We will help you get your mom off drugs!

An 11-year-old boy in Boston developed a Gastro esophageal reflux Disease (GERD). According to his mother, Cathy, it was the end of June in the year 2005 when his son developed a cough which usually happens during sleep, and even during daytime. It is only a short dry cough symptom. His pediatrician thought it was only allergy, however, when his son was tested, result showed that his son had no allergy. According to her, it was his son’s asthma that relates to GERD.

Studies show that GERD is likewise normal to infants and children like in adults, though this fact is often times being overlooked. The symptoms come in continual sickness, coughing, and other respiratory trouble.

Children are vulnerable to GERD because of their immature digestive system. Truth is majority of the infants grow out of GERD once they reach the age of one year old.

The medical specialists further stated that symptoms for children may come in difficulty in swallowing foods, or failure to grow. The doctors recommended that in situation like this it is best to lessen the amount of acid in the children’s stomach before it could lead to acid reflux, since this disease is not very curable in children.

However, the doctor suggested some approaches to avoid acid reflux on children; an example of these is burping the infant quite a few times during feeding, or letting the infant stay in an erect position for 30 minutes after nourishing.

Although, for a child ages three and up, doctors suggested to keep them off from sodas that includes caffeine like soft drinks, carbonated drinks,  spicy foods like peppermint, acidic foods like citrus fruits, too much chocolate, and fried and fatty foods. Ideally, establishing a healthy eating habit diet can really decrease the acid reflux in children.

It is also suggested that children will eat smaller meals before sleeping, if possible, do not allow them to eat two to three hours before sleeping, also, elevate the head of their bed for at least 30 degrees.

Further treatments include the use of H2 blockers; this is available in any drugs store. Prevacid, proton plump inhibitors, can also be used in treating acid flux for children.

However, if these treatments fail to stop the symptoms, other treatment method needs to be done. It is very atypical, but doctors’ recommends surgery, this is so far the best treatment for relentless symptoms which do not anymore counter to other treatments.

The Esophageal reflux surgery for children is designated for children who have had unsuccessful medical treatments, and continuous surgery is essential as the child grows.

Now, if you get confused whether when is the time to consult a pediatrician regarding acid reflux. The answer is you observe, observe the amounts of vomiting of the child, if it already comes out in green or yellow or appears to be like blood or coffee grounds, there difficulty in breathing after vomiting, and there is pain in swallowing, immediately consult a pediatrician before the symptom gets aggravated.
So to prevent the occurrence of this disease, stay away from the habit of leaning forward after eating, or worse, sleeping after taking a large amount of food.

Take note, advanced acid reflux disease has a great possibility to end serious medical complications, and it may lead to hospitalization.

Be keen of the possible symptoms so will not overlook it. Take care of your kids.

I make a number of assumptions when conducting a substance use evaluation as part of a litigation process: 1) the individual’s use is usually not less than the individual reports, but it might often be more (or much more); 2) inaccurate accusations of substance abuse are common because there is usually little negative consequence for inaccurate accusations; 3) the parties to the litigation, and those connected with them, may provide biased and inaccurate information. Therefore outside corroboration of their reports is essential for determining the extent and consequences of substance use.

As a practical matter, getting outside corroboration (information from sources not connected with the litigation) is difficult because such information may simply not exist, or obtaining it would require work performed by other professionals (such as private investigators) rather than by psychologists. That work would be outside the scope of the psychological evaluation the individual has consented to. An evaluation that obtained outside corroboration could be conducted at great expense, but would require weeks to months of effort and at best would only establish the history of substance problems (or lack of them). Such an evaluation would be appropriate when litigation is only concerned with history and not with the future (as it is in child custody litigation).

In my typical evaluation I document what is reported by the parties, conduct basic psychological and addiction testing, review documentation, and interview collaterals, as appropriate to each case. In some cases I am able to identify reports that are unlikely or impossible (e.g., consuming only 2 beers would not result 90 minutes later in BAL of .22). In some cases the information I obtain allows me to offer a firm diagnostic opinion. However, in most cases I will not have a firm diagnostic opinion, because I will not have sufficient firm evidence.

Even with a firm diagnostic opinion, the prediction of future substance use is problematic. An individual’s substance use can change, suddenly, dramatically and without treatment or support group attendance, in response to changes in the environment. Litigation often produces substantial environmental changes, and therefore has the potential to lead to significant decreases (or increases) in substance use. The diagnostic manual (DSM-IV-TR, page 221) recognizes that “some individuals (perhaps 20% or more) with Alcohol Dependence achieve long-term sobriety even without active treatment.”

Consequently, if the litigation has a future focus, my normal recommendation is to obtain substance testing on a continuous basis. I will monitor the results of this testing if the court requests it. Random testing might work in some cases, but it allows a significant potential for delay in discovering problems. Such delay is unacceptable when the best interests of children are involved. Depending on the substances of concern, testing involves the individual stopping at a drug testing facility two to three times per week to provide a urine sample. Modifications to the basic plan need to be made if the individual tested is a reportedly moderate drinker, but in some instances such individuals are willing to abstain completely for the sake of eliminating suspicions about their having alcohol problems.

I normally recommend that the testing be paid for by the other party, and continued as long as the other party feels it is worth paying for. Solomon knew that the true mother would only want what was best for her child. Even Solomon did not try, simply based on the reports he received, to determine which mother was telling the truth.