Behaviour disorders and teacher negligence

The purpose of this paper is to examine the legal implications of the continuing rise in the number of school children diagnosed with behaviour disorders. Not only are teachers now subject to a dense grid of legal regulation, they are also increasingly vulnerable to actions in tort. It will be argued here that as more and more children are labelled ‘disordered’, the duty of care become more onerous, and hence harder for teachers to meet. As a consequence, teachers are more likely to face claims of negligence. It is concluded that while the schooling system needs to retain a healthy scepticism about each new pathologising disorder that seeks special status for its sufferers, it also needs to provide greater training and resources for teachers regarding disorder management. It is also concluded that recent changes to negligence law regarding the issue of ‘reasonable foreseeability’ within breach of duty of care, may not be as significant as might have been hoped by the teaching community. Indeed, the elevated standard of care required by the increasing numbers of disordered pupils, places teachers in an ever more difficult legal position.

Behaviour disorders and the negligent teacher

The purpose of this paper is to examine the legal implications of the continuing rise in the number of school children diagnosed with behaviour disorders. Not only are teachers now subject to a dense grid of legal regulation, they are also increasingly vulnerable to actions in tort. It will be argued here that as more and more children are labelled ‘disordered’, then the concomitant duty of care requirements for teachers becomes more onerous. As a consequence, teachers are less likely to be able to defend themselves against claims of negligence. It is concluded that while the schooling system needs to retain a healthy scepticism about each new pathologising disorder that seeks special status for its sufferers, it also needs to provide greater training and resources for teachers regarding disorder management. It is also concluded that recent changes to negligence law regarding the issue of ‘reasonable foreseeability’ within breach of duty of care, may not be as significant as might have been hoped by the teaching community. Indeed, the elevated standard of care, as required by increasing numbers of disordered pupils, place teachers in an ever more difficult legal position.

Philosophy, behaviour disorders, and the school

The recent exponential rise in the number of behaviour disorders has been the focus of a wide range of commentaries, ranging from the pedagogic and the administrative, to the sociological, and even the legal. This book will be the first to apply, in a systematic and thorough manner, the ideas of the foundational discipline of philosophy. A number of philosophical tools are applied here, tools arising through the medium of the traditional philosophical debates, such as those concerning governance, truth, logic, ethics, free-will, law and language. Each forms a separate chapter, but together they constitute a comprehensive, rigorous and original insight into what is now an important set of concerns for all those interested in the governance of children. The intention is threefold: first, to demonstrate the utility, accessibility and effectiveness of philosophical ideas within this important academic area. Philosophy does not have to be regarded an arcane and esoteric discipline, with only limited contemporary application, far from it. Second, the book offers a new set of approaches and ideas for both researchers and practitioners within education, a field is in danger of continually using the same ideas, to endlessly repeat the same conclusions. Third, the book offers a viable alternative to the dominant psychological model which increasingly employs pathology as its central rationale for conduct. The book would not only be of interest to mainstream educators, and to those students and academics interested in philosophy, and more specifically, the application of philosophical ideas to educational issues, it would also be an appropriate text for courses on education and difference, and due to the breadth of the philosophical issues addressed, courses on applied philosophy.

Parent psychopathology and offspring mental disorders: results from the WHO World Mental Health Surveys

Background Associations between specific parent and offspring mental disorders are likely to have been overestimated in studies that have failed to control for parent comorbidity. Aims To examine the associations of parent with respondent disorders. Method Data come from the World Health Organization (WHO) World Mental Health Surveys (n = 51 507). Respondent disorders were assessed with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview and parent disorders with informant-based Family History Research Diagnostic Criteria interviews. Results Although virtually all parent disorders examined (major depressive, generalised anxiety, panic, substance and antisocial behaviour disorders and suicidality) were significantly associated with offspring disorders in multivariate analyses, little specificity was found. Comorbid parent disorders had significant sub-additive associations with offspring disorders. Population-attributable risk proportions for parent disorders were 12.4% across all offspring disorders, generally higher in high- and upper-middle-than low-/lower-middle-income countries, and consistently higher for behaviour (11.0-19.9%) than other (7.1-14.0%) disorders. Conclusions Parent psychopathology is a robust non-specific predictor associated with a substantial proportion of offspring disorders.

Free will, moral responsibility and ADHD

One of the oldest problems in philosophy concerns the relationship between free will and moral responsibility. If we adopt the position that we lack free will, in the absolute sense—as have most philosophers who have addressed this issue—how can we truly be held accountable for what we do? This paper will contend that the most significant and interesting challenge to the long-standing status-quo on the matter comes not from philosophy, jurisprudence, or even physics, but rather from psychology. By examining this debate through the lens of contemporary behaviour disorders, such as ADHD, it will be argued that notions of free will, along with its correlate, moral responsibility, are being eroded through the logic of psychology which is steadily reconfiguring large swathes of familiar human conduct as pathology. The intention of the paper is not only to raise some concerns over the exponential growth of behaviour disorders, but also, and more significantly, to flag the ongoing relevance of philosophy for prying open contemporary educational problems in new and interesting ways.

Free will, moral responsibility and ADHD

One of the oldest problems in philosophy concerns the relationship between free will and moral responsibility. If we adopt the position that we lack free will, in the absolute sense—as have most philosophers who have addressed this issue—how can we truly be held accountable for what we do? This paper will contend that the most significant and interesting challenge to the long-standing status-quo on the matter comes not from philosophy, jurisprudence, or even physics, but rather from psychology. By examining this debate through the lens of contemporary behaviour disorders, such as ADHD, it will be argued that notions of free will, along with its correlate, moral responsibility, are being eroded through the logic of psychology which is steadily reconfiguring large swathes of familiar human conduct as pathology. The intention of the paper is not only to raise some concerns over the exponential growth of behaviour disorders, but also, and more significantly, to flag the ongoing relevance of philosophy for prying open contemporary educational problems in new and interesting ways.

The ADHD debate and the philosophy of truth

There is ongoing and wide-ranging dispute over the proliferation of childhood behaviour disorders. In particular, the veracity of the category Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), has been the subject of considerable scepticism. With no end to the debate in sight, it will be argued here that the problem might effectively be approached, not by addressing the specific features of ADHD itself, but rather by a philosophical analysis of one of the terms around which this entire problem revolves: that is, the notion of truth. If we state: “It is true that ADHD is a real disorder”, what exactly do we mean? Do we mean that it is an objective fact of nature? Do we mean that it fits seamlessly with other sets of ideas and explanations? Or do we simply mean that it works as an idea in a practical sense? This paper will examine the relationship between some of the dominant models of truth, and the assertions made by those in the field of ADHD. Specifically, the paper will contrast the claim that ADHD is a real disorder, with the claim that ADHD is a product of social governance. The intention is, first, to place some significant qualifications upon the validity of the truth-claims made by ADHD advocates, and second, to re-emphasise the potential and promise of philosophical investigation in providing productive new ways of thinking about some obstinate and seemingly intractable educational problems.

Pathologising difference, governing personality

Recent research has stressed the integral part played by teachers in both preliminary diagnosis and ongoing treatment of a range of conduct and personality disorders. Teachers are not only required to be aware of a variety of new categories of difference (Attention Deficit Disorder, Selective Mutism, Borderline Personality Disorder, Antisocial Personality Disorder, to name but a few), but are also now lauded for extending the role of education into new areas of social management. This paper will take issue with this understanding on two counts: first, teachers have always sought to mould the personalities of students, and the pathologisation of specific forms of conduct is simply a new tactic within a very old and familiar strategy. Second, schools do not simply discover disorders such as ADD as objective facts of nature. Rather, they are part of the process through which such differences are created, and by which individuals can be more effectively governed.

Setting limits to teacher responsibility

The purpose of this article is to raise some concerns over ongoing changes to the nature and scope of the teaching profession. Teaching is a responsible profession, and teachers have always been charged with the job of turning out the next generation of citizens—educated, healthy in mind, and healthy in body. The question is: how far should this responsibility extend? Just what should schools be responsible for? This article proposes some limits to teacher responsibility.

Too great expectations?

Teachers have always been charged with the task of turning out the next generation of citizens—educated, healthy in mind, and healthy in body. The central question here is: how far should this responsibility extend? Just how much can we reasonably expect teachers to be responsible for? And just what should schools be responsible for? Obviously, teachers ought to be responsible for the fundamentals of learning, but should they be held accountable for what the children eat, or how they choose to behave, or for every single risk, direct or indirect, that could conceivably occur within the school grounds? These are precisely the kinds of expectation that have become part of educational life. Bit by bit, new forms of responsibility are being added to the site of the school and, more specifically, to the professional life of the teacher. The intention here is not necessarily to challenge any of these diverse changes, but rather to express concern about their cumulative effect on the ability of the school to do its primary job effectively.

A disordered approach

It seems a new behaviour disorder is identified every week. Forms of conduct once simply regarded as part of the human condition, are rapidly being reinterpreted as types of mental illness. Individuals are no longer simply quiet or shy, they are reclassified as suffering from Generalised Social Phobia, or Selective Mutism, or Avoidant Personality Disorder. Others are no longer simply unpopular or obnoxious, they are reclassified as Borderline Personality Disorder, or Antisocial Personality Disorder. Still more are no longer lively or boisterous, they have Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, or Conduct Disorder, or Oppositional Defiance Disorder.

Threat vigilance in child witnesses of domestic violence: a pilot study utilizing the ambiguous situations paradigm

Research has found that children exposed to family violence exhibit higher rates of maladjustment. We review relevant literature on family violence, marital conflict, and cognitive factors implicated in child behaviour problems. A bias toward perceiving threat in ambiguous contexts has been identified as one factor mediating both aggressive and anxious behaviour disorders. We conducted a study utilizing the ambiguous situations paradigm to assess whether children exposed to violent spousal conflict were more likely than children not exposed to violence (divided into children with an externalizing behaviour disorder and non-clinic children) to perceive threat in two classes of ambiguous situations: Peer and Inter-Parental. The results indicated that children exposed to violent spousal conflict perceived more threat in parental situations than either of the other two groups. A number of considerations were taken into account given the exploratory nature of the study, particularly sample limitations. We conclude with suggestions for improvements to the research design and the further relevance of exploring cognitive factors involved in the adjustment of children from backgrounds of violence.

What is the relationship between the term 'ADHD' and the object it purports to represent?

This paper addresses the question: what is the relationship between the term ADHD, and the object it purports to represent? While the most familiar linguistic position—Referential Theory— suggests that the term constitute an etymological peg corresponding to a particular part of nature, there are other, arguably more sophisticated, philosophical approaches that point to an altogether more complex relationship. These approaches do not assume that ‘behaviour disorders’, such as ADHD, are objective facts of nature, facts to which words can simply be adhered. Using the work of Wittgenstein, the intention here is to use the philosophy of language to destabilise, not just the relationship between the term ADHD and the idea to which it applies, but also the coherence of the notion of ADHD itself.

Délinquance des filles et délinquance des garçons : différence dans les comportements ou différence dans la gestion des comportements? Une étude du point de vue des intervenants

La délinquance juvénile a été souvent dépeinte de façon globale sans distinction de genre, ou encore, elle fut décrite principalement chez les garçons. Constater la faible représentation des adolescentes prises en charge en vertu de la Loi sur le système de justice pénale pour adolescents, comparativement aux garçons, conduit vers diverses explications. Certaines mettent l’accent sur la personne, arguant que la délinquance des filles est différente de celle des garçons, moins fréquente et surtout moins violente. D’autres mettent l’accent sur le traitement des instances judiciaires qu’on dit protectionniste vis-à-vis des filles, ce qui fait qu’on les dirige plutôt vers le système de Protection de la jeunesse pour troubles de comportement. Devant cette divergence d’explication, nous avons cherché à comprendre si la faible représentation des filles dans le système de justice pénale pour adolescent est due aux comportements des adolescents en tant que tels, ou à la manière dont leurs comportements sont perçus et gérés par les intervenants oeuvrant auprès de ces jeunes impliqués dans des situations-problèmes, lesquelles sont susceptibles ou non, d’être judiciarisées. Notre étude pose un regard sur l’enclenchement du processus judiciaire auquel des adolescents se trouvent confrontés, c’est-à-dire leur arrestation ou leur signalement à une instance officielle, sous l’angle de la représentation sociale des jeunes par les intervenants. Pour ce faire, nous avons rencontré des intervenants du milieu scolaire, puisque l’école se situe au deuxième rang des signalants vers le système de prise en charge des adolescents en difficulté, après les parents. Nous leur avons présenté des cas-types, sous forme de vignettes, visant à saisir leurs perceptions et réactions vis-à-vis des situations-problèmes impliquant des adolescentes et des adolescents, en souhaitant déterminer si celles-ci varient en fonction du genre. Bien qu’en théorie la vision des interviewés quant à la délinquance juvénile soit assez uniforme, et ce, peu importe le sexe du délinquant, nos résultats montrent qu’en pratique, il y a un double standard. Ainsi, si les règles sont conçues pour tous et les conséquences de leur non-respect doivent en principe s’appliquer également sans distinction, lorsqu’il s’agit d’intervenir, les interviewés conviennent que leur approche diffère selon qu’ils aient affaire à une fille ou à un garçon. Par ailleurs, ils déplorent le manque criant de ressources et questionnent la volonté de certains parents de contribuer à la réussite scolaire de leur enfant. Ultimement, ils remettent en cause, dans une large mesure, le système éducatif québécois. En tant qu’acteurs sociaux, les intervenants ont le pouvoir de faire valoir leur point de vue. L’analyse de ce point de vue, dans le cadre de notre mémoire, montre l’importance de leur rôle dans le parcours des adolescents, garçons et filles, plus spécialement lorsque ceux-ci se trouvent impliqués dans des situations-problèmes.