address them.
Probably, initially, therapy like CBT and school-based awareness and accommodations, if particular geographic, demographic, or other discernable trends show up that indicate systemic rather than merely individual random issues, probably dig deeper to understand the process and causes and address them.
Work on it, like anything else.
Children are still growing - and it is the easiest time to make changes, just like it's easier to learn a new language. It seems like the best time than to wait until it crystallizes in your twenties in addition to the stresses of being an adult.
Children are still growing - and it is the easiest time to make changes, just like it's easier to learn a new language. It seems like the best time than to wait until it crystallizes in your twenties in addition to the stresses of being an adult.
Asking doctors who get paid for providing treatment to determine if someone needs treatment sounds perfect. I bet pharma would love to have more lifetime customers too. And think of how much more effective government/media messaging will be with this info!
How could this possibly go wrong?
/s
How could this possibly go wrong?
/s
Does your reasoning apply to other USPTF recommendations, or just this one? https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/recomme...
Even if they mean well they're gonna over-treat.
Ask a painter how to spruce up your house they'll say paint. Professionals swing with the hammer they have.
Ask a painter how to spruce up your house they'll say paint. Professionals swing with the hammer they have.
They like to have everyone on meds... they make better sheeple...
Gross, get em hooked to the drugs while they're young I guess
help is supposed to be an option, not a requirement
this is philosophically and ethically wrong
this is philosophically and ethically wrong