Poll Results:
A big thank you to everyone who participated in our online poll for August/September. We had 164 responses to the question if there should be a national regulatory system over emotional growth/therapeutic residential schools and programs.
Please revisit our new poll for October and register your opinion. This month?s question asks: ?For children, are psychotropic (mood altering) drugs used: Too Much; About Right; Not Enough; Unsure.? To make your opinion count, please click here and share your opinion. The only limit is you can not vote more than once a day.
The poll question for August/September asked ?Should there be a national regulatory system over private schools and programs for struggling teens.? The responses were almost evenly split between yes and no. There were 75 responses (46%) for a national regulatory system, and 76 responses (46%) against, with only 13 (8%) being unsure. If this poll is representative of the public?s attitude, a big if since it is not a scientifically designed sample, the following are some possible interpretations, and observations based on my discussions with many people over the last several years.
From discussions I?ve had with people, I think the views of the yes votes were probably mostly for two reasons. One is that parents of kids with problems need all the help they can get, and they trust that regulators could provide some help by improving the quality of programs available to parents. The other is the regulators would be able to put pressure on programs that might be preying on parents through professional oversight, and eliminate dangerous and irresponsible practices.
The no votes would likely see the above as ?Great Expectations,? that is, that the yes voters are automatically and naively assuming that the regulators would be wise and supportive. The no voters likely are people that feel that a national regulatory system would tend to favor something similar to the public systems that parents tried and were disappointed by before they choose a private parent-choice school or program. The no voters also likely would be those that see some national regulatory system as a system developed by politicians and administered by bureaucrats ? a perspective that is a little scary. For example, if the system were set up to hire psychiatrists that favored medication therapy, then there would be pressure on all private programs to look more and more like hospitals under managed care, a system that is being criticized as being not very responsive to the needs of many teens with emotional/behavioral problems.
The almost even split between the two viewpoints suggests that the public is widely split, and we are a long way from consensus. Also, that the proposal has enough interest that it should be thoroughly debated, and all aspects studied. We at Woodbury Reports would be very interested in publishing submissions on a variety of viewpoints on this proposal as part of a public debate.
Lon Woodbury, MA, IECA
Certified Educational Planner
Woodbury Reports Inc.
http://www.strugglingteens.com
