I watched the movie The Hungry Heart last night at the Vergennes Opera House. This documentary depicts the epidemic of opiate addiction in Franklin County, VT among young people and one pediatrician's work to try to offer help to his patients. Fred Holmes, who is now retired, was one of the first doctors in Vermont certified to prescribe Suboxone®, which is the drug buprenorphine, that can help addicts calm the cravings for opiates, such as percocet or oxycodone.
I worked at the Franklin County Early Childhood Programs and Dr. Holmes was one of the pediatricians I regularly received referrals from when he suspected that a child in his care may have a serious developmental delay. As I watched the movie, which featured teenaged patients of Dr. Holmes as well as older addicts who described addiction and recovery, I was struck by the familiar faces. This movie hit so close to home.
What it did brilliantly was humanize the the story of addiction. These people were not "the other." They did not fall into our stereotype of the drug addicts. Represented among them were the farmer's hard working son, the exuberant boy with a great smile, and the girl we all go to school with.
There were examples of kids who got their first opiates from a parent, from friends at school, or from medications to control a diagnosis of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Another common theme was that the opiates helped them to not feel pain (emotional or physical). Some were children of addicts or kids who had been bouncing around in
the foster care system for years. A common theme was that they did not
feel like they had adults in their lives that loved them.
Dr. Holmes ended up being a person for these kids who was willing to listen to them and offer them help to make it through recovery. He talks about how using Suboxone® is controversial in helping addicts. Some people think it is just substituting one drug for another. And, it is a drug that is abused by addicts in an injected form. However, one of the addicts in the movie made the point that if you broke your leg, you'd get a cast, and then when the cast was gone you may still need crutchs while your leg is regaining its strength. She said it was fine with her that people referred to her Suboxone® as a crutch because a crutch was exactly what she needed to kick her addiction.
When the movie ended, the audience had an opportunity to talk with six of the people from the film, including Dr. Holmes. Of the many things they said can help with this problem in our community is reaching out to people who are in crisis and treating people with humanity. Included in those options were making sure early intervention services for kids and families were stronger to help both paretns who may be struggling as well as not letting young kids head down a road with little or no positive connections to adults. One of Dr. Holme's nurses said that her daughter, who is a kindergarten teacher, was in tears after reluctantly viewing The Hungry Heart because she could see kids in her classroom who were at risk for being addicts in their teens. I understand her reaction, because I think I could even see this possible future for some of my preschool students.
The message I took home from the movie was to not cast a blind eye to the problem. It is alive and well and growing. When the panelists asked the audience if they knew of anyone struggling with addiction, most of the hands in the room went up. When they asked the audience if they thought addiction was an issue in Vergennes, they got the same response. It is difficult to ignore a problem when it stares you in the face.
Issues that face addicts are that they are made to be outcasts, rather than people who have a disease that needs treatment. And, when they do get to a point where they want treatment, there are often waiting lists for up to two years for space in treatment facilities in Vermont. There are also a limited number of doctors who, like Dr. Holmes, are treating patients with Suboxone® to manage their cravings.
But we are not helpless. We can ask our own doctors to consider treating addicts to increase the number of options that those addicted to opiates have for treatment. We can put pressure on our state and federal representatives to fund more treatment facilities for addicts so there are less wait times. We can safely dispose of our old prescriptions of Vicodin, Percocet, and Oxycodone by bringing unused, legally prescribed pills to our local police station for proper disposal. We can also question the amount of these drugs that are legally prescribed to us. Do we really need 30 pills to recover from that surgery, or could we get by with ten? We can reach out to people we know who might be struggling with addiction and let them know there are options for treatment.
Here is a link to the movie trailer: The Hungry Heart Trailer
Saturday, November 16, 2013
Friday, November 1, 2013
Vermont Moving Forward with Early Childhood Framework
Vermont's executive branch has been focusing on early childhood, defined as birth through 3rd grade, with laser beam intensity this year. I participating in the Governor's Early Childhood Summit on Tuesday, October 29, 2013, a gathering in Montpelier of 250 people from around the state who were charged with reviewing the draft of Vermont's Early Childhood Framework, a document that will drive the state's Early Childhood policy for years to come.
This was a workday. The people in the room represented early care and education providers, administrators, parents, funders, the Agency of Education, legislators, and I am sure I am forgetting some other groups that were there. Governor Peter Shumlin stopped in to speak at lunch. He said, "If everyone can bring 10 of their neighbors, friends, colleagues to this discussion, we move this thing faster than marriage equality. We can move it faster than many other issues that have come before us. And I say that when Vermont gets this one right, the others will follow."
The work did not start on Tuesday. There were eight "Pre-Summit Sessions" held across the state with different topics that started in July. More than 700 people had input on the document, that is now in final draft form.
We spent summit day working in small groups, giving input to the document. In my group, we spent our first session just going around the table and giving our initial reactions to the Framework. Overall they were positive. The Framework seemed to provide meat to the shared Vision Statement that has been adopted by early childhood stakeholder groups, "To realize the promise of every Vermont child." The six goals outlined in the document are:
There were also some cautions and critiques from around the table. Is the document truly inclusive? I commented that I would like to see the picture on the front be more representaivel of all kids. While it is ethnically diverse, there are no babies, no kids with visible disabilities, and maybe there should be some parents with a stroller. A few folks in our group also took issue with the phrase that all children enter kindergarten, "ready to learn." We had a lot of agreement that kids are ready to learn, but we have to be ready to teach them with evidence-based and developmentally appropriate practice. I have always had push back when questioned by people if my transitioning preschoolers were ready for kindergarten. My typical response is, "Yes, they are 5 on September 1. That means they are ready." My real question back was, "Is kindergarten going to get ready for my rising preschoolers?"There was also some concern in our group that public school from K-12 was not well represented in the room. Given that the document does stress going up through Grade 3, we felt that there needed to be more involvement from the K-12 world to inform the document.
One really interesting idea that came out of our group, which would also effect the K-12 world, was to have a required high school course on parenting and being your child's first and lifelong teacher. It was echoed through all of our work sessions that this would be great. Another idea in a similar vein was to pair parenting and Le Mas courses together and make them more widely available to pregnant couples.
One other positive note from the day that I'd like to comment on was the voice of fathers. We started the morning listening to and asking questions a a panel of parents, three of whom were fathers. They talked about how Head Start programs and Fatherhood classes had been a source of support and growth for them as parents of young children. One father pleaded with the educators in the room to accept them as parents. He said that often fathers get lost in the mix. When educators call, they ask to speak to his wife, as if he is not there. He said that he wanted to acknowledged and to remember to leave a message for the dad. I took that message to heart. I am sure I am guilty of doing this in my past as a teacher. It is one of those societal prejudices that we do not always notice until someone throws it back at us. I heard that father, and I will not make that mistake in the future.
Moving forward, the next phases of working on Vermont's Early Childhood Framework is to finalize the document and then come up with an Action Plan to meet its goals. One of the themes of the day, emphaiszed by the governor in his speech, was to pass the Prekindergarten Education Bill (H270) in the Senate this upcoming legislative session. This bill will require school districts to offer publicly funded prekindergarten for all students who are 3 and 4 years old. Other areas Vermont will need to consider is building on the systems that we have in place, determining and assuring high quality programming from all early care and education providers, and figuring out how we will pay for all of this.
Governor Shumlin made a great point when he said that we currently pay about $54,000 a year to house prisoners in Vermont. If we were starting from scratch, would we let the problems of families fester until there children drop out of high school, get addicted to drugs, have children as teenagers and perpetuate those issues and spend the money after they are out of school in the corrections system? Or would we invest in families and children's well-being up front to alleviate those issues that are likely to come up later in life when kids do not get the fair start that they deserve? How do we want to proceed, Vermont?
This was a workday. The people in the room represented early care and education providers, administrators, parents, funders, the Agency of Education, legislators, and I am sure I am forgetting some other groups that were there. Governor Peter Shumlin stopped in to speak at lunch. He said, "If everyone can bring 10 of their neighbors, friends, colleagues to this discussion, we move this thing faster than marriage equality. We can move it faster than many other issues that have come before us. And I say that when Vermont gets this one right, the others will follow."
The work did not start on Tuesday. There were eight "Pre-Summit Sessions" held across the state with different topics that started in July. More than 700 people had input on the document, that is now in final draft form.
We spent summit day working in small groups, giving input to the document. In my group, we spent our first session just going around the table and giving our initial reactions to the Framework. Overall they were positive. The Framework seemed to provide meat to the shared Vision Statement that has been adopted by early childhood stakeholder groups, "To realize the promise of every Vermont child." The six goals outlined in the document are:
- Goal 1: A Healthy Start for All Children
- Goal 2: Families and Communities Play a Leading Role
- Goal 3: High-Quality Opportunities for All Children
- Goal 4: Invest Now for Our Future
- Goal 5: Know We’re Making a Difference
- Goal 6: An Innovative and Connected System
There were also some cautions and critiques from around the table. Is the document truly inclusive? I commented that I would like to see the picture on the front be more representaivel of all kids. While it is ethnically diverse, there are no babies, no kids with visible disabilities, and maybe there should be some parents with a stroller. A few folks in our group also took issue with the phrase that all children enter kindergarten, "ready to learn." We had a lot of agreement that kids are ready to learn, but we have to be ready to teach them with evidence-based and developmentally appropriate practice. I have always had push back when questioned by people if my transitioning preschoolers were ready for kindergarten. My typical response is, "Yes, they are 5 on September 1. That means they are ready." My real question back was, "Is kindergarten going to get ready for my rising preschoolers?"There was also some concern in our group that public school from K-12 was not well represented in the room. Given that the document does stress going up through Grade 3, we felt that there needed to be more involvement from the K-12 world to inform the document.
One really interesting idea that came out of our group, which would also effect the K-12 world, was to have a required high school course on parenting and being your child's first and lifelong teacher. It was echoed through all of our work sessions that this would be great. Another idea in a similar vein was to pair parenting and Le Mas courses together and make them more widely available to pregnant couples.
One other positive note from the day that I'd like to comment on was the voice of fathers. We started the morning listening to and asking questions a a panel of parents, three of whom were fathers. They talked about how Head Start programs and Fatherhood classes had been a source of support and growth for them as parents of young children. One father pleaded with the educators in the room to accept them as parents. He said that often fathers get lost in the mix. When educators call, they ask to speak to his wife, as if he is not there. He said that he wanted to acknowledged and to remember to leave a message for the dad. I took that message to heart. I am sure I am guilty of doing this in my past as a teacher. It is one of those societal prejudices that we do not always notice until someone throws it back at us. I heard that father, and I will not make that mistake in the future.
Moving forward, the next phases of working on Vermont's Early Childhood Framework is to finalize the document and then come up with an Action Plan to meet its goals. One of the themes of the day, emphaiszed by the governor in his speech, was to pass the Prekindergarten Education Bill (H270) in the Senate this upcoming legislative session. This bill will require school districts to offer publicly funded prekindergarten for all students who are 3 and 4 years old. Other areas Vermont will need to consider is building on the systems that we have in place, determining and assuring high quality programming from all early care and education providers, and figuring out how we will pay for all of this.
Governor Shumlin made a great point when he said that we currently pay about $54,000 a year to house prisoners in Vermont. If we were starting from scratch, would we let the problems of families fester until there children drop out of high school, get addicted to drugs, have children as teenagers and perpetuate those issues and spend the money after they are out of school in the corrections system? Or would we invest in families and children's well-being up front to alleviate those issues that are likely to come up later in life when kids do not get the fair start that they deserve? How do we want to proceed, Vermont?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)