No child left unmedicated

[Guest guest]

I found this article troubling at best… for just a

couple reasons… Should the national government be gathering and keeping

individual information on mental health tests on our children? What about

parent rights? Shouldn’t parents have the right to opt out or choose their own

examiner? What about those without insurance? Do they have to pay for the

expensive mental health screenings, even the ones whose children seem perfectly

healthy? What happens if a child is misdiagnosed? Does their information ever

get corrected or just added on to? What is the government going to do with this

information? Will the children be stigmatized later in life due to a “possible”

diagnosis earlier in life that may or may not have been correct? What if a

child receives a diagnosis and the parents do not believe he/she needs

medication but rather other interventions? Do they have the right to opt out of

the medication? Will parents who opt out of the medication be prosecuted or

with child protective services be called in to intervene? To what end are they

doing this? Is it really for the good of the people or does the government have

ulterior motives for the information they are gathering…

Don’t get me wrong… I am all for mental screenings

being available for those who want them/need them, and that medications should

be available for those who NEED them… My concern is the mandatory portions of

this, the elimination of choice and parental rights, as well as the assumption

that if a child is “diagnosed”, that automatically means they need to be

medicated…

Any thoughts???

Rabecca

No child left unmedicated

Phyllis Schlafly

November 23, 2004

Big Brother is on the march. A plan to subject all

children to mental health

screening is under way, and pharmaceutical companies

are gearing up for

bigger sales of psychotropic drugs.

Like most liberal big-spending ideas, this one was

slipped into the law

under cover of soft semantics. Its genesis was the

New Freedom Commission on

Mental Health created by President W. Bush in

2002.

The commission recommends " routine and

comprehensive " testing and mental

health screening for every child in the United

States, including

preschoolers. The president has instructed 25

federal agencies to develop a

plan to implement the commission's recommendations.

The

commission proposes using electronic medical records for mental health

interrogation of both children and adults for mental

illnesses in school and

during routine physical exams. The commission also

recommends integrating

electronic health records and personal health

information systems.

It recommends " linkage " of these mental

examinations with " state-of-the-art

treatments " using " specific medications

for specific conditions. " That means

prescribing more expensive patented antidepressants

and antipsychotic drugs.

Illinois became the first state to jump on board. By

near-unanimous votes in

2003, the General Assembly passed the $10 million

Illinois Children's Mental

Health Act creating a Children's Mental Health

Partnership, which is

expected to become a model for other states. The

partnership's plan,

released July 16, calls for periodic social and

emotional developmental

examinations to be administered to all children, and

for all women to be

interrogated for depression during pregnancy and up

to a year postpartum.

When the partnership showcased this plan with five

public hearings stacked

with bureaucrats and social service workers, a

political tempest erupted,

with state legislators saying they had no idea this

was what they had voted

for.

Illinois legislators were shocked to hear the

details. The plan includes

periodic developmental exams for children ages 0-18

years, a statewide

data-reporting system to track information on each

child, social-emotional

development screens with all mandated school exams

in kindergarten, fourth

grade and ninth grade, and report cards on

children's social-emotional

development.

The plan is to add mental health assessment to the

state's physical

examination certificate, along with mandatory

immunization records. All

children in Illinois, unless religiously exempt, are

required to have

up-to-date health examinations and immunizations for

school entry.

The partnership requires the Illinois State Board of

Education to develop

and implement a plan that incorporates social and

emotional standards as

part of the mandated Illinois Learning Standards,

which are due on

Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich's desk by Dec. 31.

This inevitably opens up

screening for politically incorrect attitudes and

nonconformity with liberal

attitudes of tolerance.

Mental health diagnoses are inherently subjective

and social constructions,

as even the diagnostic manuals admit. Many

thousands, if not millions, of

children would receive stigmatizing diagnoses that

would follow them for the

rest of their lives.

" State-of-the-art treatments " will result

in many thousands of children

being medicated by expensive, ineffective, and

dangerous drugs. The

long-term safety and effectiveness of psychiatric

medications on children

have never been proven.

The side effects of suggested medications in

children are severe. They

include suicide, violence, psychosis, cardiac

toxicity, and growth

suppression. Several school shooters, such as

(Columbine) and

Kip Kinkel (Oregon) had been on antidepressants or

stimulants when they

committed their crimes.

The validity of much scientific research has lost

its credibility because

the Food and Drug Administration has allowed the pharmaceutical

industry to

withhold data not favorable to their products and

because people in the pay

of the pharmaceutical companies are the ones

recommending medications.

The current controversy about links between suicide

and antidepressant drugs

that have not been adequately tested has contributed

to the uproar. The FDA

posted an analysis in August that some

antidepressants pose a risk of

suicide in children.

Parental rights are unclear or nonexistent under

these mental screening

programs. What are the rights of youth and parents

to refuse or opt out of

mental screening?

Will they face coercion and threats of removal from

school, or child neglect

charges, if they refuse privacy-invading

interrogations or unproved

medications? How will a child remove a stigmatizing

label from his records?

A Columbia University pilot project of screening

students called TeenScreen

resulted in one-third being flagged as

" positive " for mental health

problems, and half of those being turned over for mental

health treatment.

If this is preview of what would happen when 52

million public school

students are screened, it would mean hanging a

libelous label on 17 million

American children and putting 8 million children

into the hands of the

psychiatric/pharmaceutical

industry.

[Guest guest]

I never listen to anything Phyllis Schafly either writes or says. She's

a right-wing nut, IMHO. Notice how she used so many loaded words in

this article? Like " interrogate " in reference to kids and pregnant

women? And " Big Brother " ? Please. In Phyllis' world, anything a

Democrat comes up with is automatically suspect, and liberal is a dirty

word (why is that?). I quit paying attention to her when she did that

Eagle Forum thing telling all women they should stay home and raise

kids, all the while leaving her kids and husband in the care of someone

else while she went on interminable speaking tours. Can you say

" hypocrite? " I thought you could.

Sorry, folks, but this woman just rubs my fur the wrong direction.

Annie, who loves ya annie@...

--

Every person is responsible for all the good within the scope of his

abilities, and for no more, and none can tell whose sphere is the

largest. Gail Hamilton (1833-1896) - Humorist

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

>

> This is incorrect. No one can force anyone to take

> drugs unless they are admitted to a mental

> institution. Again something else that is blown out of

> the water that is getting people all worked up for

> nothing. Pish pash

> I swear...people are not happy unless they have

> something to bitch about..

>

I think you will find this is correct actually. There has just been a truly

disturbing prograame shown here about how children in NY (black of course),

whose mother died of AIDS, are being forced to take whole cocktails of

drugs, even though it has been shown they don't need them. These are

resulting in terrible skin conditions and all manner of serious problems,

but if anyone tries to stop it they are being called child abusers and the

child is taken into care. Then the authorities do as they wish. They are

using these children as human guinea pigs.

in England

[Guest guest]

Annie,

~laughing~ I had never heard of her or the issue before I read

this... and through her eyes, the sky is falling and the free world

is about to come to an end!!! Thanks for setting the record

straight!!!

~hugs~

Rabecca

> I never listen to anything Phyllis Schafly either writes or says.

She's

> a right-wing nut, IMHO. Notice how she used so many loaded words

in

> this article? Like " interrogate " in reference to kids and pregnant

> women? And " Big Brother " ? Please. In Phyllis' world, anything a

> Democrat comes up with is automatically suspect, and liberal is a

dirty

> word (why is that?). I quit paying attention to her when she did

that

> Eagle Forum thing telling all women they should stay home and raise

> kids, all the while leaving her kids and husband in the care of

someone

> else while she went on interminable speaking tours. Can you say

> " hypocrite? " I thought you could.

>

> Sorry, folks, but this woman just rubs my fur the wrong direction.

>

> Annie, who loves ya annie@r...

> --

> Every person is responsible for all the good within the scope of

his

> abilities, and for no more, and none can tell whose sphere is the

> largest. Gail Hamilton (1833-1896) - Humorist

[Guest guest]

,

As a foster parent and as a childcare provider here in Oregon, I not

only have seen kids that have been taken into custody due to parents

refusal to medicate, but we are trained to watch for this and to

report it (it is called medical neglect here). They may not be able

to force you to feed the medications to your child, but they can take

him or her away if they deem it medically nessissary and you refuse...

~hugs~

Rabecca

> Hi ,

> >

> > This is incorrect. No one can force anyone to take

> > drugs unless they are admitted to a mental

> > institution. Again something else that is blown out of

> > the water that is getting people all worked up for

> > nothing. Pish pash

> > I swear...people are not happy unless they have

> > something to bitch about..

> >

>

> I think you will find this is correct actually. There has just been

a truly

> disturbing prograame shown here about how children in NY (black of

course),

> whose mother died of AIDS, are being forced to take whole cocktails

of

> drugs, even though it has been shown they don't need them. These

are

> resulting in terrible skin conditions and all manner of serious

problems,

> but if anyone tries to stop it they are being called child abusers

and the

> child is taken into care. Then the authorities do as they wish.

They are

> using these children as human guinea pigs.

>

> in England