California's Children

Parents unaware of teen "study drug" use, UMich poll show

May 21, 2013: Adderall, Concerta, Ritalin, and Vyvanse -- stimulant medications "typically prescribed for treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) -- but commonly used by teens as a "study drug," according to a May 17th report from the University of Michigan reported yesterday in ScienceDaily.

Oh, and the kicker: 10% of teens are taking study drugs -- and only 1% of the parents are aware of it.

...Among parents of teens who have not been prescribed a stimulant medication for ADHD, just 1% said they believe their teen has used a study drug to help study or improve grades, according to the latest University of Michigan Mott Children's Hospital National Poll on Children's Health. However, recent national data from Monitoring the Future indicate that 10% of high school sophomores and 12% of high school seniors say they've used an amphetamine or stimulant medication not prescribed by their doctor.

Sometimes students without ADHD take someone else's medication, to try to stay awake and alert and try to improve their scores on exams or assignments. Taking study drugs has not been proven to improve students' grades, and it can be very dangerous to their health, says Matthew M. Davis, M.D., M.A.P.P., director of the C.S. Mott Children's Hospital National Poll on Children's Health.

"Taking these medications when they are not prescribed for you can lead to acute exhaustion, abnormal heart rhythms and even confusion and psychosis if the teens get addicted and go into withdrawal," says Davis....

 

HHS laps Congress in safety standards for fed-funded child care facilities

May 17, 2013: The U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services (HHS) "helping to answer President Obama's call to ensure quality early education for every American child," announced yesterday that it is proposing to require "states, territories, and tribes" to "strengthen their standards to promote the health, safety and school readiness of children in federally funded child care." The 199-page PDF of the proposed new rules can be read here. The announcement, the first nationwide safety standards for child care -- that will supersede "the current patchwork of health and safety standards" of individual states, and that will apply to all childcare facilities that accept government subsidies, was described by the Brigid Schulte in the Washington Post:

The proposed regulations will require workers in all subsidized child-care centers and homes to be trained in first-aid procedures, such as CPR, and safe sleeping practices. They call for quality-rating systems that parents can have easy access to and universal background and fingerprint checks of child-care workers. And they impose tough standards for monitoring and unannounced inspections to ensure that the regulations are being followed.

Specifically, from the HHS press release:

The proposed rule would only apply directly to child care providers who accept Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) funds. More than 500,000 providers serve about 1.6 million low-income children through CCDF. Many more children would benefit, however, because the providers also serve non-CCDF children.

Under the proposed rule, states would require that all CCDF-funded child care providers:

• Receive health and safety trainings in specific areas
• Comply with applicable state and local fire, health and building codes
• Receive comprehensive background checks (including fingerprinting)
• Receive on-site monitoring

Schulte quotes HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, above left, who made yesterday's announcement, "“We frankly can’t wait any longer...Fifteen years have passed since we last updated our child-care rules — years of tragic stories of children lost and families devastated because there were no safety standards in place to protect them. We have a sacred responsibility to care for our children..."

On EdWeek, Sara Mead posts in her "Policy Notebook":  ...[The Obama Administration is] aggressively interpreting the boundaries of its executive authority in an effort to fix problems in a major piece of underlying legislation that Congress is long overdue to reauthorize. In this case, that legislation is the [Child Care and Development Block Grant] Act and Section 418 of the Social Security Act. CCDBG was last reauthorized as part of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996--aka welfare reform--and subsequent efforts to reauthorize the law have stalled. The proposed regulation is now open for a 75-day public comment period, which may result in revisions to the proposed rules. In any case, smart folks should keep an eye on this for both its early childhood implications and as a reflection of how the administration is dealing with the larger context in Washington today.

Majority of LA supes slow in responding to felonious foster care agency

UPDATE, May 16, 2013: Continuing its investigative reporting on Los Angeles County's "decades long" relationship with Teens Happy Homes, a private agency that secures foster homes under a $3.6 million annual contract from the county and that has been responsible for the placement of over 1,100 in more than 1,100 children over the years, the Los Angeles Times, in a story by reporter Garrett Therolf, posted Tuesday that the county board of supervisors has agreed to stop sending children to the agency.

Above, Mark Ridley-Thomas, member of the LA County Board of Supervisors and representative of the South Los Angeles district where Teens Happy Homes is located. 

...The county now is considering even stronger action to terminate its relationship with Teens. Supervisors Michael D. Antonovich and Gloria Molina urged the county to cancel its contract and remove all children from the agency's care.

The two supervisors have not been able to secure a needed third vote from the five-member board. Supervisors Don Knabe, Zev Yaroslavsky and Mark Ridley-Thomas...declined to comment.

Under Teens Happy Homes' contract, the supervisors can terminate the relationship without cause or penalty, according to a [County Dept. of Children & Family Services] spokeswoman. Los Angeles County almost entirely funds Teens' budget — up to $3.6 million a year.

Michael Nash, the presiding judge of L.A. County's Juvenile Court, and Leslie Starr Heimov, who leads the court-appointed law firm representing foster children, have called on the supervisors to sever the contract.

That action can be taken, Heimov said, without having to disrupt the placement of children whose foster parents are providing good care. "If the parents meet standards," she said, "the county needs to assist them with a new certification by a new contractor. The county has successfully managed large, sudden closures of contractors in the past."

The now three-year-long audit of Teens' alleged financial abuses probably will not be officially released for another four months because of potential appeals...

UPDATE, May 1, 2013: The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors  reported no action after a closed-door meeting yesterday to consider terminating the county's decades-long relationship with Teens Happy Homes, a private foster care provider that officials say repeatedly misused funds and placed children in homes where they were abused (see earlier story below), according to Los Angeles Times reporter Garrett Therolf.

Department of Children and Family Services Director Philip Browning was instructed after Tuesday's meeting to prepare options to correct the problems, according to a person familiar with the discussion.

April 28, 2013: There are 50 private contractors, all non-profit charities, that provide foster home services to Los Angeles County. Typically, according to the lead story in today's Los Angeles Times by Garrett Therolf, these contractors finances are audited by the state and county "once a decade." Other practies of the agecies are "only loosely monitored."

Ass'blyman Donnelly requests audit of Sac CPS in Russian child seizure

 UPDATE, May 3, 2013: Assemblyman Tim Donnelly (R-Twin Peaks) is "shocked and appalled" by the Nikolayev story (see below) and has requested, in a lengthy letter, an audit of the Sacramento County Child Protective Services.

Meanwhile, Sutter Hospital in Sacramento, where the child was diagnosed as needing heart surgery (and from which the parents removed him without a medical discharge, thus precipitating the police-CPS action), has released a letter of its own.

Our nurses and physicians are bound by law to call Child Protective Services if they believe a pediatric patient's health is in danger... Our No. 1 concern has always been the health and safety of this child, and we want him to receive the care he needs to live a long and healthy life.

 April 30, 2013:  Sacramento Superior Court Judge Paul Seave has lifted the protective custody order that was served against the parents of five-month-old Sammy Nikolayev. The boy, who has a heart murmur, is [now at] Lucile Packard Children's Hospital at Stanford for evaluation and possible surgery.

AB 549: campus safety bill to be heard before Ass'bly Ed Comm today

May 1, 2013:  AB 549, the "comprehensive school safety plan: adult role on campus guidelines" bill," a measure introduced in February by Assemblymember Reginald Jones-Sawyer (D-Los Angeles), will have its first hearing, before Assemblymember Joan Buchanan's Education Committee, today. 

The bill would require school districts to develop "clear guidelines" for the roles of mental health and intervention professionals, school resource officers, and campus police (state-mandated and funded local program). 

The bill is opposed by the Association of California School Administrators. Laura Preston, the group’s legislative advocate, says that the proposal takes too much control away from local districts and schools because it limits what they can do with school safety dollars. In an April 29 letter, the group argued that the bill’s requirements to put police guidelines in school safety plans added up to an imposition “without regard” for “the additional time needed to do this work.” The bill is supported by the California Federation of Teachers; the larger union, the California Teachers Association, has not taken a position as yet.