DON'T CREATE STATE RITALIN POLICY

A package of bills limiting what schools can recommend to parents
whose children may have attention-deficit disorder or hyperactivity
has passed the state House and is pending in the Senate. The
legislation is sparked by concerns that schools are pressuring parents
into placing children on Ritalin and other psychotropic drugs to
modify behavior.

The bills should be abandoned as unnecessary. Ritalin, like other
drugs, may only be prescribed by a physician. And every child --
regardless of his or her medical status -- has a right to a free
public education.

Given these bedrock rules, decisions on what teachers or school
administrators may say or recommend to parents about their children
should not be a topic for additional state involvement. Each local
district ought to have its own policies, formulated by local school
boards. The issue shouldn't be micromanaged from Lansing.

Attention-deficit disorder, which may or may not be accompanied by
hyperactivity, is a real condition, affecting 3 to 5 percent of
school-age children, mostly boys, according to the National Institutes
of Health. Michigan has a relatively high rate of use of Ritalin and
related drugs for the disorder. That has raised the concern of the
Legislature.

Some parents have complained that school officials have essentially
told them they must have their child treated with one of these drugs
if the child is to stay in school -- and have even threatened them
with investigation by social workers if they do not consent to drug
treatment.

But the legislation is a blunderbuss. It shouldn't get into the
details of what a teacher can say to a parent about the benefits of
Ritalin or any other medical treatment.

In most cases, teachers and other school officials simply suggest a
student be evaluated to see if Ritalin might help. Teachers, school
social workers and administrators know they aren't qualified to make
medical recommendations and certainly aren't allowed to write
prescriptions.

There is a danger that the proposed rule would bar the schools even
from suggesting that a child be evaluated by family physicians or
specialists. And while it is true that school officials enjoy legal
immunity if they instigate a child abuse investigation, it is not
likely that any school officer would pursue such a drastic course
simply because parents rejected the use of Ritalin or other drugs.

Ritalin and other stimulants can be effective in the treatment of some
cases of attention deficit disorder. But such drugs need to be
accompanied by close attention from parents and the prescribing
physician. Other therapy is needed as well. The problem of the proper
administration of these drugs is a complex medical one. It simply
isn't a suitable topic for broad state legislation.

Lawmakers ought to let parents, doctors and educators make decisions
for children without trying to create a one-size-fits-all state policy