Sometimes Patent Medicine Works: A Reply to Braaten, Kauffman, Braaten, Polsgrove, and Nelson

Abstract

Sometimes Patent Medicine Works: A Reply to Braaten, Kauffman, Braaten, Polsgrove, and Nelson According to American Heritage Dictionary of English Language, is a drug or other medical preparation that is protected by and can be bought without prescription. * Concerned about reduction of special education services for (BD) which may result from movement known as regular education initiative (REI), Braaten et al. (1988) recently argued that (a) some with behavioral disorders require special education, (b) such can be identified in many cases on basis of their problem behavior (s), (c) with behavioral disorders are notoriously underserved, (d) these are labeled before they enter special education, (e) these require different educational technology, (f) teachers of with behavioral disorders need different skills than most teachers, and (g) jeopardizes meager services available to these and probably would cause many to be shunted out of education altogether. The fundamental concern that Braaten and his colleagues addressed was that proponents of REI movement have proffered reform proposals with little concern for available data or their political and pragmatic ramifications. They attacked proponents of REI in such manner that we are concerned that REI perspective is misrepresented. In building case to support their beliefs that REI may be patent medicine to with behavioral disorders, Braaten et al. addressed issues related to (a) integration and (b) right to treatment. We will review their arguments and point out inconsistencies with basic tenets of partnership movement to illustrate an alternative perspective on REI. INTEGRATION ARGUMENTS These arguments by Braaten et al. are based on opinions about research on identification practices; opinions about labeling; opinions about appropriateness of placing with behavioral disorders in regular classrooms; opinions about teachers' attitudes, skills, and priorities; and opinions about effects of excellence-in-education movement. The authors believe that with behavioral disorders are not an overidentified group in special education (few have argued that they are). They share concerns about stigma associated with behaviorally disordered label (but they believe stigma is more result of what these children do rather than what they are called). They agree that the mainstream is most appropriate for many handicapped students (emphasis in original), but that research clearly does not support assertion that all can be managed and taught effectively in regular classes (emphasis added). Moreover, they believe that general education teachers to successfully teach and manage, and tolerate most disruptive and disturbed is extremely naive and illogical, both from viewpoint of common sense and from perspective of available research. (With regard to their last concern, we believe that expecting any teachers to welcome, successfully teach and manage, and tolerate most disruptive and disturbed students is asking lot.) RIGHT-TO-TREATMENT ARGUMENTS The second group of arguments by Braaten et al. is based on opinions about eligibility for services, rights to privacy, and appropriate interventions. The authors believe that with behavioral disorders are underidentified and that under REI even more will be denied appropriate help. They fail to point out, however, how identifying them will solve their problems. They believe that being served in special class settings affords these privacy that they welcome in dealing with their problems (the argument that segregation is better than integration). …