Chad Taylor took his 12-year-old son off Ritalin after he began noticing serious side-effects.
"He was losing weight, wasn't sleeping, wasn't eating," he said. "[He] just wasn't Daniel."
After being taken off the Ritalin, Daniel's sleeping and eating habits returned to normal, but the normal symptoms of ADHD returned. When his teachers discovered he was no longer on Ritalin, they contacted New Mexico's Department of Children, Youth, and Families. A detective and a social worker then made a home visit.
"The detective told me if I did not medicate my son, I would be arrested for child abuse and neglect," Taylor said.
Antidepressant use is seriously on the rise, especially in young people. It rose 49% among patients under 18 between 1998 and 2002, with children 5 and under the fastest-growing group.
It's clear he's in a bind: put his son back on a drug that will allow him to sit still but has other, possibly serious side-effects, or go to prison. Taylor says he's made the decision I think most parents would make: "Yeah, I'll go to jail for it. I'll go as long as I have to go."
The article has more on the overall trend and the options parents face. Another detective in New Mexico is quoted as saying that criminal prosecution is definitely a possibility.
Regardless of where you fall in the debate on the validity of antidepressant medication, I believe this is a case of the State saying its judgment is better than a parent's, something which should only be done in the most extreme of cases. He's not risking his son's health or safety with his decision; quite the contrary, he's removing a harmful influence from his son's life. The state has seriously overstepped its bounds in this case.
Now with beginning-of-the-article-linked goodness!
