 JF J wrote:

 Dr. Baughman

 The "disease" debate detracts focus from the real issue, the 1991 
 Disabilities Act which pays individuals and/or institutions who handle 
 the "disabled"

[Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD: wrong, Sir, the entire medicalization, leading to the "disabled" designation begins with some "disease" label. This is the start and lynch-pin of all that follows]

 .  The entire 
 issue is Constitutional, an incentive paid which leads to abuse 
 (especially to children).  Teachers tell parents the child will get 
 better grades on Ritalin

[Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD: absolutely no such evidence exists. In fact accepting "brain disease" "chemical imbalance" labels and the drugs that go with them makes the child a psychiatric/mental health patient forever, leads to learning disable (special ed) and other psychiatric "co-morbidity" and leads to a vastly diminished educational, vocational, social, and life attainments]

 .  Any 
 answer other than "yes" is almost certain loss of custody, either to 
 an "ex", grandparents, or to foster care.  When the child turns 18 and 
 tries to get that same drug (Meth), they are jailed and yet another 
 institution can profit from the Disabilities Act.  You will notice 
 prison populations increased dramatically to a point where America now 
 has the highest incarceration rate (of its own citizens) of any nation 
 on earth

[Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD: I have noticed]

.

 It would really help to know just how much is paid, to who, national
 quotas for County workers, bonuses paid to County workers, to 
 educational workers, etc.  I've heard figures like $30,000 per year 
 per child (to the school), possibly much more.  I recall a recent 
 similar scandal that was brought before the Surpreme Court who agreed 
 terms were too broad (the Disabilities Act), however when it comes to 
 Ritalin, everything has been thrown out.

 The enemy is "us", our credibility for being fooled when that first 
 teacher suggested it.  Most individuals jump at the attention, their 
 "special" child, a "trump-card" in a custodial battle for more funds, 
 and/or a huge paycheck from Social Security.

 Those who profit from this have the only credentials a court will 
 listen to

[Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD: this is surely true of family and juvenile courts. It is horrid, this thing we have let happen to ourselves, our children, that we participate in]

.
 I'm only a father, a former broadcaster (22 years) now in the computer 
 industry who also devotes his free time to returning children to 
 missing parents (a volunteer to those who have no one to turn to).  I 
 truly believe the larger issue is a national attack on the family for 
 profit.  Label one parent as bad, and all parents can be removed.

 Jerry

[Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD: I just counseled, tried to, a young father who has lost his share of custody in divorce, for trying to disrupt the psychiatric dx. and drugging of his normal son. It all makes George Orwell look like small potatoes.]