The Crux « We (Apparently) Found the Higgs Boson. Now, Where the Heck Did It Come From? The Surprising Connection Between Card-Shuffling and the Higgs Boson » Is Autism an “Epidemic” or Are We Just Noticing More People Who Have It? By Crux Guest Blogger | July 11, 2012 4:37 pm Emily Willingham (Twitter, Google+, blog) is a science writer and compulsive biologist whose work has appeared at Slate, Grist, Scientific American Guest Blog, and Double X Science, among others. She is science editor at the Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism and author of The Complete Idiot’s Guide to College Biology.
Shutterstock
In March the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) the newly measured autism prevalences for 8-year-olds in the United States, and headlines roared about a “1 in 88 autism epidemic.” The fear-mongering has led some enterprising folk to latch onto our nation’s growing chemophobia and link the rise in autism to “toxins” or other alleged insults, and some to sell their research, books, and “cures.” On the other hand, some researchers say that what we’re really seeing is likely the upshot of more awareness about autism and ever-shifting diagnostic categories and criteria.
Even though autism is now widely discussed in the media and society at large, the public and some experts alike are still stymied be a couple of the big, basic questions about the disorder: What is autism, and how do we identify—and count—it? A close look shows that the unknowns involved in both of these questions suffice to explain the reported autism boom. The disorder hasn’t actually become much more common—we’ve just developed better and more accurate ways of looking for it.
Leo Kanner first described autism almost 70 years ago, in 1944. Before that, autism didn’t exist as far as clinicians were concerned, and its official prevalence was, therefore, zero. There were, obviously, people with autism, but they were simply considered insane. Kanner himself noted in a 1965 paper that after he identified this entity, “almost overnight, the country seemed to be populated by a multitude of autistic children,” a trend that became noticeable in other countries, too, he said.
In 1951, Kanner wrote, the “great question” became whether or not to continue to roll autism into schizophrenia diagnoses, where it had been previously tucked away, or to consider it as a separate entity. But by 1953, one autism expert was warning about the “abuse of the diagnosis of autism” because it “threatens to become a fashion.” Sixty years later, plenty of people are still asserting that autism is just a popular diagnosis du jour (along with ADHD), that parents and doctors use to explain plain-old bad behavior.
Asperger’s syndrome, a form of autism sometimes known as “little professor syndrome,” is in the same we-didn’t-see-it-before-and-now-we-do situation. In 1981, noted autism researcher Lorna Wing translated and revivified Hans Asperger’s 1944 paper describing this syndrome as separate from Kanner’s autistic disorder, although Wing herself argued that the two were part of a borderless continuum. Thus, prior to 1981, Asperger’s wasn’t a diagnosis, in spite of having been identified almost 40 years earlier. Again, the official prevalence was zero before its adoption by the medical community.
And so, here we are today, with two diagnoses that didn’t exist 70 years ago (plus a third, even newer one: PDD-NOS) even though the people with the conditions did. The CDC’s new data say that in the United States, 1 in 88 eight-year-olds fits the criteria for one of these three, up from 1 in 110 for its 2006 estimate. Is that change the result of an increase in some dastardly environmental “toxin,” as some argue? Or is it because of diagnostic changes and reassignments, as happened when autism left the schizophrenia umbrella?
To most experts in autism and autism epidemiology, the biggest factors accounting for the boost in autism prevalence are the shifting definitions and increased awareness about the disorder. Several decades after the introduction of autism as a diagnosis, researchers have reported that professionals are still engaging in “diagnostic substitution”: moving people from one diagnostic category, such as “mental retardation” or “language impairment,” to the autism category. For instance, in one recent study, researchers at UCLA re-examined a population of 489 children who’d been living in Utah in the 1980s. Their first results, reported in 1990, identified 108 kids in the study population who received a classification of “challenged” (what we consider today to be “intellectually disabled”) but who were not diagnosed as autistic. When the investigators went back and applied today’s autism diagnostic criteria to the same 108 children, they found that 64 of them would have received an autism diagnosis today, along with their diagnosis of intellectual disability.
Further evidence of this shift comes from developmental neuropsychologist Dorothy Bishop and colleagues, who completed a study involving re-evaluation of adults who’d been identified in childhood as having a developmental language disorder rather than autism. Using two diagnostic tools to evaluate them today, Bishops’ group found that a fifth of these adults met the criteria for an autism spectrum diagnosis when they previously had not been recognized as autistic.
Another strong argument against the specter of an emergent autism epidemic is that prevalence of the disorder is notably similar from country to country and between generations. A 2011 UK study of a large adult population found a consistent prevalence of 1% among adults, “similar to that found in (UK) children” and about where the rates are now among US children. In other words, they found as many adults as there were children walking around with autism, suggesting stable rates across generations—at least, when people bother to look at adults. And back in 1996, Lorna Wing (the autism expert who’d translated Asperger’s seminal paper) tentatively estimated an autism spectrum disorder prevalence of 0.91% [PDF] based on studies of children born between 1956 and 1983, close to the 1% that keeps popping up in studies today.
One study in South Korea found a significantly higher rate of autism, but it used a different methodology and different study population. In fact, the part of the Korean study that was most comparable to other studies found an autism rate of .8%—about the same as in other countries.
Toting up these three known reasons for why autism prevalence is rising—consistent clinical prevalence rates across generations, many people who fit the criteria for autism going unidentified, and evidence of diagnostic substitution—we don’t need to dig much further to explain what looks superficially like an “autism epidemic” in the U.S. Because of greater awareness of autism and the flexibility of the diagnostic tools used, we’ve recently been diagnosing people with autism who previously would have received other diagnoses or gone unidentified.
Shutterstock
And now, after the autism rate’s 70-year boom, it may soon take a sharp drop—but that will have nothing to do with environmental factors. The manual currently used to make mental-health diagnoses, the DSM-IV (the “bible of psychiatry”), is in the process of being updated. The proposed DSM-V criteria for diagnosing autism would, according to some studies, shift down the number diagnosed. In fact, Asperger’s and PDD-NOS would disappear altogether. If the number of people diagnosed as autistic decreases under the new criteria, as predicted, should it send us scurrying to look for environmental factors that are decreasing to explain the decline? Obviously not.
These evident explanations for rising autism rates don’t stop many, many people from hopping on the autism-cause bandwagon to shill research, books, and “cures” for the “epidemic.” The MO in nearly every case is, as Baroness Greenfield might say, pointing to a rise in some alleged problem, pointing to the rise in autism, and insinuating a link between the two. But there are two problems with this obsessive focus on misleading connections.
Problem one is that as we now have what is probably a more realistic picture of autism prevalence than ever before, we’re ignoring the fact that autistic adults are also walking around in these numbers, as the UK study suggests. Autistic adults may not be seeking a “cure” for autism, which many consider to be a part of who they are, but the autistic adult community could use attention, support, and resources that all too often go to misguided efforts to find one delivish, monolithic cause of the alleged epidemic.
Problem two relates to understanding the causes of autism, another obsession for many people. Homing in on new or recently increasing environmental factors shifts attention from always-present factors that might actually be involved in causing some cases of autism. Does autism have environmental components, such as parental age or interacting factors in the womb? Probably. Do these environmental components have to show an increase to confirm an association with autism? No. Let’s not let fright words like “epidemic” and “toxin” distract us from what the data really say. Any true increase in autism prevalence, if there is one, is likely quite small. The data suggest that autistic people have always been here, whether diagnosed or not
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Where is the outrage over school funding disparity in Sch’dy?
As a new resident of Schenectady with grandchildren in the public school system, I have been reading with great interest all of the articles regarding the schools in this city. I think that the coverage given by the paper has been a wonderful way to stay informed. On Dec. 11 I attended the winter concert at Paige Elementary and heard Superintendent Laurence Spring talk about the inequity of funding given school systems throughout the state. Schenectady is receiving just 54 percent of the state aid that it should be receiving by law! Schenectady has the dubious distinction of having the 13th-highest concentration of childhood poverty in the state. Clearly our children would not only benefit from our schools receiving their fair share of funding, but there is a very real possibility that they would actually thrive. It seems that Superintendent Spring is doing all that is possible to draw attention to this issue. According to all the articles I have read, including your Dec. 13 one, “Spring: Too many black kids getting mental health label,” he is shining a bright light in every corner of our school system. I would like to help him by applying as much pressure as possible regarding this disproportion in funding. It is appalling that our children, who are already facing terrible adversity, must suffer more by not receiving the best education possible because of spending cuts, programs barely operating on a shoestring and programs not available at all because the money just isn’t there. I can certainly write a letter to our governor and will, as I am sure other parents and grandparents will. However, how much more amplified would our voices be if article after article regarding this issue appeared in our local paper? Schenectady, one of the poorest districts in the state, is among 22 districts being funded below 54 percent. Only 3 percent of all districts are being funded at this level. Meanwhile, 138 districts are funded at 100 percent or more. More than $120 million is being overpaid to districts. Imagine the results if every Schenectady resident expressed outrage over this issue.
Mary, doesn't realize they are underfunded because the funds are undermanaged.....it depends on what part of the budget takes most of the funding....
this is a tit for tat between the state and the union contract/pay
Quoted Text
Average Teacher Salary in Schenectady City School District
The average teacher salary in Schenectady City School District is $52,816.
Grade Level Average 10th percentile 25th percentile Median 75th percentile 90th percentile Pre-school $27,173 $18,488 $21,554 $24,909 $29,946 $40,368 Kindergarten $57,275 $41,980 $46,963 $54,851 $65,343 $79,411 Elementary $59,244 $40,838 $46,726 $55,705 $72,792 $84,754 Middle school $59,958 $42,164 $47,763 $56,479 $69,940 $86,888 High school $60,434 $41,605 $48,234 $57,428 $71,906 $86,109 How to Become a Teacher in Schenectady City School District To learn how to become a teacher in the Schenectady City School District, read our how to become a teacher in New York article. For average salary information, read our average teacher salary in New York article.
General Facts Staff: 1,616 Full time teachers: 780 Pupil to teacher ratio: 15 to 1 Teacher assistants (instructional aides): 255 Instructional Coordinators: 14 Elementary Teachers: 300 Kindergarten Teachers: 52 Pre-K Teachers: 9 High School Teachers: 297 Pre-K to 12 Students: 10,019 Financial Statistics for Schenectady City School District Revenue Revenue from local sources: $45,994,000 Revenue from state sources: $84,170,000 Revenue from federal sources: $13,703,000 Total revenue: $143,867,000 Expenses Expenditures on instruction: $95,669,000 Expenditures on teacher salary: $74,799,000 Expenditures on teacher benefits: $26,790,000 Expenditures per student: $2,193,000 Total expenditures: $146,449,000 Breakdown of Teacher Salary Expenses Teacher salary expenses on regular education: $34,516,000 Teacher salary expenses on special education: $5,382,000 Teacher salary expenses on vocational education: $3,000 Information on Schools within Schenectady City School District Elementary Schools within the Schenectady City School District School Students Student to Teacher Ratio Full Time Certified Teachers Lowest Grade Offered Highest Grade Offered Elmer Avenue School 90 Elmer Ave Schenectady, NY 12308 518-370-8310 Total: 422 Kindergarten: 63 1st grade: 60 2nd grade: 69 3rd grade: 63 4th grade: 62 5th grade: 62 6th grade: 43 17 to 1 25 Kindergarten 6th Grade Franklin Delano Roosevelt Elementary School 570 Lansing St Schenectady, NY 12303 518-881-3970 Total: 199 Kindergarten: 58 1st grade: 24 2nd grade: 28 3rd grade: 23 4th grade: 24 5th grade: 28 6th grade: 14 22 to 1 9 Kindergarten 6th Grade Fulton Elementary School 408 Eleanor St Schenectady, NY 12306 518-881-3980 Total: 209 Pre-k: 126 Kindergarten: 73 1st grade: 10 14 to 1 15 Prekindergarten 1st Grade Hamilton Elementary School 1091 Webster St Schenectady, NY 12303 518-881-3720 Total: 410 Pre-k: 29 Kindergarten: 44 1st grade: 39 2nd grade: 48 3rd grade: 33 4th grade: 45 5th grade: 46 13 to 1 32 Kindergarten 6th Grade Howe International Magnet School 1065 Baker Ave Schenectady, NY 12309 518-370-8295 Total: 364 Kindergarten: 49 1st grade: 51 2nd grade: 49 3rd grade: 57 4th grade: 56 5th grade: 58 6th grade: 44 18 to 1 20 Kindergarten 6th Grade Jessie T Zoller School 1880 Lancaster St Schenectady, NY 12308 518-370-8290 Total: 456 Kindergarten: 60 1st grade: 90 2nd grade: 81 3rd grade: 73 4th grade: 74 5th grade: 78 14 to 1 33 Kindergarten 5th Grade Katherine Burr Blodgett Elementary School 520 Bradt St Schenectady, NY 12303 518-881-3950 Total: 129 Kindergarten: 20 1st grade: 20 2nd grade: 20 3rd grade: 25 4th grade: 19 5th grade: 12 6th grade: 13 16 to 1 8 Kindergarten 6th Grade Lincoln School 300 Park Ave Deer Park, NY 11729 631-274-4360 Total: 181 Kindergarten: 101 1st grade: 102 2nd grade: 110 3rd grade: 112 4th grade: 97 5th grade: 109 6th grade: 102 26 to 1 7 Prekindergarten Prekindergarten Martin Luther King School 918 Stanley St Schenectady, NY 12307 518-370-8360 Total: 415 Pre-k: 18 Kindergarten: 47 1st grade: 49 2nd grade: 47 3rd grade: 64 4th grade: 80 5th grade: 58 6th grade: 52 15 to 1 27 Prekindergarten 6th Grade Paige School 104 Elliott Ave Schenectady, NY 12304 518-370-8300 Total: 466 Kindergarten: 74 1st grade: 69 2nd grade: 81 3rd grade: 73 4th grade: 63 5th grade: 68 6th grade: 38 16 to 1 30 Kindergarten 6th Grade Pleasant Valley School 1097 Forest Rd Schenectady, NY 12303 518-881-3640 Total: 426 Kindergarten: 80 1st grade: 81 2nd grade: 80 3rd grade: 62 4th grade: 55 5th grade: 68 13 to 1 34 Kindergarten 5th Grade Van Corlaer School 2310 Guilderland Ave Schenectady, NY 12306 518-370-8270 Total: 428 Kindergarten: 46 1st grade: 78 2nd grade: 61 3rd grade: 70 4th grade: 72 5th grade: 58 6th grade: 43 13 to 1 32 Kindergarten 6th Grade William C Keane Elementary School 1252 Albany Ave Schenectady, NY 12304 518-881-3960 Total: 306 Pre-k: 19 Kindergarten: 60 1st grade: 54 2nd grade: 47 3rd grade: 42 4th grade: 25 5th grade: 37 6th grade: 22 15 to 1 20 Prekindergarten 6th Grade Woodlawn School 3311 Wells Ave Schenectady, NY 12304 518-370-8280 Total: 475 Pre-k: 18 Kindergarten: 76 1st grade: 65 2nd grade: 66 3rd grade: 60 4th grade: 79 5th grade: 64 6th grade: 47 16 to 1 30 Prekindergarten 6th Grade Yates School 725 Salina St Schenectady, NY 12308 518-370-8320 Total: 382 Kindergarten: 62 1st grade: 65 2nd grade: 50 3rd grade: 48 4th grade: 60 5th grade: 53 6th grade: 44 15 to 1 25 Kindergarten 6th Grade Middle Schools within the Schenectady City School District School Students Student to Teacher Ratio Full Time Certified Teachers Lowest Grade Offered Highest Grade Offered Central Park Middle School 421 Elm St Schenectady, NY 12304 518-370-8250 Total: 548 6th grade: 58 7th grade: 236 8th grade: 254 11 to 1 52 6th Grade 8th Grade Mont Pleasant Middle School 1121 Forest Rd Schenectady, NY 12303 518-370-8160 Total: 695 6th grade: 129 7th grade: 300 8th grade: 266 10 to 1 71 6th Grade 8th Grade Oneida Middle School 1629 Oneida St Schenectady, NY 12308 518-370-8260 Total: 550 6th grade: 106 7th grade: 230 8th grade: 214 11 to 1 52 6th Grade 8th Grade High Schools within the Schenectady City School District School Students Student to Teacher Ratio Full Time Certified Teachers Lowest Grade Offered Highest Grade Offered Schenectady High School 1445 The Placeaza Schenectady, NY 12308 518-370-8167 Total: 2,958 9th grade: 985 10th grade: 784 11th grade: 534 12th grade: 655 13 to 1 224 9th Grade 12th Grade General District Statistics Per capita income: $17,100 Median family income: $36,515 Median male income: $22,828 Median female income: $16,576 Median income of a renter: $21,569 Median income of a home owner: $42,285 Number of Households making: 10 - 25k 25 - 40k 40 - 60k 60 - 100k 100k+ 4,790 2,915 3,065 2,715 805
Five Towns Teachers Average $111,691 Annual Salary Jan 26, 2012
inShare
By Jonathan Walter Additional Reporting by Scott P. Moore
Hewlett-Woodmere School District's Franklin School Do local teachers and administrators make too much money? It’s a tough question to answer as many locals don’t know how much work is being put in and how much that work is worth. However, a breakdown of salaries for teachers and administrators at local public schools can help.
In response to public school budgets skyrocketing through the years, Governor Andrew Cuomo unveiled a two perecent maximum tax cap to prevent large increases from year to year, however, with budgets of over $103 million for Hewlett-Woodmere Union Free School District and over $93 million for the Lawrence Union Free School District, these large budgets are already a force to be reckoned with locally and over a third of those totals go toward teacher and administrator salaries.
Lawrence School District 15 employed 334 teachers, which also includes district employed psychologists, social workers and therapists, during the 2010-2011 school year, paying each an average of $109,774.82. A teacher with a bachelor’s degree and no prior experience entering the Lawrence district could be expected to be paid $51,432 a year while those with master’s degrees could expect a starting salary of $59,354. The highest paid teacher in the school district, Lawrence Middle School sixth grade teacher Susan Fineo, made $161,472 last year. (These salary figures do not include benefit packages.)
Hewlett-Woodmere School District 14 employed 300 teachers during the same time period with the same classification during the 2010-2011 school year and salaries averaged 113,607.88. The highest paid teacher for Hewlett-Woodmere during that time period was Social Studies teacher Patricia Nardi, at $159,751.
While some may view these salaries as being high, Karl Corn, a representative from the New York State Union of Teachers sees things differently.
“While teachers salaries have improved over the years, many teachers still earn less thatn they would in the private sector for similar levels of experience,” Corn said. “New York is one of seven states where they require teachers to have a masters degree to teach. Most teachers on Long Island have at least 30 more credits past their masters degree. Nassau county is among the most highly experienced and highly educated in not only New York state, but the nation. Even having said that, salaries for teachers still lag behind the private sector. A phyiscs teacher earns a lot less than a physicist would earn in the private sector. A chemistry teacher earns less tha a chemsist would earn in the private sector. When you look at teachers salaries, what the public doesn’t often see is the masters degree, doctorate and 25 years experience.”
Corn also pointed out New York’s educational success as the results of these teachers efforts.
“Just last week, Long Island Schools dominated the Intel Science Competition,” Corn said. “New York ranks third in overall educational achievements. Long Island schools are not only among the best in New York State, but also the nation. As a society, if we are going to continue to attract and maintain the best teachers, we have to pay competitive salaries. Just like in sports, and in hollywood, if you want the best talent, you have to pay a competitive salary.”
Corn also pointed out that while it may seem like a lot to ask residents to pay for these teacher’s salaries while the area is plagued with such high property tax rates, New York State has cut public school funding by over $3.2 billion over the past three years.
It has shifted the burden from the state level to the backs of local property tax payers,” Corn said. “By the state’s failure to fund education, they were denying students right to a basic education. After a lawsuit, the court of appeals ordered the state to increase the amount of funding for the schools by $5 billion, but that never happened. The property tax rates are a direct result of the state cuts to public education.”
The 13 administrators of Lawrence school district, a group that includes the superintendent and principals but does not include the Board of Education members made an average of $137,013.31 during the previous school year. The highest paid administrative employee, Lawrence Middle School Principal George Akst, made $170,913 in 2011, while superintendent Gary Schall made $155,774. (Administrators who were also teachers were not included in this group.)
David Sussman, a member of the Lawrence School Board, said administrators work much more than teachers do to earn the extra pay.
“They work much harder and much long,” Sussman said. “They don’t have a 39-week year that teachers and are often voluntarily present in the evening working.”
Meanwhile, over at Hewlett-Woodmere, 22 administrators averaged $167,201.77, with Superintendent Joyce Bisso owning the highest salary in the district at $280,412.
“We have a pretty rich model here and it should be understood we have healthy load of teachers,” said Lawrence Superintendent Gary Schall. “We have a lot that can compare with the top districts on Long Island.”
Lawrence and Hewlett-Woodmere are not alone – district teachers across Long Island are paid vastly higher wages than their counterparts state and countrywide. The median salaries for Lawrence and Hewlett school districts, respectively, are $110,059 and $111,924, according to the New York State Education Department. (These numbers are slightly different than the average numbers stated above. The median is the value lying at the middle of a distribution of numbers, as opposed to an average.) In contrast, the median of teachers’ salaries throughout the New York City School System is only $72,990 while in Nassau and Suffolk Counties it was $95,050. The highest median teacher salary on Long Island belonged to the Jericho Union Free School District, which includes three elementary, one middle and one high school, at $122,479.
Locally, there isn’t a significant change in median salary for some of the area’s neighboring large school districts. Lynbrook’s median teacher salary was $102,545. East Rockaway’s median salary was $109,762, Oceanside was $107,072, and Long Beach was $106,786. Rockville Centre was a bit of a local outlier, with a median salary of $89,702.
Teachers across New York have an average starting salary of $41,079 while the state’s average salary for teachers is $69,118, according to the National Education Association. Similarly, teachers starting their careers in California begin with an average of $41,181 while the statewide average for all teachers is $68,093. Other states, however, come nowhere close to even these numbers – teachers in North Dakota, for example, start out at an average of $25,793 and the statewide average is only $41,654.
SOCIAL ENGINEERING AT OUR EXPENSE....remember, once a diagnosis ALWAYS a diagnosis.......
from the schoolhouse to the jailhouse....cog making at it's best
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Read the article in the Gazette where Hugh Farley apparently is not in agreement with the social worker that Schenectady district isn't getting the correct amount of aid. Starting to think the new superintendent/social worker is a little bit off his rocker. Obsessed with poverty like it's smallpox or something.
SEE ABOVE POST WITH $$$$$ VALUES
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
The intersection of interests noted above was an important factor in creating an environment within which reactionary reforms could take place. However other environmental factors also played an important role in creating conditions whereby the desires for progressive reform could be co-opted. For example, the goals of the Reagan Administration were well received in some quarters of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). In the 1980s, the NIMH started to come under the leadership of a different cohort of individuals. While the NIMH had originally been led by individuals who had come of age during the Great Depression, the leaders of the 1980s had come of age later. The result was that while the former cohort had been committed to innovations in government al social policy, the latter generation tended to be less interested in actual social policy and more supportive of measures to reduce the cost to the federal government (Armour, 1989, 187).
The Administrations goals of fiscal restraint also received support from the general public due to the perception of a federal government too prone to waste revenues and not address other basic concerns, such as crime prevention. Certain forms of social welfare spending, such as programs for the mentally ill, were perceiv ed as wasteful and thus easy targets for budget cuts (Gans, 1995; Katz, 1989). In contrast, other social programs, such as Social Security, were perceived as being "earned" by the recipients, and thus equitable. Despite the fact that the average Social Se curity recipient receives more in return than they pay into the system, programs such as this are perceived as being a pension for which the recipient has already paid. As such, they are less susceptible to cuts than categorical spending programs, such as community mental health treatment centers. Indeed, Social Security funding per beneficiary increased under the Reagan Administration (Levitan, 1990, 30). Mental health policy lacks the widespread public support that benefits Social Security (Armour, 1989 , 186). In light of this, it is not surprising that the Reagan Administration was able to cut these programs relatively easily (186-7).
The concerns of the general public were also mobilized in the context of fear over the possibility of a patient committing a violent or otherwise anti-social act. Media attention paid to the problems of the mental health system tended to concentrate in two areas: the growing homelessness problem of the early 1980s and the possibility of criminal acts committed by deinsitutionalized patients. Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, hundreds of thousands of mentally ill people concentrated in the inner cities. With the rise of gentrification during the 1980s, many of them became displaced from their relatively affordable housing and were unable to fin d new accommodations. Many of these patients had lost contact with family members and were unable to work, and many did not have health insurance. Thus, they were unable to receive mental health services in the private sector. Media coverage of the growin g homeless problem helped to pressure legislators in many states to rewrite commitment laws to extend the net and make the streets "safer."
This media attention played into, and supported, the growing perception of violent crime as a problem in the United States. The Reagan Administration answered this general alarm by calling for quick and severe punishment of offenders. For those offenders who were not mentally ill, prison was normally seen as the solution (Gans, 1995). For the mentally ill however, involuntary committment seemed the best answer. Either way, quick removal of individuals threatening the social order fit well with the administration's "law and order" stance (LaFond and Durham, 1992, 114).
The new laws, however, were not intended to make it easier to commit the dangerous mentally ill. Rather, the new laws had more general application and made it easier to commit those only considered a threat (Lafond & Durham, 1992, 11. In addition to this, many of the existing liberal justices began to rule on a "right of treatment" clause rather than a straight civil libertarian viewpoint. The result was that at both the state and federal level, the court became increasingly reluctant to strike down legislation that broadened the definition of who was eligible for involuntary commitment (119). Again, this more stringent approach meshed well with the "law and order" stance taken by the administration.
SCHENECTADY Spring: State aid racially imbalanced Research shows white schools do better BY KATHLEEN MOORE Gazette Reporter
School districts with many minority students are getting less of the state aid they are supposed to receive than districts with mostly white students, according to Schenectady City School District Superintendent Laurence Spring. Spring presented his research to the school board Wednesday. Board members said they were surprised and asked Spring to immediately send his presentation to state offi cials. Spring researched which districts in the state had “minority as majority” student bodies — Schenectady is one of those districts. He found that just one non-white district is getting 90 to 99 percent of the state aid required by a court settlement that determined how much money is needed to provide a basic education. Meanwhile, 62 mostly white districts are getting 90 to 99 percent of their court-ordered aid. At the lower end of the spectrum, 37 districts are getting 50 to 59 percent of their court-ordered aid. Of those, 12 are predominantly nonwhite, including Schenectady. Only 8 percent of the state’s districts are predominantly non-white, but a third of those are getting 50 to 59 percent of their court-ordered aid. Of those getting less than 50 percent of their court-ordered aid, 30 percent are predominantly nonwhite. “You can see it’s heavily weighted,” Spring said. “That strikes me as alarming and something to be very concerned about.” In dollars per pupil, Schenectady is already receiving much more aid than many other districts. To choose the nearest example, mostly-white Niskayuna gets $2,740 per student, while heavily minority Schenectady gets about $7,300 per student. But Spring argues that Schenectady, due to its poverty, deserves more money. Niskayuna is getting 66 percent of what it should under the court-ordered settlement, while Schenectady is getting 54 percent of what it should be receiving. Looking at the matter from a racial perspective makes it even more clear that the state aid is unfairly distributed, Spring said. A more equitable formula would leave about four non-white districts at the lowest funding levels, Spring said. Instead, there are 15 non-white districts at those levels, including Schenectady. There are also 32 white districts at those funding levels. Spring called the funding discriminatory. Because non-white students are getting so much less than they are supposed to, he said, he plans to push the issue much harder. “I see it as my responsibility to raise the dialogue to a different level,” he said. Putting the issue a different way, Spring said 53 percent of white districts get at least 79 percent of their court-ordered aid, compared to only 20 percent of non-white districts. “Our minorities are getting the short end of the stick,” he added. He asked residents to call their state representatives and ask them two questions regarding the state aid formula. “Ask them if they’re aware this is the way the formula works. Ask if they’re OK with the way the formula works,” he said. Board member Ron Lindsay urged Spring to send his presentation to state officials, even those who have heard from the district already in its letter-writing campaign. “It’s OK for people to keep hearing from us,” Lindsay said, “because if we don’t advocate, no one’s going to advocate, and our children are too precious to not advocate for them.” ....................>>>>...................>>>>.............http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....r01103&AppName=1
throwing $$ at the poor performing schools isn't all the answer.....maybe the leaders should live among them...root out the bad apples from up close....kinda like the police chief living in the city,,,,in 'those areas'.....
the $$ isn't the issue....it's called a social cancer......
mandating schools to HAVE to take kids back that fail to fit in the cog system because the parents complain they don't have child care does a HUGE DETRIMENT to the whole system....
it becomes a 'shove it along' system...along with some well placed diagnosis/drugs...all LEGAL of course.....
the schools aren't poor performers....THEY ARE FREAKIN' OUTDATED SYSTEMS....BECOMING MORE AND MORE IRRELEVANT EVERY YEAR.....using them for daycares (see Tonko's take on it) is no different than birthing the human and tossing them to the state to raise....
WAKE UP FOLKS......
keep defending the schools keep blaming the schools
your tax dollars your jails your drugs your daycare your mommy your daddy etc etc etc......
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
throwing $$ at the poor performing schools isn't all the answer.....maybe the leaders should live among them...root out the bad apples from up close....kinda like the police chief living in the city,,,,in 'those areas'.....
the $$ isn't the issue....it's called a social cancer......
mandating schools to HAVE to take kids back that fail to fit in the cog system because the parents complain they don't have child care does a HUGE DETRIMENT to the whole system....
it becomes a 'shove it along' system...along with some well placed diagnosis/drugs...all LEGAL of course.....
the schools aren't poor performers....THEY ARE FREAKIN' OUTDATED SYSTEMS....BECOMING MORE AND MORE IRRELEVANT EVERY YEAR.....using them for daycares (see Tonko's take on it) is no different than birthing the human and tossing them to the state to raise....
WAKE UP FOLKS......
keep defending the schools keep blaming the schools
your tax dollars your jails your drugs your daycare your mommy your daddy etc etc etc......
Again, this is well worth repeating Senders. Thank you for the reality check!
Before one more dollar, one more cent is given to the Schenectady Schools, the entire system needs a revision! Let's stop concentrating on providing drug/medical/pension/benefit coverage for teachers...that's not going to solve ANYTHING. Academics....yeah...that little area of the budget should have more funding. Chicago, NY City, other districts with welfare kids have flourished...why the he** haven't Schenectady School Admin taken a road trip to find out what's working there??
Get off your duffs and start looking ahead, not into NYS pockets!!!
Minority Report has arrived: Maryland and Pennsylvania using computers to predict future crimes Parole officers use software to decide level of supervision for ex-inmates Uses algorithm devised by American criminology professor Richard Berk By HARRIET ARKELL PUBLISHED: 04:35 EST, 11 January 2013 | UPDATED: 06:11 EST, 11 January 2013 Comments (40) Share
Futuristic: Tom Cruise as Chief John Anderton in Minority Report When police in Minority Report predicted who would commit crimes and stopped them before they did it, it was considered so futuristic, the film was set in 2054. Now, however, law enforcers in two American states are using crime-prediction software to predict which freed prisoners are most likely to commit murder, and supervising them accordingly. Instead of relying on parole officers to decide how much supervision inmates will need on the outside by looking at their records, the new system uses a computer algorithm to decide for them. The Minority Report-style software is already being used in Baltimore and Philadelphia to predict future murderers, and will be extended to Washington D.C. soon. It has been developed by Professor Richard Berk, a criminologist at the University of Pennsylvania, who believes it will reduce the murder rate and those of other crimes. Prof. Berk says his algorithm could be used to help set bail amounts and also decide sentences in the future. It could also be modified to predict lesser crimes. He told ABC News that currently parole officers are using their own judgment to decide what level of supervision each parolee should have, based on their criminal record. His software, he said, replaces that 'ad-hoc' decision making, and should identify eight future murderers out of 100. He said: 'People assume that if someone murdered then they will murder in the future, but what really matters is what that person did as a young individual.
More... Katie Holmes appears in New York court as man goes on trial for beating his infant daughter to death Victim, 24, relives horror of 'grappling with knife-wielding schizophrenic woman who pointed 12-inch blade at her chest' 'If they committed armed robbery at age 14, that's a good predictor. 'If they committed the same crime at age 30, that doesn't predict very much.' Prof. Berk's researchers used the details of more than 60,000 crimes then wrote an algorithm to find the people behind the crimes who were more likely to commit murder when they were out of prison.
Pre-cog: Samantha Morton plays a human who can see into the future in Minority Report
The software predicts future criminals like the 'PreCogs' in the Tom Cruise film who can see crimes not yet committed
Future murderer? Neal McDonough, centre, and Colin Farrell, right, co-starred with Cruise in Minority Report Criteria including criminal record, type of crime, location, and age at which the individual committed the crime were analysed, with type of crime and age proving to be the most reliable predictors of future crime. He said even his students at the University of Pennsylvania compared his work to Minority Report, the 2002 film starring Tom Cruise in which gifted humans called 'PreCogs' can see into the future and predict who will commit crimes. In the film, Cruise plays the elite crime squad head Chief John Anderton, who himself is accused of committing a murder in the future. Prof. Berk's work has been described as 'very impressive' by Shawn Bushway, a professor of criminal justice at the State University of New York at Albany. However he cautioned that human rights campaigners might see that the extra supervision mandated by the software for those deemed most likely to murder might amount to harassment.
Logged
. In addition to this, many of the existing liberal justices began to rule on a "right of treatment" clause rather than a straight civil libertarian viewpoint. The result was that at both the state and federal level, the court became increasingly reluctant to strike down legislation that broadened the definition of who was eligible for involuntary commitment (119). Again, this more stringent approach meshed well with the "law and order" stance taken by the administration.
