Ritalin DefendedAs a special education teacher, my...

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

May 09, 1993

Ritalin Defended

As a special education teacher, my observation of parents' reaction to the report of a genetic link to Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is one of relief.

Relief that they can finally have some comfort in what they have felt all along, but also relief that many others will understand that their child's behavior problems are not necessarily due to bad parenting.

However, I do take exception with the statement in your April 8 article, "Gene Defect Tied to Flaw in Behavior," that the typical treatment for ADHD is Ritalin, "a controversial drug that some critics charge can create passive 'zombies.' "

Like any other medication, no one drug is the treatment of choice for all people.

Ritalin is not the only medication that has been shown to be effective when working with ADHD children. If children do experience side effects with Ritalin, other medication should be prescribed.

Often a child with ADHD can be helped without medication, but can be aided through a consistent, well thought-out behavior management program and thorough modification of the child's learning environment.

I take strongest objection with the only image that you present of Ritalin, that it is a drug that has no therapeutic benefits. Many of the parents that I work with say that since their children with ADHD have been prescribed Ritalin, the children are better able to manage their behavior, develop better leaning skills and socialize with their peers in more appropriate ways.

You do a disservice to parents who have had a child diagnosed with ADHD, when you report that a potentially powerfully therapeutic medication creates "zombies."

For many parents, the decision to put a child on medication is a difficult process of weighing options. It is important that when relaying such a scientific breakthrough to the public, as in your article, that the facts be presented in an objective manner.

I suggest that in the future you present a more complete composite of the potential benefits and risks involved with Ritalin, along with options for treatment for ADHD.

Peter LaCount

Baltimore

Foreign Trucks

There's been a good deal of discussion in Washington over whether or not imported multipurpose vehicles (MPVs) -- sport utility vehicles, minivans and vans -- should be classified as cars or trucks for tariff purposes.

As manager of the General Motors North American Truck Platforms Plant in Baltimore, my facility employs more than 3,600 people and is a high-volume builder of MPVs. To us the solution to the MPV issue is simple, and a matter of consistency and fairness.

When a vehicle is designed to perform as a truck, built like a truck, is classified as a truck for emissions and fuel economy standards (and for purposes of the gas-guzzler and luxury taxes) then it ought to be called a truck for tariff purposes.

In 1989, the U.S. Treasury made a political decision to overturn a Customs Service ruling that had properly classified all MPVs as trucks. Treasury decided that two-door versions of MPVs were trucks and four-door versions were cars for tariff purposes.

This Treasury decision gave a unilateral tariff concession to Japanworth $300 million a year for which, as President Clinton said recently, "the U.S. got nothing, and I repeat, nothing in return."

From my vantage point, this ill-conceived Treasury decision not only costs Americans millions of dollars in lost revenue but has increased jobs overseas.

While some have argued that reinstatement of the higher MPV truck tariff will prompt price increases here at home, the record speaks forcefully to the contrary.

Over the last 12 years, Japanese vehicle prices have gone up 80 percent compared to 44 percent for U.S. producers, which is well below the 60 percent rise in the overall Consumer Price Index.

We are competing and, in many ways, beating the competition in the marketplace. We've got great new products. We are seeking consistency and a level playing field on the MPV issue.

More important, we are concerned that the Treasury decision will harm plants such as ours.

We applaud President Clinton's recognition that the Treasury Department made a major error in 1989 when it overturned the Customs decision.

We look forward to his reinstating the original Customs decision that all MPVs are trucks for tariff purposes.

Robert R. Rieman

Baltimore

Russian Victims

In these times of remembering the horrors the Holocaust brought to the Jewish people, let us not forget the 18 million, or as many as 22 million, Russian people who died during World War II. (No wonder the Soviet Union built a wall around itself after the war.)

Stephen Taylor

Baltimore

Bill James

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.