The first paragraph in this article reinforces something I've known to be true. And the public schools have played a major role in making this happen.
My son, Adventure Boy, was born in 1993. As soon as he hit the public schools we were under pressure to drug him. The teachers started it, then brought in the school psychologist and staff and administration. Yup, there was serious pressure. All couched within the context of what was "best for the child".
Bullshit.
They wanted what was best for the school. On multiple fronts.
- Boys tend to have high energy. And with our no-new-taxes governor and cut-your-taxes president the fact is that schools have less and less money. So what gets cut? Physical Education. Recess. My kids have substantially less time to run around, get exercise and burn off energy as I did when I was their age. So kids are now spending more time sitting still in classrooms - no wonder they exhibit high energy behavior.
- Schools get extra funds for every kid on a special plan. To get a kid on a special plan they must be diagnosed with something. Take any high energy kid and you can easily find a doctor willing to diagnose them with ADD/ADHD/etc. And the school is eager to help. They provided us with references to doctors known to give these diagnoses, and provided documentation to help the doctor realize just how critical it was to get this kid drugs. That $$ is critical for the school's shrinking budget!
- Teachers are dealing with ever increasing class sizes (see the tax thing above). Couple that with the lack of exercise periods and they are dealing with more and more kids with more and more energy. Of course they want to drug any kid they can. The more kids that are drugged, the fewer kids they have to keep quiet.
Now don't get me wrong - I'm not saying that some kids don't need help. There's no doubt that some kids do need drugs or other special help. Nor am I saying that the teachers are evil - though I do think many are woefully misguided.
But is it realistic to consider that kids born in 1993 and later are FIVE TIMES more likely to be ADD/ADHD than kids born in 1992 and earlier?
Well let's think about that. What happened in 1993, on a national level, that could have triggered this. Was it a bio-weapon, or bio-accident that contaminated the water or food for the entire nation (and still does)? Doubtful. Was it a nuclear explosion or fallout of some sort that has caused continual mutations starting in 1993? I don't recall any such big-booms, but I suppose it is possible (the government DID do all those secret experiments in the 1950's... 
).
Basically, there are two options. Either you buy into some kooky conspiracy theory saying that an external factor has triggered a radical change in the genetics of American babies since 1993, or you consider that American society is shaped by money more than any other single thing.
- Schools are pressed for money - ever more pressed.
- Every student diagnosed to get these drugs means more money for the school.
- Big companies make big bucks from these drugs.
- Every student diagnosed to get these drugs means more money for the corporations.
- Teachers are faced with increasing class sizes of increasingly fidgety kids, so they work a LOT harder for their meager salaries.
- Every student diagnosed to get these drugs is calmer and easier to manage, making it easier to earn a living.
Having successfully resisted the concerted efforts of the schools to drug my kids over the past several years, it is not a surprise to me that the number of kids on drugs has increased more than fivefold since 1993...