Causes of Scientific Disorders - Essay Example

Developmental disorders involve any condition that occur at some age in the development of a child and leads to delay of development of one or various psychological functions of a child such as a language and communication skills. Developmental disorders involve both physical and psychological disorders. They are impairment in normal development in cognitive or motor skills which are usually have no cure and are expected to continue indefinitely (Searight, 2001). Causes of scientific disorders is scientifically based on various theories where some of the major variations is whether not the environment the child’s normal development, or there are predetermined abnormalities. Normal development of developmental disorders occurs due to contributions from contribution of both genetics and environment where the variation is the belief of the role of ever factor in normal development. As a result, this affects hoe such abnormalities are caused. One of such theories that underpin environmental causes of developmental disorders involves early childhood stress such as theorizing cause of developmental disorders by traumatizing by early childhood. Other theories even stress that accumulation of small stresses can accumulate leading to developmental difficulties as a result of behavioural, social, or emotional disorders in children (Neef, 2001). The central issue considered in diagnosis of developmental disorders is provision of a coordinated, timely, economical, equitable and accurate diagnosis. Well diagnosed developmental disorders facilitates timely entry towards an appropriate treatment, enable the members of the family to have a clear understanding of the developmental challenges associated with their child in order to adapt to the demands of the needs of the child, and opens opportunities for counselling and control of increased risks in the child and subsequent generation (Mandell et al., 2002). This essay discusses and evaluates issues that surround the effective diagnosis of developmental disorders in early childhood by considering three cases: ever child is like no other children; is like some other children; and is like all other children. It also examines the challenges of achievement of an effective diagnosis of developmental disorders. Although there is consensus on professionals in regard to what leads to best practices for comprehensive conduction of diagnostic assessments, there are several challenges associated with diagnosis of developmental disorders. Diagnosis of developmental disorders is usually challenging due to complexity associated to their some common effects such as relationship to the people around as well as the way a child may be communicating. In addition they syndromes associated with such various developmental disorders such as autism may be related to a wide range of subgroups making it even more complicated to diagnose (Pinto-Martin et al, 2005). Many children may be having a mixture of various features by at last; they may not fit neatly into any syndrome. As a result, the whole spectrum is usually defined in terms of presence of impairments which affect social imagination, social interaction, and social communication, referred to as triad of impairments. Such impairments are associated with repetitive range of activities (Silka, & Hauser, 1997). In addition, there are also a range of other problems which are associated with the triad making diagnosis more complex. This leads to challenges of trying to settle at impairments that may be regarded as basic as the defining criteria for certain disorder. Diagnosis of developmental disorders can also be challenging given that individuals who are identified as experiencing a certain disorders behave very differently. This is due to extension of various features such as intellectual capability from severe disability in learning to normal or even going further to the levels above intellect. In a similar way others skills have such a wide variety of variation. Fr instance, linguistic skills of a child with a developmental disorder may range from the children who are mute to those who might display grammatically correct speech, but in a complex way (Sand et al., 2005). Issues of diagnosis even expand further given that there are no exact cause or rather causes of certain developmental disorders that may have been established fully. For instance, the causes of autism are not yet established fully given that research of such causes is still continuing on numerous fronts. Research shows that developmental disorders such as autism can result from a wide range of conditions. These conditions that affect the development of the brain also occur either before or during birth. Example of such conditions includes tuberous sclerosis, maternal rubella, complications of child illnesses for instance, measles and whooping cough, and lack of oxygen at birth. Some studies suggest that there is a genetic link in autism but on the other hand, the site of genes that are relevant have not yet been identified (Volkmar, State, & Klin, 2009). There is also a major barrier in regard to coordinated and economical identification and diagnosis of developmental disorders given that diagnoses can be provided by different professionals such as educators, physicians and psychologists among others through various systems of service such a health plans and schools, and also based on different purposes such as treatment planning and determination of eligibility. This is because the criteria of diagnosis vary across systems, professionals and purposes. The diagnosis that results may not always be recognised by other professionals or systems. For instance, autism diagnosis at school may not be recognised by a health plan for a child. As a result, most children end up receiving multiple diagnostic evaluations which as a barrier by diminishing the efficiency as well as increasing costs (Yeargin-Allsopp et al., 2003). In addition, there can be a very little overlap for children among those recognised as having a certain developmental disorder by each system. For instance, a health care system usually misses children who have been diagnosed through their involvement in special education (Egger, & Angold, 2004). Thus, there has not yet been an establishments of the degree in which such kind of discrepancies are due to lack of agreement as well as differences in use of service between the health care setting and the school setting (Yeargin-Allsopp et al., 2003). Effective diagnosis process Given that every child is like all other children, like some other and no other children, the risk factors of developmental disorders may be at any children in a different form. This calls for an effective diagnosis of such disorders in order to prevent short-term and long-term failures. Thus effective diagnosis of developmental problems in early childhood is process that needs to be initiated as early as possible. According to American Academy of Paediatrics (2000), this process involves addressing the issue at paediatric preventive care visit, performing surveillance, screening, and developmental and medical evaluation. Developmental screening is also essential in aiding identification of any developmental risk to a child before the issue is beyond control. Such screening tools require collaboration of parents and healthcare professionals. Lack of effective developmental screening according to the needs of the children poses a challenge to the effective diagnosis of developmental disorders (Glascoe, 2000). Once the risk of developmental disorder is identified through developmental screening and surveillance, effective diagnosis is possible through pursuing of diagnostic developmental evaluation (Lipkin, 1996). For instance, for children with neuro-developmental disorders are usually associated with behavioural or developmental disorders. By identifying these orders in the earliest time possible, further evaluation and treatment will be effective. In addition to developmental evaluation, Ashwal et al (2004) add that medical evaluation is important in order to identify underlying etiology. This allows early intervention in order to address the issue which is an indication of an effective diagnosis of developmental disorders. According to McPherson (1998), early intervention programs are very valuable when the risks of developmental delays are identified in a child as it prevents more effects even before the completion of evaluation. However, there are challenges associated in diagnosis of developmental disabilities based on the fact that every child is like all other children, is like some other children and is like no other children. Every child is like no other children One of the disorders that are unique in every child is autism spectrum disorders (ASD) where the developmental conditions interfere with the interactions and communication with other people. For a child with ASD, there is a unique set of strengths and challenges. The effects of ASD on children have a wide range of variations which make every child like no other children. For instance, there is a child with few language skills while the other may find it easy to speak but on the other hand, may not be good at using language in order to interact with other people (King et al, 2005). In another way a child may be extremely intelligent while another one may experience severe cognitive impairments. Still, a child may not have immediately noticeable behaviours while another may have very unusual behaviours (Debey, 2009). ASD impacts the development of a child, but not evenly in every area. If an ASD is diagnosed, this means that the child has unusual development and so, if a child with ASD may or may not probably have both challenges and strengths. In addition, it is not possible for a health care professional to say that this child is at the high autism end and the other child is at low autism spectrum end. Instead, every child will be likely struggling in different areas and is likely to be skilled in different things (APA, 2000). Thus, in-depth evaluation that is performed by child health providers in child development as well as behaviour may answer various questions such as the skills that a child is experiencing most trouble with and the strengths of every child. Monitoring is also important as the characteristics of the development and behaviour of every child may shift but differently. Thus, diagnosis of ASD is challenging as there is usually no answer to the parent in regard to whether their child may experience this condition in the rest of life. This is because every child is different and the understanding of the specialists in regard to these conditions and therapies are also changing. Thus, the principles based on ASD state that diagnosis of ASD is based on the behaviour of each child and sometimes the behaviour if the child may change to cause the specific diagnosis to change also. In addition, the systems for these children may continue into adulthood though such symptoms may change in different ways or improve over time. Finally, among the challenges after diagnosis of ASD, there is no known for it (Ploof, & Hamel, 2002). This is the same case for children with persuasive developmental disorders (PDD) where there is impairment in use of various nonverbal behaviours such as body posture, eye contact, facial expressions and other gestures employed in communication and social interactions. But, given that PDD covers a wide range of behaviours and symptoms, every child is unique and no two children with PDD can behave the same (Lipkin, 1996). Every child is like some other children Diagnosis of developmental trauma during childhood has been a challenge to child health providers especially on how to organise complex behavioural and emotional characteristics (Nozyce & Grant (2009). DSM is applied for diagnosis of developmental trauma in children given that every child is like some other children, some traumatised children do not meet the diagnostic criteria while some other children meet the criteria (Kiser et al., 1991). In addition, interpersonal trauma especially maltreatment, inappropriate sexual behaviour, separation from care givers, and neglect do not meet the DSM-IV “Criterion A” which requires threatened death or threat to self physical integrity of self and others. Children with such interpersonal diversity would not qualify for “Criterion A” unless they are exposed to events qualifying as ‘traumatic’. This means that, some other children with ‘traumatic’ events qualify. However, some children fall under ‘Non-criterion A’ forms childhood trauma exposure such as emotional or psychological abuse (Ackerman et al., 1998). Every child is like all other children It is usually not easy to identify children with developmental disorders. This is because of a wide range of variations given that there is no profile that you can refer to in order to proof the problem. This is mostly the case in identification of learning disabilities (Glascoe, 2000). However, some symptoms are common for every child in different stages. Given that children that don’t experience developmental disability may still have difficulties in learning. Every child with developmental disabilities is diagnosed due to consistent unevenness in the child’s ability in mastering certain skills. For instance, during pre-school, some there are very common symptoms for children with disabilities such as problems in word pronunciation, and difficulty in following directions among others. At a higher grade some common symptoms for children with developmental disabilities include making consistent errors, unevenness in learning of new skills among others (Debey, 2009). Challenges of effective diagnosis of developmental disorders However, achievement of an effective diagnosis of developmental disorders is a very challenging situation. This is the case given that there are still more cases present in the contemporary world that would have been reduced through early detection and identification, which is an important element of effective diagnosis of developmental disorders. According to Horwitz et al (2004), there are still a great number of children affected by developmental delays and conditions. Delays in language and speech development and fine motor, social as well as problem-solving skills in early childhood mark specific conditions of development such as language and speech disorders, cognitive disability, learning disability, autism spectrum disorders, hearing or vision impairment and cerebral palsy. They add that, in the last decade, 10% of young children had language delays, 8% has disability in learning and around 1% with cognitive disability. However, many delays in children are associated with more than one domain of development. According to Tomblin et al (1997), various factors that expose young children to increased risks for developmental disorders include poverty, low attainment of maternal education, maternal depression, premature birth, male gender and suboptimal nutrition. Developmental disorders and lack of early intervention have important impacts on the society. This can be explained in terms of costs of provision of healthcare, ongoing services and educational support. Furthermore, there are also indirect costs associated with such disorders which include loss of income potential for the affected. According to Stevens (2006), there is a substantial amount of resources that are expended in terms of medical educational and community support of individuals experiencing developmental conditions and disorders. The affected children have led to significant increase in the rates of the use of healthcare in comparison with those without such disorders. However, there is there is more increase in economic costs associated with lack of early intervention in developmental conditions such as additional medical care as well as indirect costs that are associated with low productivity. There are also various barriers to implementation of effective diagnosis process. According to Schor (2004), despite the acknowledged responsibility for healthcare professionals as well as documented research for valid tools for screening and diagnosis, a lot of healthcare professionals in practice do the developmental disorder identification procedures routinely. As a result, this leads to under-detecting of the potential of developmental disorders during early childhood. As a result, they fail to detect such developments at an early stage leading to more challenges to the children in future as well as incurring of more costs in late treatments. This also affects the effectiveness of diagnosis of these disorders. According to Zuger (2004), there is lack of enough providers training in regard to development which begins long before medical school. A lot of students in medical school enter with backgrounds of sciences but with minimal training in child development, education and psychology. The curriculum in regard to child development is variable with a very minimal time development training and formal behaviour. Despite such king of training, the paediatricians are expected to have the authority in regard to development and behaviour of a child. Such factor affects the effectiveness of diagnosis of developmental disorders. Yarnell (2003) identifies lack of time as a significant barrier to the success of an effective procedure of diagnosis of developmental disorders. This especially applies to the developmental screening where the healthcare providers are expected to do more in a very limited time. This leads to squeezing of items and tasks out of the schedule. Lack of time will lead to failure to perform these tasks frequently leading to dissatisfaction of the results. For instance, developmental screening in order to identify the risks of developmental disorders requires doing such tasks frequently. Due to lack of time, the child health professional will skip some tasks in order to be within time. As a result, there is lack of identification of the risks associated to various developmental disorders at an early stage. This will lead to development of a multiple of disorders at a later stage most of which could be in a better control if detected earlier. This increases costs of treatment and leads to more reduction in the productivity of the child in future as well as that of parents. According to Dobrez et al (2001), there is lack of adequate reimbursement to child health professionals for performing tasks such as screenings, which is taken as the part of normal routine of a preventative visit or a well-child. As a result, the cost of administration of screening is high as well as consultation and treatment. As a result, most child health professionals feel pressurised by short well child visits and they are not likely to integrate any additional service without appropriate reimbursement. Thus, will the already pressurised child health professionals; they will not be willing to take any other tasks on identification of risks and diagnosis of developmental disorders. This may negatively affect the effectiveness of the diagnosis of developmental disorders. Ploof, & Hamel (2002) argue that one of the challenging barriers in diagnosis of developmental disorders is the fear of child health professional of having a positive screen. After the professional develops a relationship with the child’s family, there arises the discomfort of giving the bad news to the parent. On the other hand, the health provider may also worry that by over-referring a false-positive screen; there will be development of unnecessary anxiety and distress. They also noted that there are a few physicians who have adequate background skills or time to order to guide the families on how they will the confusing and fragmented network of services which may be required by the child in a successful way. In addition, they add that a provider may not initially see the benefit of performing of routine developmental screenings. However, according to Shinn et al (2003), research shows that early treatment of developmental disorders in early childhood results to improved outcomes and in turn, it leads to reduction of cost to the society. In addition, a systematic review of programs of childhood development that is very essential as they may be used to address the issues related to effective diagnosis of developmental disorders. According to Roth et al (2004), a health and development infant program based on comprehensive intervention is important in addressing these issues. Primary care professionals need to be informed that performance of a developmental assessment is directly linked higher ratings of provider’s interpersonal quality, and higher rate of satisfaction in regard to care (Gilliam, 2008). This will be a way of encouraging these providers of primary be effective in performing developmental assessments. Conclusion Effective diagnosis of developmental disorders in early childhood is very important for the well being of the children as well as their families. This requires an appropriate responsibility for any paediatric healthcare provider and an integral function of primary care as well as the commitment of the parent. However, the issues associated with effective diagnosis of developmental disorders varies based on three cases: ever child is like no other children; is like some other children; and is like all other children Generally, an effective diagnosis of developmental disorders is a process that is faced by many challenges. These can be explained in terms of costs of provision of healthcare, ongoing services and educational support. Moreover, effective diagnostics have proved successful in developmental disorders through improvement of the outcomes of the children as well as reduction of the costs to the society among others. Thus, effective diagnosis of developmental problems is essential in early childhood as it will ensure that the risks of developmental disorders in any child will be detected, diagnosed and intervened at an early stage. References Ackerman, PT, Newton J.E.O, McPherson, W. B, Jones JG, Dykman, R. A. (1998). Prevalence of post traumatic stress disorder and other psychiatric diagnoses in three groups of abused children (sexual, physical, and both). Child Abuse Neglect, 22(8), 759-774. American Academy of Pediatrics (2000). Committee on Practice and Ambulatory Medicine. Recommendations for preventive paediatric health care. Paediatrics 105, 645– 646 American Academy of Pediatrics (2001). Committee on Children With Disabilities. Developmental surveillance and screening of infants and young children. Paediatrics, 108, 192– 195 American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision, American Psychiatric Association, 2000 Debey, M. (2009). Child care and early education. In B. A. Mowder, F. Rubinson, & A. E. Yasik (Eds.), Evidence-Based Practice in Infant and Early Childhood Practice (pp. 641-668). New York: Wiley. Dobrez, D., Sasso, A. L., Holl, J., Shalowitz, M., Leon, S., Budetti, P. (2001). Estimating the cost of developmental and behavioral screening of preschool children in general pediatric practice. Pediatrics, 108, 913–922. Egger, H. L., & Angold, A. (2004). The Preschool Age Psychiatric Assessment (PAPA): A structured interview for diagnosing psychiatric disorders in preschool children. In R. DelCarmen-Wiggins & A. Carter (Eds.), Handbook of infant, toddler, and preschool mental health assessment (pp. 223-243). New York, NY : Oxford Press. Gilliam, W. S. (2008). Implementing policies to reduce the likelihood of preschool expulsion. New York, NY: Foundation for Child Development. Glascoe, F., P. (2000). Early detection of developmental and behavioral problems. Paediatrics Review, 21, 272–280. Horwitz, S. M., Irwin, J. R., Briggs-Gowan, M. J. et al., (2003). Language Delay in a Community Cohort of Young Children, Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 42(8):932–40. King, T. M., Rosenberg, L. A, Fuddy, L. , McFarlane, E., Sia, C., & Duggan, A. K. (2005). Prevalence and early identification of language delays among at-risk three year olds. Journal of Developmental Behaviour Paediatrics, 26, 293– 303 Kiser, L. J, Heston, J., Millsap, P.A, Pruitt, D. C. (1991). Physical and Sexual Abuse in Childhood: relationship with posttraumatic stress disorder. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 30, 776-783 Lipkin, P., H. (1996).Epidemiology of the developmental disabilities. In: Capute AJ, Accardo PJ, eds. Developmental Disabilities in Infancy and Childhood 2nd ed. Vol 1. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes, 137– 156 Lord, C., & McGee, J. (2001). National research council educating children with autism. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. Mandell DS, Listerud J, Levy SE, et al. (2002). Race differences in the age at diagnosis among Medicaid-eligible children with autism. Journal of American Academy of Child Adolescent Psychiatry 41, 1447–1453. Neef, N. A. (2001). The Past and Future of Behavior Analysis in Developmental Disabilities: When Good News is Bad and Bad News is Good. The Behavior Analyst Today, 2 (4), 336 -343. Nozyce, M. L., & Grant, R. (2009). Health impaired. In B. A. Mowder, F. Rubinson, & A. E. Yasik (Eds.), Evidence- Based Practice in Infant and Early Childhood Practice (pp. 537-574). New York: Wiley Pinto-Martin, J. A, Dunkle, M, Earls M, Fliedner D, & Landes, C. (2005). Developmental stages of developmental screening: steps to implementation of a successful program. American Journal of Public Health, 95, 1928– 1932 Ploof, D., Hamel, S. C. (2002). Developmental screening is an important part of well care: how can we really make it happen? Basic principles for practice change in the real world. American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics Newsletter. Roth, J., Figlio, D. N., Chen, D. N. et al., (2004). Maternal and Infant Factors Associated with Excess Kindergarten Costs,” Pediatrics, 114(3):720–28. Sand, N., Silverstein, M., Glascoe, F., P., Gupta, V. B., Tonniges, T. P., & O'Connor, K. G. (2005). Pediatricians' reported practices regarding developmental screening: do guidelines work? Do they help? Paediatrics, 116, 174– 179 Schor, E. L. (2004). Rethinking well-child care. Pediatrics, 114, 210–216. Searight, R. (2001). Conduct Disorder: Diagnosis and Treatment in Primary Care. American Family Physician, 15, 1579-1589. Shinn , C., Fullilove, M. T., Anderson, L. M. et al., (2003), The Effectiveness of Early Childhood Development Programs. A Systematic Review, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 24(3), 32–46. Silka, V. R., & Hauser, M. J. (1997). Psychiatric assessment of the person with mental retardation. Psychiatric Annals, 27(3). Stevens, G. D. (2006). Gradients in the Health Status and Developmental Risks of Young Children: The Combined Influences of Multiple Social Risk Factors,” Maternal and Child Health Journal, 10(2):187–99. Tomblin, J. B., Records, N. L., & Buckwalter, P. et al. (1997). Prevalence of Specific Language Impairment in Kindergarten Children, Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 40(6):1245–60 Volkmar ,F. R, State M, & Klin A. (2009). Autism and autism spectrum disorders: diagnostic issues for the coming decade. Journal of Child Psychology Psychiatry, 50(1-2), 108-15. Yarnell, K., & Polla, K.I. (2003). Primary care: is there enough time for prevention? AJPH, 635–641. Yeargin-Allsopp M, Rice C, Karapurkar T, et al. (2003). Prevalence of autism in a US metropolitan area. JAMA 289, 49–55. Zuger, A. (2004). Dissatisfaction with medical practice. NEJM, 350, 69–75 Read More