Where You Live and Who You Are Does Matter
December 16, 2007 by Kristina Chew, PhD
Filed under Health
The December 14th Guardian reports on a study that has found that geography, race, class and gender play a greater role in determining a child’s chances for getting help, over and above “the nature of the learning difficulty.” The study was done by Harry Daniels and Jill Porter of the University of Bath; their report states that:
“There is a pervasive gender bias, with not only higher incidence amongst boys than girls, but earlier recognition of boys’ difficulties. Children from certain ethnic minority groups are more likely to be identified as having social emotional behavioural disorders than others…..Children with dyslexia and autism have powerful lobby groups and are over-represented within the system…children from more affluent backgrounds receive more help and for less significant levels of difficulty, than those from poorer homes.”
The report also noted that middle class children “receive quicker and better support.”
These findings don’t seem too surprising: It’s not secret here in New Jersey that the suburbs (and certain suburbs) are the places to live for special education services. School districts in Jersey have been up in arms after Governor Joe Corzine announced a new formula for determining how special ed funding is allocated. In New Jersey, certain urban school districts—including those of Newark, Camden, Asbury Park, Jersey City where I teach at a small Catholic college whose student population is very local—have been designated as “Abbott districts.” Due to past poor performance records in terms of student achievement, the districts receive special funding from the state, which oversees their performance. The question with the new formula—-which gives all districts a modest increase in the first year—is whether or not Abbot district will receive a higher proportion of state funds than other, wealthier districts (such as Princeton’s).
You won’t be surprised to hear that I don’t live in an Abbott school district. We’d like to live in Jersey City: I would be close to work (and could ask students to babysit…….) and Jim could be in midtown Manhattan at his office in a half-hour (right now he has to walk a mile and a half to take the train…..welcome to the suburbs). Families have moved from Jersey City and other urban areas to my town for the special ed services. Recent immigrants from all around the world live in Jersey City and I have to wonder how many of their children might need special ed services and are not receiving them due to language and cultural differences and not knowing what to do or what could be done? Of course I wish to maintain my son’s school program at the level that it is. But all autistic students should, like Charlie, receive the best education that they can have, to attain their full potential. How many minority students who are boys are diagnosed as having emotional and behavior disorders instead of Asperger syndrome or ADHD?
…How many minority students who are boys are diagnosed as having emotional and behavior disorders instead of Asperger syndrome or ADHD?
This was actually the first thing I thought of when I read the line in the article that stated
…There is a pervasive gender bias, with not only higher incidence amongst boys than girls, but earlier recognition of boys’ difficulties. …
I think our educational system is set up to devalue boys and the way they act and learn in general, and minority boys in particular. That is why boys are prone to get labels early on, and minority boys are seen as trouble makers and emotionally disturbed, rather than as individuals that require a different approach to learning.
Joe
This is all very true. I have seen lots of kids not getting help. Or when the parents are poor and from inner city areas they are often more likely to be accused of causing the child’s difficulties.
Oh to live in a world where gender, bank balance or zip code doesn’t affect your ability to receive appropriate diagnosis, education and intervention…So much work to be done.
But if we stick together (I guess that sounds sappy, but I honestly believe in it).
I think there is also an element here, perhaps, of a larger number of single-parent families in lower income brackets and, therefore, fewer people in a position to **really** advocate for a child. Yes, I do think it is often a case of “oh, the poor boy, he just needs a father figure” instead of stripping away the social constructs we place around children to explain certain behaviors. Also the stigma (thanks in no small part to things like NYU’s latest ad campaign) attached to having a a learning disability or other diagnostic label is greater than simply being labeled a “bad kid.” Sad, sad commentary on our culture.
Sappiness is contagious … and beats the alternative in my humble opinion.
I can’t think of a single thing that is evenly distributed to everyone rich and poor. The ability to receive a proper education and help for that education if needed would seem to be a modest goal if equality of oppturnity is ever to be attained.
The effects of culture and family life are different between the rich and poor ( I am not saying they should be or are in every case ) . When you factor in financial resources that are generated by local conditions of being able to have higher school taxes where rich people live than where poor people live, you start to be able to see how entrenched educational problems can be complicated by issues that are not easily addressed.
Perhaps a place to start would be to change the tax structure of funding schools away from local sources to the state government.
The longest journey starts with a single step.
I’m not so sure that “having lots of $$” always necessarily correlates with one’s child (autistic and otherwise) “doing well”: The pricetag of an education is not a necessary guarantee of quality or outcomes, I think one could say.