Quote:
Originally Posted by christiangirl
What I'm wondering is if it's now seen as better to label someone with a problem they don't have than later find out you missed something. Theoretically, it might be easier to defend oneself in a malpractice suit if one can say "Oh, I gave the wrong diagnosis but at least I took action and was sort of on the right track" then to say "Yes, the patient came to me for help prior to [insert catastrophe here] and I completely missed this." I think it used to be (and to an extent still is the case) that doctors were afraid of diagnosing someone when they did not have to because of the stigma surrounding mental health diagnoses and the effect that label could have on a person's life. However, this concern has taken a backseat to a number of factors including fear of not getting paid by insurance companies.
|
That all depends on who's doing the labeling. One of my friends refused to have her children put into the special ed program (they are supposedly mildly autistic, but I personally think it's because their blob of lard father who was at home with them when they were toddlers did nothing but sit and watch tv) at their school because once you are on that track (and bringing in funding for the school) it's nearly impossible to get off. I'm sure she signed some sort of waiver when she made this decision.
On another note, a friend's daughter got kicked out of preschool for being loud and jumping on things. Isn't that called...being a 3 year old?? This is the thing that worries me the most...that even though teachers do know better, they'll start thinking of medicated, overly docile children as the norm.
Threaded Mode
