One thing that gets me about the media is that they cannot even have a program on all the legistlation going through Congress. I mean satellite radio has 24/7 on just racing. I just read this on a thread at DU telling of the passage. They cannot even find a source for this passing on the Internet and an individual put up the news himself when confirmed with Ron Paul]s office.

This is some scary legislation with another Orwellian title from the Great White Forked-tongued White Fathers. There will be a witchhunt to find children to eat pills and make profits for our infamous pill industry. It is just unbelievable that this commercial attack to sell pills to children even made it to Congress for a vote, much less pass. When you read the link at http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/newfreedom/ , they make like this is a piece of real work. And just when will the media tell us our children are to be mined for pill profits.

This DU link is the only one I have at present- http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...ess=104x2737890

I hope parents challenge this in the courts. Parents should refuse to allow testing on their children.

If their subjective tests showed anything questionable, the next step would be court ordered therapy or IN PATIENT treatment. Child Protective Services already does this sort of thing. They make demands on parents and if they parents fail to comply, they remove their children.

I'm surprised people don't see how this curtails parental rights and cuts into the privacy of families.

This conflicts with existing laws where a person can only be ordered to undergo psych testing if they are a "harm to themselves or others. " Testing can be traumatic for children and should be avoided unless there are presenting symptoms that are strong indicators they child may be out of the norm.

The other issue of concern here is that many diagnoses cannot, by APA standards, and should not be made on children. The tests are very subjective and wide open to interpretation. It will be interesting to see how many poor black children get diagnosed with disorders compared to their white counterparts.

Seems to be a lot of conflicts here, hope it gets struck down!

Does anyone know where the APA and the AMA stand on this issue?

I should have said that the New Freedom Iniative passed the Senate. I just checked the link at DU and there still is not any link to more information up yet.

It is amazing that a search for "New Freedom Iniitiative" at GoogleNews produced no news of the passing in the first five pages of results. The first page did have this link dated Novermber 15th- http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/1234 An article at WorldNetDaily from November 18tjh tells of Ron Paul's efforts to stop the insanity- http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41511

Four consecutive paragraphs from the first link are below.
------------------------------------

The plan, called the New Freedom Initiative (NFI), is the keystone of a package of initiatives by the President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, a group of doctors and mental health care professionals established by the Bush Administration in 2002.

As previously reported by The NewStandard, the Initiative's critics, ranging from grassroots mental health advocacy organizations to government whistleblowers, have said the NFI's proposals do little else but establish state-mandated markets for the psychiatric pharmaceutical industry.

In 2003, the Commission published a report recommending states encourage more mental health testing and treatment for Americans and suggested public schools were an ideal place to access students and begin to root out undiagnosed and "severely disruptive" mental health issues. It pointed to a program begun during George Bush's governorship of Texas called the Texas Medication Algorithm Project (TMAP), which set a standard operating procedure within a flow chart allowing psychiatrists to identify and medicate possible conditions.

"It doesn't have the Orwellian goal of drugging the populace for a political purpose; it's the Orwellian goal of drugging the populace for an economic purpose." --Allen Jones, WhistleblowerIn a report posted on the website of the Law Project for Psychiatric Rights quotes a whistleblower who says doctors staffing the Texas program had strong links to pharmaceutical companies, and those doctors often prescribed expensive, brand-name drugs over cheaper alternatives. The source of that claim is Allen Jones, a former investigator for the Office of the Inspector General who says he was fired for speaking out against a TMAP-style program in Pennsylvania.

-----------------------------------

Three consecutive paragraphs from the second link follow.

------------------------------------

The program in question was proposed by the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, which President Bush established in 2002. The New Freedom Initiative recommends screening not only for children but eventually for every American.

Critics of the plan say it is a thinly veiled attempt by drug companies to provide a wider market for high-priced antidepressants and antipsychotic medication, and puts government in areas of Americans' lives where it does not belong.

The congressman, who is known for his strict adherence to the Constitution, wrote in a letter to his colleagues before the September vote: "As you know, psychotropic drugs are increasingly prescribed for children who show nothing more than children's typical rambunctious behavior. Many children have suffered harmful effects from these drugs. Yet some parents have even been charged with child abuse for refusing to drug their children. The federal government should not promote national mental-health screening programs that will force the use of these psychotropic drugs such as Ritalin."

The New Freedom Commission found that "despite their prevalence, mental disorders often go undiagnosed" and recommended comprehensive mental-health screening for "consumers of all ages," including preschool children.

found this but it's on the 11/11

Congress to Allow Massive Forced Psych-Drugging of Our Children
ACT NOW! This is being voted on TODAY!

This is an appeal to all rational-thinking Americans who are concerned about the future of our children. It is especially an appeal to American parents and grandparents.

Following is an article from Newsmax.com which I am reproducing here, as it states the situation most directly and succinctly. Read it carefully, as this could be your child's future:

----------------------------------

DOCTORS GROUP OPOSSES MANDATORY MENTAL HEALTH TESTS FOR KIDS

Dave Eberhart, NewsMax.com
Thursday, Nov. 11, 2004

Under new law being considered, the federal government would require that every child in America undergo psychological screening and receive recommended treatment, including drug therapies.

Next week the Senate re-convenes to consider an omnibus appropriations bill that includes funding for grants to implement mandatory universal mental health screening for almost 60 million children, pregnant women, and adults through schools and pre-schools.
But officials of the respected Association of American Physicians & Surgeons (AAPS) decry what they see as “a dangerous scheme that will heap even more coercive pressure on parents to medicate children with potentially dangerous side effects.”

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues...=ua_congressorg

Use this site's search feature for "New Freedom Initative", this topic was running pretty strong here a couple weeks ago.

I supplied some research and links.

There was a comment at DU that gave these links in regard to the NFI.


http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul204.html
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2004/cr100604....
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,132397,00.html
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/328/7454/14...
http://www.interventionmag.com/cms/modules.php?op=modlo...
http://www.mentalhealthcommission.gov/index.html
http://www.drugpolicy.org/news/11_16_04pain.cfm
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2004/06/23/bush_to...

I have a BA in psych, graduated in '96. I am on the fence regarding the passage of this bill because I know there are statistics out there that support what they are trying to do. Mental illness is absolutely rampant in this country and way too many children go without detection until they hit their early 20's when most serious and irreversable conditions break. Sometimes these illnesses are organic in nature and cannot be prevented by early detection, sometimes they are environmental/behavioral and can be prevented through medication, early counseling, and in extreme cases removal from their home situations. I do not know where exactly the APA stands on this issue, however, I do know they enforce strictly, their code of ethics for practicing psychologists. If a psychologist/phyciatrist is reported as being in violation of the APA's rules and guidelines, this organization has the power to deny a psychologist their ability to practice. It is not in a psychiatrist best interest to overmedicate/ misdiagnose a child or adult, they can have severe reprocussions for it.

I do think there are legitimate concerns by American citizens that this bill does not become abused by those enacting it. There should be more obvious safeguards in it to protect those who do not have mental illness from being incorrectly diagnosed and treated. This bill does not exactly benefit the poor either, as these parents won't have the money to fight something like this in court if their child is misdiagnosed. Also, everything I learned in my psychology courses tells me that medication is always a last resort and should always be left for those who have more serious conditions. Teachers, family care practitioners, and counselors should not have the ability to prescribe medications for behavioral/ emotional/ or mental problems, this should be left to psychiatrists only. There is a logical, orderly, and scientific way to approach diagnosing mental problems and it should be followed to the tee for each and every person being screened. If the government cannot guarantee that each child/adult screened are done so with the utmost professional knowledge, integrity, and objective opinion possible, then they should not be passing such an all inclusive law.

Personally, I think this issue should be tackled state by state, not by the federal government. It leaves open too many doors for potential misinterpretations of the law and misapplications. [/SIZE]

I started a thread on this same subject

Attempt to stop mandatory mental screening fails, will no longer require Parental Consent
target='_blank'>


http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...109&#entry64109


My biggest concern is that since this has passed already from the sounds of it, as a "mandatory" mental health screening that does NOT require parental permission , it is already, imo, on the path to being mis-used and abused.

I would not have wanted my children subjected to any testing that I hadn't given permission or lent my participation to perform. Nor do I want it for my grandchildren without their parent's permission.

Total agreement about the media, Virgil. If we were truly free, we'd be able to access Al Jazeera as part of the regular cable lineup. English language broadcasts from China, Russia and everywhere else would provide Americans with some perspective. They don't get that now. Do your cable companies even give you access to BBC or CBC? We're two "friendly" neighbours - even if we do spell and talk strangely.

Ron Paul's amendment to allow a parental veto on drugging their own children was supported by 96 Republicans and one (sic) democrat. 118 Republicans and 196 Democrats voted to give the goverment more control over America's youth.

The Brave New World of 1984 continues to unfold.

I wonder if they will have to even notify parents when they get ready to do the screening. I don'twant them screeninng my children. What is their idea of what is good mental health? Someone who goes along with everything the government and society at large want to do? Is free thinking going to be looked at as antisocial and therefore a mental illness? Will they drug people and piss test them to make sure they take their medication or else threaten them with jail? What the hell is going on in this country? What can we do to stop this? The year my firends is not 2004, it is 1984.

This is really scary....

My work involves this very venue, and I see problems created as much by the institutions as the individuals, young though they may be.

You can read a very good analysis, here, for the fact still remains, one mans idea of madness is anothers spark of genius.

After you read part one, then read part two here. You will see just what I'm talking about..... it's a fairly long detailed analysis, but you WILL understand what I am refering to after you fininsh.

If the government is to be the sole judge of all that is 'sane' or 'insane', 'fair' or 'unfair', and 'just' or 'unjust', then we have NO CONSTITUTION LEFT !!!

After all.... I heard just today, Howard Hughs, one of the most wealthy men on the planet to date, a man who was a business genius, died from a rare form of pshchosis caused by syphilis. If he had been "tested" and the 'infection' not diagnosed.... he would have been classified "maladjusted" at best, ro 'crazy' or worse!

If more is found out about the piece of trash, let us all know here..... :o

L8R
TheWeedMan

There are currently federal laws in place that keep us from even testing kids for learning disabilities without express parental permission. I work for the school system and that's my job. We can't even mention Attention Deficit Disorder to parents, much less recommend that their child take medication. So, how in the blue blazes could we now begin to mental health screening????

This would contradict current federal law, which is the Individual with Disabilities Education Act, just reauthorized with no major changes, part of the American's with Disabilities Act.

This doesn't sound right.

By the way, only a couple of the links at the top actually work. I did go to the government report that was sent to the president and within that report, I found this, which specifically alludes to IDEA which requires informed parental consent for assessment.

"

The Commission suggests a national focus on the mental health needs of young children and their families that includes screening, assessment, early intervention, treatment, training, and financing services. The national focus will:

*

Build on coordination mechanisms already in place, such as Part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); and
* Expand the coordination of services for children ages 3 through 21 for those who qualify for services under Part B of IDEA, thus building capacity for improved and increased services in communities.

A coordinated, national approach to these issues will help eliminate social and emotional barriers to learning and will promote success in school and in other community settings for young children. This effort may involve collaborations among parents, mental health providers, and early childhood and child care programs. Other important dimensions of the approach will include:

*

Training a workforce skilled in treating young children and their families;
*

Training primary health providers to screen for and recognize early signs of emotional and behavioral problems and to offer connections to appropriate interventions;
*

Eliminating barriers to coverage, such as a required psychiatric diagnosis when an alternative diagnosis that minimizes labeling and stigma is more appropriate; and
* Including "social and emotional check-ups" in primary health care.

The IDEA specifically provides for a statewide, comprehensive, interagency system for early prevention services for children with disabilities from birth to 3 years old who have a developmental delay and physical, cognitive, communication, social or emotional, or adaptive development problem, or have a diagnosed physical or mental condition that has a high probability of resulting in a developmental delay.

More effort is needed to heighten public awareness of the developmental requirements for children's social and emotional well-being - just as public awareness of the early developmental and educational needs for reading skills has been increased through public and private initiatives.

When children with disabilities reach age 3, they may be eligible for services under Part B of IDEA if they have one of the specified impairments and if, because of the impairment, they need special education and related services. However, services and other resources for children who have emotional and mental health issues are sometimes less readily available with respect to workforce, interventions, and financing, than other services, such as speech and language therapy or physical therapy.

Addressing the mental health of young children may also involve providing information, supports, and treatment for parents. For the young child, treating the parents' mental health problems also benefits the child.150

I don't know what Texas school system you work for, but they feel pretty damned free to mention ADD out here. Wife and I got called into an ARD meeting and the committee announced they had determined son was ADD, please sign here for appropriate medication. Now mind you, no one mentioned an actual medical doctor, probably because at this point none was involved in this "diagnosis".

We told the ARD committee thank'ee very much, hope you don't mind if I do a little poking around on my own before we sign off on feeding this kid Schedule 2 narcotics. A month and several hundred pages of research later we met the committee again and told them, politely at first, that we intended to decline their offer to medicate the boy for basically fidgeting in class. The committee's tone became increasingly strident and ended by threatening to refer us to CPS for investigation of neglect for failing to dope the boy. At this point I somewhat less than politely (I believe I used the term "fascist" at least once) suggested that they collectively engage in certain anatomically improbable acts, and told them our communications henceforth would involve attorneys. Never heard another word out of the yahoos.

This was ten years ago. The boy, by the way, graduated high school, had no interest in college, but he is supervisor of the auto service shop at a WallyWorld

Yes, 10 years ago, this was happening. It's now specifically against the law in Texas to mention the need for pschotropic drugs for kids, because of the type of scenarios you describe. I'm sorry you had such an awful experience. Hopefully, things are much better now. I know in my school system they are.

In my own son's case, we did eventually use Adderall, but that was because his doctor recommended it. He graduated from high school a year early, works at a good paying job and has passed the first two parts of his fireman's exam after attending weekend classes. He has a very high IQ, but still struggles with the attention issues and the related dyslexia. (Learning disabilities and attention problems tend to go together. New brain research shows they are often from the same part of the brain. My son quit breathing several times as an infant, had to be resuscitated, had to have serious surgery to correct health problems when he was 6 weeks old. I've often thought there might have been some subtle damage to the brain from the lack of oxygen.) But, he is a bright young man, very personable, and is being very successful for a 19 year old. He doesn't smoke or do drugs, and other than driving WAY too fast, he is a nice, law abiding young man. I'm glad to hear your son is doing well, too.

THis law slipped by silently alright but I saw it happen. I have 2 children who are in Special Education classes for dyslexia.

Well one graduated last yr, one more to go, three days after the law passed I got a call they want to reevaluate my daughter this year.

She has made honor roll 3times being mainstreamed and Im really proud of her work being in Jr high.
If they do anything but give her even more mainstream I will take her out. They fought me tooth and nail about mainstreaming her, the oly reason it happend was a cut in funds this year decreased our special education dept.

I wont have my happy healthy child medicated she is NOT a behavior problem at all.

Good luck to you with your daughter. My son wasn't a behavior problem, either, but he couldn't focus enough to get the instruction when he got to middle school. That is actually why doctors give the medications, not to control behavior, but to help kids focus. The side effect is that once they can focus and think about the consequences of their behavior, the behavior problem kids usually do get better, but only if they are being taught.

I still stand on the fact that parental consent forr testing will be required, as the special education laws have not been repealed or revised. Schools CANNOT prescribe medications, period. They are not physicians. So, I think this one has got a certain amount of discussion that is probably overstating the case.

I do have a good rappor with a few of the Child Study team people after 18yrs with them, Ill find out what I can in our meeting next week and post here! They will be honest with me.
We just agree to disagree at times.

THanks Eveylen
THats why Im so proud of her. We felt with the change to middle school and mainstream all at once it may be too much for her. But she surprised us all.

In some state (CT) is one, Dyslexia isnt even a disability. GO figure!

Lots of genious in their company, My oldest daughter has it worse and was always mainstreamed. But it effects her socially more than the youngest, she also gets depressed often. She I agree needs a slight med, and I actually am taking her this month for an evaluation before she is off my insurance. She seems to get depressed, does your son have this problem? Also, life in general is just too much for her, she seems to not be able to focus, If we clean house toghter, and I give her a room, I have to tell her to stay focused on it, because shee will go off to another room!

BY the way I agree with you about parental concent. They need our concent here even to evaluate the children. Its very strict in NJ, and you can refuse anything.

Her I feel I will always have to be here for, but who says being a Mom is an 18yr job right?

I claim no expertise to interpreting what all of this says, but it sure looks like Mandatory Mental Health Screening with Parental Consent Required to me. Take it for what it's worth = Ominbus Bill that passed, the one with all the pork in it, the one that was presented to congress after being worked up for presentation in the dead of night and congress had less than 14 hours to read through, the one that was 2000 pages and weighed several pounds, that bill.

Mandatory Mental Health Screening, no parental permission required
Congressman pushed language requiring parental consent
Posted: November 24, 20041:00 a.m. Eastern© 2004

WorldNetDaily.com

An attempt by Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, to add language to the omnibus spending bill in Congress to require parental consent for any mental-health screening done to children with federal money has failed.

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41606


My thoughts:

I find this alarming and have concern now for our children and
grandchildren. Mental health screening is no lightweight matter, opens the doors
to all kinds of abuse and misuse. If parents don't have say in the matter, who
does? Who will make the call that a child or person needs mental health
screening? The schools, the teachers, the employers...who, who, who??

Once a process like this begins, the misdiagnosis start, the
prescribed drugs start, the labelling over a lifetime starts. The whole process
of diagnosis is a long, complex process, and the potential for abuse is rampant.
Which drs, pyschiatrists, psychologists will have or spend the kind of time
necessary to carefully explore and arrive at accurate diagnosis? In a systemized
screening, believe me, a former beauracrat worker, it will turn into processing
with requirements to produce numbers to measure and little time to perform
adequately.

Given the administrations handling of our military, given the
administrations handling of our schools, the no child left behind, the now
disenfranchised Pell grant college students (a million to be lost), I can only
shudder to think what the ramifications will be of "mandatory screening for
mental health"...

.... end thought




a few more links on the subject
http://www.namiscc.org/News/2004/Fall/Ment....aapsonline.org
you will have to scroll down a little way in the left column on this one. there is another link here called 'stop big brother from snooping around in your medicine cabinet.'
http://www.conservativeusa.org/pubs.htm


Illinois is testing the program now - more links

http://www.illinoisleader.com/news/newsview.asp?c=18658

Mental Health Plan gives legislators headache Illinois recently gained national and international attention as the first state to put into law a template for mental health screening that could become a national model for government mandated “evidence-based practices screening" for emotional and social disorders for the state’s children.

State Sen. Chris Lauzen (R- Aurora ), who along with all 59 members of the Illinois Senate voted for the final version of the bill, said today, “If this negative interpretation of the Act is accurate, it is personally discouraging to me that this bill could have gone through the hearing process with everybody voting it forward, and none of the true implications of what this bill was all about were understood by many of voting on it.”

Bush plans to screen whole US population for mental illness

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/extract/328/7454

The plan promises to integrate mentally ill patients fully into the community by providing "services in the community, rather than institutions," according to a March 2004 progress report entitled New Freedom Initiative (www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/newfreedom/toc-2004.html ). While some praise the plan's goals, others say it protects the profits of drug companies at the expense of the public.

The Pennsylvania formulary is based on the Texas Medication Algorithm Project that has been exported to about 12 states and was recently commended as a model programme by President Bush's New Freedom Commission. However, Dr Peter J Weiden, who was a member of the project's expert consensus panel, charges that the guidelines are based on "opinions, not data" and that bias due to funding sources undermines the credibility of the guidelines since "most of the guideline's authors have received support from the pharmaceutical industry."

http://psychrights.org/Drugs/AllenJonesTMAPJanuary20.pd

... Screening is a public health measure for identifying a condition which is then treated. Mental illness is difficult to diagnose, since screening instruments are questionnaires filled out different clinicians, as opposed to a relatively objective measure like blood pressure or cholesterol. There is overlap among symptoms of many mental illnesses. Considerable stigma still attaches to mental illness. Screening children in schools may result in psychological stress in addition to their already excessive burden of stress. Treatment is often conceived of as drugs, although the first line treatment for depression in children recommended by the APA is psychotherapy. Most drugs have not been studied in children, and the current problems with SSRI-suicides in children should give pause. Many American families and children have no insurance to access health services or drugs. Children diagnosed with mental illness may have a difficult time in the future with insurance and other medical issues associated with a putative mental illness.

Despite widely held beliefs, there are not specific drugs for specific illnesses. Treatment guidelines recommend many drugs in various sequences and various doses with no diagnostic tests as to which drug may be more suitable for which patients. Drugs recommended overlap many illnesses, which themselves overlap in symptoms. Drugs are used in combinations never tested clinically so efficacy trials are not relevant. Polypharmacy has been characterized as an "uncontrolled experiment". Efficacy trials suffer from many limitations, which are rarely mentioned: exclusion of difficult cases, short period of duration, low level of improvement counted as a successful response, and many more. These limitations make the conclusions of studies of questionable relevance to the general population of people with mental illness. Adverse events associated with central nervous system drugs, especially used in untested combinations, are considerable. Since the clinical trials for drug approval are very short, typically four to twelve weeks, the long term adverse effects of drugs are never revealed. Current examples are the SSRI-suicide controversy and the metabolic X syndrome associated with the atypical antipsychotics.

The idea that whole classes of drugs, such as atypical antipsychotics, can legitimatey be eliminated from a formulary is questionable. Drugs must be used on an individual patient's needs. Unfortunately, real evidence of efficacy, effectiveness, safety and tolorability are not well established for most of these drugs, Even in such a situation, patients who are not helped by some drugs must have access to any others which might help them, even if the drugs are more expensive. The reason for the high cost of these drugs is an important issue to study.

and

Mental illness is not found upon "screening" but requires prolonged observation by multidisciplinary teams of professionals. Neither are the most appropriate therapeutic interventions likely to be offered for those so identified. Even insured parties are generally denied significant reimbursements for effective behavioral and cognitive therapeutic interventions. It takes knowledge of the individual, extensive assessment to rule out other health conditions and a commitment to at least a trial period of therapies which are non-chemical in nature.
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/328/7454/1458#6 ...

Texas Medication Algorithm Project (TMAP)--which was developed by University of Texas psychiatrists, paid for by Big Pharma, and adopted during the Bush governorship. See:Whistleblower removed from job for talking to the press by Jeanne Lenzer BMJ 2004;328:1153 (15 May), doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7449.1153 http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/328/7449/11 ...

[QUOTE][quote=EvelyninTexas,Dec 28 2004, 07:36 PM]
By the way, only a couple of the links at the top actually work. I did go to the government report that was sent to the president and within that report, I found this, which specifically alludes to IDEA which requires informed parental consent for assessment.[/QUOTE]

"

oops duplicate, deleted. site kept telling me to resubmit post, error message.

pardon me, another duplicate, deleted...kept getting error message from site, didn't realize it already posted.

deleted duplicate.