every parent's worst nightmare
 

Yes, engaging the gorilla in the first palce was stupid, stupid, stupid!

Still want her on my team.

every parent's worst nightmare
 

Say what you will about bridge of love; that is one well-cultured mofo.

Every time someone in my office refers to the Morrison & Foerster firm as "MoFo," I silently complete it in my head, "The Ah-mayzing Psy-kick Gorilla."

every parent's worst nightmare
 

See link below for the 18 year old's own account of the incident.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/mas...ck_by_gorilla/

I haven't picked her for my team yet

I said, Hey Joe, take a walk on the wild side.
 

Easy for the two-year-old to talk trash like that when the gorilla is back in its cage. Bet she wasn't so tough at the zoo.

every parent's worst nightmare
 

Yup, that wasn't how it was reported on the evening news. OK, not yet on the team.

every parent's worst nightmare
 

In her taped interview (shortly after), she was quite hysterical, telling us that "I'm over 300 pounds, and he just picked me up and threw me like I was nothing."

Then, as she calmed down, she started talking about how she's "emotionally traumatized", and will probably be scarred for life by the horrible fear of death that this has caused. "I don't even wanna see a banana right now, I'm so scared", she said.

Plaintiffs' lawyers are lining up outside, I'm sure.

every parent's worst nightmare
 

don't take it contingency, Mass. is a workman's comp. state.

every parent's worst nightmare
 

I don't think this is course of employment stuff, but the interesting issue will be charitable immunity. Mass. caps the liabilities of charities for most things at $20,000, and the way around is usually to sue the directors for reckless oversight.

The fact this happened the day after the Globe ran an article on the last gorilla escape (very brief, a few weeks ago) the day before this one becomes an interesting fact.

every parent's worst nightmare
 

Have to say, I'm with the Zoo on this one. They took what seem to be reasonable measures after his first escape; the fact is, this is an enormous, agile, and very smart animal who was highly motivated by hormones and adolescence to leave the family home, if only for a short while. Should they have equipped their regular staff with tranquilizer darts after his first escape? maybe, but I'm not sure that gets you to reckless oversight.

The 18 year old was a zoo employee, but I don't think she was on duty on Sunday.

Author-of-cool-children's-books Peter Sis won a MacArthur genius grant this weekend. I think his stuff is pretty neat, and, more importantly, so does the Little Slothrop.

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/03...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg


Remember to buy his books through Lawtalkers.

This is a very depressing picture to put up here in full view of the Minnesotans, who have already been scraping their windshields.

Sorry. If it makes you feel any better, turn on the news tonight for the stories about the recall.

Montessori
 

Anybody have any thoughts/experiences re Montessori education? I think a lot of the philosophy makes sense, especially in the 3-6 year old range. I am also impressed by the teachers I've met; very into what they do, and with regard to the younger kids, way beyond a typical preschool teacher. On the other hand, I'm not sure my 3-year old needs to be in school every day (with mom currently in stay-at-home mode). And the whole thing can seem a bit new-agey and cult-like (e.g., "the cosmic child" and the constant and reverential references to Dr. Montesorri).

Any thoughts? I think we're leaning toward giving it a try.

Montessori
 

If the Montessori you're looking at is in your neighborhood, I think I might have some friends who go there and love it. For us, well, Magnus is really into letters and numbers and I figured if he went to a Montessori school he would just focus on what he really loves and ignore everything else. We have him in a co-op pre-school at a local synagogue (2 mornings/week) and are thrilled that he is learning to love the craft room. Reading and arithmetic we can cover at home--I really want him to branch out, be more creative, be more social. Now if he would just be interested in going peepee in the potty . . . .

tm

Montessori
 

Montessori is great for really young kids who are too young for directed or group play and learning --- in other words, too young for anything else. Like a three year old, for instance.

The benefit turns to a detriment at about five or six, IMHO. I'm pretty close to a couple of elementary and middle school teachers, and they say kids who are kept in a "pure" Montessori learning environment too long are unable to sit still and focus on what a group is supposed to be doing. They're accustomed to wandering off and finding something that interests them, and the transition to a traditional classroom is sometimes rough and long. Maybe it's partly a video game culture to blame, but lots of kids in unstructured learning environments start to feel that learning is always about fascination and self-entertainment. FWIW, Montessori educated kids also tend to have parents who think that learning is not about objectively measurable success, so cause and effect might be mixed up here.

A daily school enviroment is great for lots of three-year-olds --- they look forward to it, and can learn to love school.

Montessori
 

See how the kid likes and reacts to it.

Our kids have all gone to the same pre-school, which has a very well developed developmental learning philosophy (not Montessori). One of them just was absolutely perfect for the school, it brought out the best in her and she just shined. It was not as good for another, who turns out to have some dislexia and needed more structure to compensate. Different personalities do better in different settings and with different learning methods.

Also, we've looked at Montessori schools that are very different from each other, and a lot depends on the teacher. Having the kid and teacher, or kid and lead teacher if it is, as I suspect, a setting with multiple teachers, spend fifteen minutes interacting will likely give you a good idea if there is some chemistry.

Montessori
 

Very good point. In fact, little Ruth Bader Ramone spent the better part of an hour hanging out in the classroom with the lead teacher (or "guide") yesterday, and absolutely loved it. She's going to spend the morning there tomorrow. We'll see how it goes.

Montessori
 

I'll give you a slightly different perspective: I was a Montessori kid, and I loved it. So much so that the baltspawn are already on the list for the local Montessori.

I had a lot of freedom to learn and explore, but I really don't remember it as a free-for-all. There were lots of group activities, but on the occassions that a student didin't want to participate, the issue wasn't forced. I suppose if a kid is predisposed towards being antisocial, this might be a problem, but there is encouragement to participate in various activities, just no mandate.

On the down side, I did have discipline problems throughout elementary school. I always attributed this to being bored because most of my (public) elemenatry school education was redundant to what I had learned in Montessori (full time 3 years 2-5, then after school three years 6-9), But Atticus points to a different contributing factor that I have to admit in retrospect may have been a part of it. Still, it's hard to lay the blame at Montessori's feet for me having to sit through long division in 5th grade after having learned it four years previously in after-school daycare.

Anyway, I think its a great program. With the right kid, s/he will absorb information and skills like a sponge.

Montessori
 

So you're the one NY Doll (aka etc.) married?

Montessori
 

I'm a nuisance sock, sure, but this is honest advice. Being a "discipline problem" when we were growing up was treated differently than it is now.

Schools today don't spank, they recommend for meds. My community has the highest percentage of post-grad degrees in my state. My daughter's second grade had 6 boys in a class of 24 on meds. That is, the offspring of people who have 2 college degrees aren't capable of 2nd grade.

I'm willing to accept that meds help some kids, but some of the kids simply were goofy little boys. One kid was just an introverted nerdy guy who was identical to his dad, a neonatoligist. the boy over focused, and thus sometimes didn't hear the teacher. Bang. have some meds.

One of my favorite kids was a goof. This was in the day of Power Rangers. He didn't complete his K homework one day (color a map), the teacher asked him why. "Couldn't, there was a spell on me." I would be proud if my kid came up with that, but teach used it as evidence of need for drugs.

It is a screwed up situation, and it impacts boys hardest. If your kids are going into public school, I would recommend a pretty structured pre-school, at least for the last year.

Montessori
 

This is an interesting and important point. However, I would point out that as of yet, it takes two (or three, really) to tango to the meds tune. While I am sure the Supremes are working on it, the in loco parentis doctrine that allows schools to test students for drugs without parental permission does not yet allow them to administer drugs without parental permission. I can not help but note the irony that our public schools spend the first six years trying to put kids on drugs and the last six years trying to keep them off them.*

I know what real ADHD looks like (younger sibling has it - for real. can't sit still for more than about 30 seconds, ever. and I mean ever. for years. being around him is like listening to the Beatles' Revolution No. 9, really loud, at double speed, all day.).

Ain't no way I'm putting my kids on meds if they don't need them. The schools can just deal. They somehow dealt with me (the ultimate solution to my discipline problems was discovered by my brilliant and beautiful 5th grade teacher [mmmmmm...Ms. Centner] - she sat me next to a special needs kid in the class and instructed me to tutor him. It shut us both up and eliminated what had been two different discipline problems. He was getting individual attention he needed and I wasn't bored. The world needs more Ms. Centners.).



*And if I hear one more news story about a kid getting expelled for giving another kid an albuteral inhaler to stop an asthma attack, I'm seriously going to go postal, but I digress.

Montessori
 

A child psychiatrist friend of mine told me that people with ADHD are at higher risk for drug abuse problems later in life if they DON'T receive chemical treatment when they are younger, in an (obviously misguided) attempt to self-medicate.

In my children's preschool, I don't think there is one boy in the whole school who isn't in some kind of "therapy", but not many are on medication -- maybe 2 or 3 in the whole school. But the point about the disparate impact on boys in an important (and for me, as the mother of only boys, upsetting) one.

Montessori
 

it doesn't kick in till K, or 1st or 2nd grade. as to both sides needing to agree, that is true. the one mom who fought the recommendation was a criminal defense lawyer who fought to keep her kid off. she was hit with the principal and teacher and psych all saying the kid needs it, and that the kid was screwing up the class. she finally brought in a children's rights lawyer and got them to back off a little. but the act is a series of conference about behavior, ultimately leading to the pills.

the doc who is nerdy and has a nerdy kid? I said to him what they're saying about John Doe is true of you Dr. Doe. You got through first grade! he opted to follow the medical advice of the psych.

It's just a sad thing that I didn't expect from elem. school, and I do try and warn parents to be on the lookout.

Montessori
 

I can't deny that there is a lot of pressure put on by the schools, which is too bad. As I mentioned above, sometimes the solution takes some creativity, but it often doesn't involve drugs. I hope that I am strong enough to overcome those pressures, if the arise.

I can totally believe a correlation between failing to medicate genuine ADHD and subsequent drug use. My brother was seriously depressed for a while, and got much better after being put on Ritilin (sp?). Although the Ritilin ultimately can cause depression too, as I understand it. But it focused him enough to almost act "normal," and that allowed him to relax enough to get out of the depression. Drugs would allow one to achieve the same effect, in that speed would allow you to focus and pot would allow you to let go. Having a fairly large inability to focus myself (hey, I came by it honestly), I can see the attraction of these kinds of chemical alterations.

There is something weird about depressed and hyperactive as a combination. Somewhat like a bi-polar disorder, but really fast.

The good news is he made it through, and now, as a young adult, he's off the meds and relatively stable. He still doesn't have a decent J O B, but he's living the dream.

Montessori
 

The best solution, unfortunately, is the one public schools are not ready to provide. That is a student/teacher ratio of about 6/1 or so, which results in an ability to keep up with the ADHD child. This will work for almost all but the most severe ADHD kids. (Though when ADHD kids become GA's, you need about a 1:1 partner:associate ratio for it to work, and as partners they need a 2:1 associate:partner ratio for it to work.)

Montessori
 

And a thread-hijacking bastard as well. Start your own meds/ADD discussion; I wanna talk about Montessori!

Oh, and thanks to all those who have offered their thoughts.

Montessori
 

I did offer a thought about "unstructured" preschool and the potential downside of the discipline problems that others pointed to, perhaps the most important one offered. Shit happens quickly in the schools on these issues. But you know what, listen to the touchy feely benefits and talk about enabling creativity if that is what catches you.

Montessori
 

See also David Sedaris. He had brutally bad OCD (feeling like he would die if he didn't lick his neighbors' doorknobs on the walk home from school qualifies as brutally bad, IMHMO) that went away when he found cigarettes. Of course, that later led to such other mind-altering substances as meth and art school . . . .

While thankfully this is still a hypothetical question for me, I'd like to think that I would never be cowed into medicating a child today because some child psychologist says it might lead to drug abuse later. You know what the primary cause of drug abuse is? BAD PARENTING. BAD CHILDHOOD. When this generation of "medicate him" children reaches college, do you think they'll have any moral compunction against self-medication? They're being raised to think that their moods need to be chemically managed, and we think this will reduce drug use? Insane.

No offense to anyone whose kid is currently medicated after due deliberation.

be careful out there
 

point 2, you can't be too careful about talking about this stuff with other parents because you will likely not know all of the kids who are drugged. I was going off on this with one dad, whose younger kid I knew was ok. Daddy hit me with he is on rit. and his older son is on rit. and its a fucking wonder drug and probably I should be on it too.

Montessori
 

I think drugs are terribly overused, and that the alternatives (more direct attention, care to diet, etc.) are woefully underused.

But there are some cases where the drugs are appropriate. A broadside against drugs can do some harm (as well as some good).

(And, on self-medication, I actually do think that self-medication helped me achieve a reasonable state of self-awareness; there are times when a few pieces of dried cactus can have a positive impact).

Montessori
 

It wasn't a child psychologist, but a child psychiatrist (and a personal friend -- not one treating any child of mine, and with no particular axe to grind either way). You make it sound like some quack with an agenda wants to put a kid on medication, just for the hell of it. Hardly.

Ritalin (and other amphetamine derivaties) has been used for 40 or 50 years as a pediatric medication. It is one of the most (if not the most -- I was going to say "the most", but do not have perfect clarity of that recollection) studied drugs for pediatric use. The phenomenon of children WHO HAVE ADHD and are not treated for it being at higher risk for later drug abuse is a studied subject -- not some psychologist making something up.

For someone as analytical as you, I find it hard to believe (and, dare I say it, yes, I dare -- disappointing) that you would so flippantly dismiss the risk.

Montessori
 

I can't speak from experience, because my own children did Quaker pre-school (keeping them blissfully free from school-generated holiday hype).

But when I was looking at schools, I heard this criticism of Montessori. Maybe it is true, maybe not. All of the Montessori games are like puzzles, and they are all intended to have a single correct answer. Naturally, this is good for developing certain problem solving skills. But the M. school near us did not allow for play that didn't have an answer - like throwing together a bunch of costumes; or building legos.

So although the M. play is unstructured in the sense that one can pick and choose at will, it is very much structured in how one interacts with the objects available in the classroom.

Montessori
 

The school my kids have gone to (not Montessori) allows for plenty of dress up, etc. - but this play, too, is structured; spaces are set aside, teachers seek to encourage dress up to become acting, and legos to be used to develop pre-math skill.

But that is all good; my life is filled with purposeful play (indeed, on a good day that is how I think of what I do for a living), and that is far better than any available alternatives. If my kids start now with purposeful play, perhaps their lives will be filled with it as well.

Montessori
 

I appreciate the distinction. One has gone to medical school and the other hasn't. One can dispense drugs and the other can't. I believe this is some cause for mild antipathy between these groups, and a difference of approach, or at least a difference of first resort.

My natural skepticism often compels me to regard the medical profession's love of meds as something like the IT department's love of gadgets. "Oooh, look what this one can do --- it's miles ahead of the last one!" Not to mention the fact that MDs have been at the forefront of a massive shift of health care spending to pharma companies, partly because the incentives to prescribe --- some monetary, some more subtle --- are regulated by nothing more than an individual doctor's Hippocratic Oath. (Which, by the way, I respect.)

No slam on your friend --- individual doctors do wonderful things within the context of a health care system that's fucked up. I do not doubt the sincerity of his position and the desire to treat the whole person --- the adult who will grow from the child. I have less faith that studies will bear out that this generation of pharmacalogically treated ADHD children will avoid adult drug use in greater numbers than non-treated ADHD children. Diagnoses and medication have both skyrocketed in the meantime.

I don't believe I said he was "making it up." And I apologize for not making the distinction between the choices faced by a parents of a child with unmanageable ADHD and those faced by others. Right now, I have the luxury of being in the other camp. And I hear stories about parents who just want their child "fixed" and resort to medication without exploring other therapies.

My position on this is biased against medication because I think we're becoming overmedicated as a society as a whole.

I don't dismiss the risk. I'm just not optimistic that medicating today will reduce self-medicating tomorrow. If I met your friend at a cocktail party, I'd probably cave more quickly.

Montessori
 

The Stark laws also discourage that. Not saying that all docs now are free of bias in what they prescribe, just pointing out ...
Studies are inconclusive at this point, but this article is fairly interesting on the subject, and the author does admit that they were interested in whether medicating a child with ADHD could increase the possibility that the child may use other drugs later as the child was used to medication as a means to feeling good.

I have no dog in this particular fight (no kids yet), but I agree with you. If I ever am blessed with children and one has ADHD or a similar disorder, I know it will be gut-wrenching to decide whether to medicate the wee one.

Edited to add another interesting article that I found on ADHD medication and later drug abuse.

Montessori
 

Do want to raise a scientist/doctor/lawyer or an actor?

NTTAWW being an actor.

I know, I know, a lot of people will say that they just want their kid to be happy, and if that means being an actor, so be it. But that assumes that someone naturally wants to be an actor and not a scientist. Montessori pushes in a direction (arguably - but arguably not in other ways), but that doesn't mean that it's bad to do so. We make choices for our children, and deciding to put them in prgrams that emphasize role playing pushes in one direction, while programs encouraging problem solving push in another. Most programs (including Montessori) try to deal with this issue by balancing the activities, but it's hard to say that a particular emphasis is wrong.

Montessori
 

Another thought, third-hand evidence. A very good friend of mine put her 3-year old in Montessori recently. The daughter is still there and loves it, but the experience can depend on the teachers. For instance, a couple of the older, really good teachers left that school (pay issues). My friend was recently told that her daughter is now a "problem child" because the newer, younger teacher approached her and said "you can't walk around and eat your carrot at the same time." The girl handed the teacher her carrot and continued to walk around the room, although the teacher was trying to get her to sit down and eat the carrot. I thought that was brilliant of the child. She quickly assessed her priority, chose the appropriate action, and went on with it. To the teacher, this was "not listening to authority." I thought it showed perfect attention and decision-making capability. But my friend and her spouse are now carefully watching what is going on, and may decide to place their daughter with another Montessori school.

And regarding the kid who said "can't, had a spell on me," that's genius. I love that. Might not have high-fived the kid if he were mine, but definitely would have chuckled inwardly.

Montessori
 

Right -- but what you said was "I'd like to think that I would never be cowed into medicating a child today because some child psychologist says it might lead to drug abuse later." Are you saying that this is not a flippant dismissal of the empirical evidence? I don't think I said it was the only consideration to be taken into account -- just another factor in the decision-making process, and one I found to be compelling.

What gives you the impression that doctors are out to prescribe drugs to children for no reason (or at least, for something-less-than-pure-medical-analysis reasons)? You read it somewhere? Anectotal evidence (read -- as good as no evidence at all)? Because you've pointed out now several times that it's not from personal experience.

Furthermore, Ritalin (&c) is not "the latest thing" -- as I think I mentioned, it's one of the most-studied and longest-prescribed pediatric drugs.


I'm not insulted by any slam (and did not perceive one) on my friend; just pointing out that this information was not received in the context of making a medication decision for my own child and as evidence that the factoid was not offered as a "cowing" tactic to get me to medicate my child, but as a point of information in a non-diagnostic conversation.

And again, this is FAR from the first generation of children taking Ritalin. You may not have any faith in future studies; I don't have a view about future studies. All I am talking about are past studies (and apparently there are quite a number of them), which do lead to the conclusion that children with ADHD who are not treated have a GREATER RISK (i.e., it's not a certainty) of drug abuse later in life. I don't believe I made the assertion anywhere that those ADHD kids who are treated will avoid drug use/abuse in every case (and I know that's now what you're saying); but according to two child psychiatrists and one "regular" psychiatrist (who, just as an added tidbit, had untreated ADHD as a child), the studies out there do show a correlation between untreated ADHD and drug use/abuse later in life (adolescence, I think).

And yet, 50 years of empirical studies say otherwise. But, eh, studies, schmuddies; go with your gut.


[Edited for clarity.]

Montessori
 

an article in the local paper claimed that school districts got extra $$$$ per each special needs kid, and every ADHD (or other acronyms) kid rang the cash register. The docs in question are employed by the school district. There is at least the potential for over-prescribing. anyway, 5 years from now when this wave of kids from the posters here are just moving out of 3rd grade, maybe we can revisit the question.

Montessori
 

Actually, we've watched school districts fight classification heavily, because service obligations also come with the designation, and in many cases the services are already strained. It is often parents fighting to GET the classification.

Where are you that the school district has docs on the payroll? We're lucky to have a nurse in the building a few days a week, and are in one of the top school districts in our state.