Just a reminder to you all not to give out any personal information over the Internet, especially on the Forum.  Dont identify your childs school, etc etc.  We all know WHO I mean and why I say it. xx

 That's a great reminder Eraina

  Through my quest finding, supporting, and increasing awarenes regarding alternative methods because of my son's difficulties, and doing it on forums such as this, I had become the victum of a cyberstalker and harrasser. I made the mistake of posting on several different topical forums using my favorite username (If I have a question, I get on a forum!!LOL) and this person had druged up every forum I had been on.  You all may be totally shocked of the people who are so against CAMs for LD's that they would go to these extremes, but I can tell you some people don't have anything better to do with their time, sadly.  This person knew more about what I had posted on the various forums than I did.  So, to add to Eraina's excellent advice,

 -Do NOT complete anything but the essential information on a forum registration or in any of your posts including hobbies, interests, occupation, town where you live, times/days of your appointments, etc. Someone can find you by surprisingly very little information, if it is the right information.

-Trust NO ONE when they private message or e-mail you anymore than you would trust them on the forum, and give no more information than you would by publicly posting it either.   When necessary to go outside the protection of the forum's message system to e-mail, use only a web-based e -mail system such as yahoo or MSN and set one up an account that does not use your name, reveal anything about your identity, or location, etc. You can even set one up from a different country if you want to.  

-Use a different username for each forum is even better, tho us birds that flock together know and can identify each other around the net, but any other nonDore forum work I do, I use a different username. 

Hi Eraina, the thing about trolls and other wierdos is that if you ignore them they often get fed up and go away and everything in the garden is safe and peaceful again. Wouldn't that be lovely?    xx

 

Sad isn't it?

Incredibly so Sarah...and you thought your life was boring!! bless 'em ey??...

 

FWIW, I'm not a Deranged Axe-Wielding Stalker, & since I work with children with profound & multiple disabilites, I have to have the highest level of police-check so if I was someone would have noticed by now. Obviously on the Inernet I can't prove this, and anyway you never know who else might be reading, so sensible advice.

 More widely, since I may not have restated this enough - I have no problem with people who use DORE. I disagree with the way they carry out & report their research. The nastiest thing I can do to someone is bore them to death by talking about stats, & even I can tell that most children don't particularly want an impromptu Maths lesson 

I don't use my real name since DORE have thrown lawyers at peope who disagree with them (to no effect since they had no legal case). I'm not aware of anyone getting in legal trouble for publishing their opinions on other interventions, so most of you posting won't have anything to worry about. However, een if you think you are anonymous, it's generally unwise to put stuff on t'interwebs you'd not want catching you up IRL.

Eraina - I sincerely hope you don't take this as a threat, since it really is intended only as helpful advice - but you might want to consider not using the same photo in your profile as I recognised on one of the DORE UK case histories, since that does say a lot about your son and it's very easy to put pieces together. It's an open forum, so you never know who might be reading.

wasnt actually referring to you in my original post duck... I use the same picture to prove I am NOT an ANONYMOUS poster..or a Dore ghost writer.

Jordan started on the Dore Programme in May 2005. At this time we were becoming increasingly concerned about his behaviour and clumsiness. He was struggling in the classroom and had been written off as a naughty child. He would just not do any work in literacy and dreaded any handwriting exercises. His teachers called him ‘slow’ and ‘lazy’ and he was often kept in at playtimes to finish his written work. Jordan would often call out inappropriately in class and struggled to sit still for any length of time. His reading, science and maths work just wasn’t happening on the same level.

Jordan had always been ‘clumsy’ and had broken his legs three times by the age of three. It was a standing joke at his day nursery that I had to sign the accident book on so many occasions that they should have one just for Jordan! Beyond this had few friends and suffered at the hands of bullies who saw him as an easy target.

We also had concerns with ADHD, the constant confrontations, oppositional behaviour and fidgeting were driving me to despair! Not to mention the constant stream of chatter that did not stop, for anything! Jordan wasn’t very happy either and his confidence and self-esteem was at an all time low. I didn’t want him to remember his childhood as being a miserable time and was terribly concerned he’s be prescribed with retilin if diagnosed with ADHD.

I came across the Dore Programme through a friend who’s son had been through the programme and had positive results so decided to follow suit. After the initial assessment which was a long day but worth every minute, we embarked on the exercises. The tests showed that Jordan’s vestibular balance (inner ear) was especially poor and worked on this in particular. The exercises are planned to suit each individual so it works on his particular needs.

Within three weeks Jordan was riding his two wheeled bike, unaided. His concentration and his ability to stay on task improved considerably. He was so calm as well, as if seven years of pure frustration had evaporated. His handwriting was the most impressive improvement, within four weeks it became neat and tidy and usually all the letters are the right way round. This is most noticeable in his weekly spelling book.

Since commencing on the Dore programme Jordan is like a different child His self esteem has gone through the roof as he is now getting positive comments and remarks and realises that he is good at things.

Areas such as social skills, relating to others and making friends are so much better too and watching him charge up and down the playground playing football with his mates is a delight. We continue to see these improvements everyday in fact his recently received the class ‘Star of the Week’ because of his excellent report in Maths, Science, Design and Technology, Geography, RE, Art, physics, English AND PE!!

It sounds corny but seeing Jordan as a much happier and more confident child means more to me than any of the academic changes.

 

07 September 2007

-->

 

When we wrote this we made sure there were no references to Jordans School or location, D-o-b etc etc. All that it says about him is that he is doing so well since commencing the Dore programme.

Duck please don't feel paranoid, Eraina is not pertaining to you! We know you are an enthusiastic student, and not a weirdo.

Hi Duck

Could I ask who you are reffering to? Also where you found/heard this information about lawyers? I think it is rather unfounded! Please will you elaborate on this point?

Many thanks

Rose  

Thank you for the reassurance everyone (& the PM). Very much appreciated. Eraina I hadn't re-read your son's story to check - glad it's not got anything too identifying.

Rose, I know of at least 3 instances where DORE have used lawyers to try to make people stop talking about DORE. Lawyers delivered a letter threatening legal action to the home address (not the university) of Prof Snowling after she talked to the BBC about DDAT (as it was known at the time). The letter contained a clause attempting to forbid her from telling the media that she was being gagged by DORE lawyers. They also wrote to Prof Rack telling him to stop talking to the media about DDAT in much the same way. It would appear that Prof Coltheart has been similarly threatened.

I know in the cases of Rack and Snowling that the university's lawyers were able to successfully argue that they have a positive moral duty as experts in the field to speak out on matters concerning dyslexia. They were advised that to be on the safe side they should preface staments with qualifiers such as 'It is my opinion as an academic...', or ''From a career working in dyslexia research it seems to me that...' to make it quite clear that they had every right to hold opinions on the current state of research in dyslexia. The DORE organisation has used that to accuse people of 'hiding behind academic positioning', when this is a position they were forced into by your lawyers.

It's hard to find sources for this that aren't paywalled, but I hope you'll consider the journal 'Nature Neuroscience' trustworthy:

'Academics typically argue such disagreements in the pages of scientific journals. However, people who criticize this training program in public may hear from the company's lawyers. Max Coltheart, then president of the Specific Learning Disabilities Association of New South Wales, received such a letter after his organization posted links on its website to comments on the Dore program from the British Dyslexia Association and the International Dyslexia Association, in which the latter stated that the Dore program "is not supported by current scientific knowledge." Margaret Snowling of York University also received a letter asking that she retract a statement to the British Broadcasting Corporation that there is no scientific evidence for the efficacy of the Dore treatment.'

Nature Neuroscience, full article online here: http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v10/n2/full/nn0207-135.html (needs ATHENS login) or try here http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2007/20070806_dore/NatureEditorial.pdf (free access but PDF).

You could see also here: http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2007/s1997916.htm

'As in the UK, Dore summoned lawyers to deal with criticism.

DR PAUL WHITING, PRESIDENT EMERITUS SPELD NSW : Suing people who are critical of you is not a great way to answer the criticis. You're just attacking the messenger but you don't change the message by that approach.

MATTHEW CARNEY: When SPELD (the Specific Learning Difficulties Association in New South Wales) posted a critique of the Dore Program and drew attention to the scientific uproar about its research, a threatening legal letter arrived accusing this largely voluntary service of publishing material which:

" ... may amount to misleading and deceptive conduct ..."

PROFESSOR MAX COLTHEART, MACQUARIE CENTRE FOR COGNITIVE SCIENCE: The information we've put up there about the Dore Program was that this had been criticised by the British Dyslexic Association and the International Dyslexic Association in America, hoping that would mean parents would think twice about spending all this money on a treatment that had been publicly criticised by International Organisations.

DR PAUL WHITING, PRESIDENT EMERITUS SPELD NSW : Well our reaction was that we were dealing with an organisation that had a lot of money and we didn't have any money and therefore we weren't going to take them on.'

Sending the lawyers in on a support group is much lower than going after individuals who at least have the university to deal with this sort of thing for them. These arguments should be made with research and data, not lawyers and gagging orders. Now do you understand why I am angry?

I am surprised that you do not know about this, as someone who works for DORE. I've mentioned it before on here. If you can tell me for definite that it did not happen I will be impressed, as I have seen the letters. But if you decide what I am telling you is true - what else might DORE not be telling you? Why do they feel a need to hide things, instead of showing that they are better by having research to show that they are better? Why do you think that DORE would do this?

It goes a long way to explaining the 'hostility' so often complained of by DORE advocates - it's hard not to be defensive when you have to wonder if lawyers might come to your own front door, just for doing the sort of critical analysis of research data which is the bread and butter of academia. As you so often say, we should be working together - not trying to misuse legal gagging orders to silence awkward questions.

I am concerned about the unprofessional way that you as a student at York university are being shown these sort of things, especially being shown legal documents. This should not be happening. It seems to me that someone is making the the bullets, loading them and you are evidently firing them. Manipulation of impressionable students is of great concern to me.

I would respecfically ask what is going on at York University as it is supposed to be about teaching.   When are you going to stop this mud slinging? What are you going to be told to shoot next? You kow legal proceedings have no place on this site, but insist on bring them back in, I hope your post is removed.

Maggie Snowling et al are hardly innocents in all this, -obviously. If people want to know more about Maggie Snowling et al here's a great link to the myomancy site, I know you like to link to him yourself Duck.

http://www.myomancy.com/2007/02/who_are_dyslexi

http://www.myomancy.com/2007/09/2088

Good points, Lelly.

 To add, I am VERY uncomfortable with the way that many innocent poster's threads and posts here have been deralied by Duck's comments, discussions, Dore hashings, like a annoying negative poison leaching everywhere.  That is trollish and NOT necessary here. It intimidates genuine readers from posting, asking for, receiving, and returning support and encouragement regarding the program because they don't want to be slung at and I don't blame them.  Duck has her sounding board and venue on her own blogs, and it has absolutely NO place here on the support forum.

 I encourage the admin and mods here to keep this a safe place to land and encourage the negativity to carry on somewhere other than here.

Thanks.

I have just looked up the Definition of Troll on Wiki, mmmmm I see what you mean Frazzle.

Duck, I'm sure it's just your caustic style and patronising tone that causes distress to others, not a mean intent (to us anyway).

 

An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial and usually irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, with the intention of baiting other users into an emotional response^[1] or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.^[2]

 

 

^{Awww you mean this lesley...Im sure psychoduck isnt meaning to be that way....Im sure all his/her topics are relevant in some way shape or form...JUST NOT ON HERE>}

I totally agree Eraina, this is not the place for psychoducks topics. We need to get the forum back to what it used to be, a support forum for those that need it. We don't need psychoduck's negativity we get enough of that from schools etc. Keep smiling everyone!

Baiting (Internet)

Eraina!  You changed your avatar! 

toil, i mean Psychoduck advised me to. I thought it was a good idea. You like?

I like very much Eraina. You've brightened my day. THANKYOU!