Attempt to stop mandatory mental screening fails

Congressman pushed language requiring parental consent
Posted: November 24, 2004
1:00 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 own comment:

The Matrix has, or will have, you! Does this represent the first legal franchise for American McMind? It is a rather frightening precedent in the current barrage of changes on the American political landscape.

Freeing the mind may not be possible in the future with the advent of mandatory "mental health" screening today. It is clearly a potential tool for marginalizing, or even eliminating elements of society that are deemed to be non-conformist.

Will we accept the Clear Channel of the American mind? Can we allow this attempt to usher in a Brave New World where an entire population can then be chemically controlled and/or motivated to fit a consensus concept of correctness proscribed by the Government? The results of the "screening" will follow a child or adult all of their lives and, of course, be accessible to various entities now that privacy is endangered.

The devil is in the details, of course! Psychology is NOT, in my opinion, an exact science and those who author the tests will determine how they affect and control the population.

Haladol is being used nationwide in nursing homes even though it has
major warnings for anyone over 65 and the side effects of the drugs
are like a chemical straight jacket.

Mandatory "mental health" screenings seems like something straight out the page of Stalinist Russia repression handbook.

Are the gulags next?

in the courts by outraged parents and won't stand.

At least in the America I knew, it won't. I don't see courts upholding this law.

The courts after the Repukes get done with the? YOU WILL HAVE NO RIGHTS!!!

are up in arms about it.

You know someone is screwing up if we agree on anything. :crazy:

...just like people who say mental health doesn't deserve as much respect as other health issues.

that they think (just like us) that it's going to take their rights away! We think that the Christian fundies are going to use it to exorcise the demon-possessed autistics and put homosexuals in prison camps. The Freepers think that the "liberal psychologists" are going to use it to take the fundies' children away and make them homosexual.

It's kind of funny and awful at the same time! And that's the whole problem with this bill - it takes ALL our freedoms away. Both sides could be correct given the right circumstances. We need to do away with this piece of legislation. It reminds me of Soviet Russia - the totalitarians locking up dissenters in mental hospitals.

If nobody likes it, why the fuck did it pass? Can anybody answer that? Now I wonder if Dem and Rep are just labels in Congress? Are they really in bed with one another and now we're all just sheep to the slaughter?

Why did it pass? Because it is a payback to Big Pharma, who contributes Big Bucks to both Dems and 'Pugs. And yes, if the past four years haven't convinced you, this bill should, that for the most part, Dem and 'Pug are now just labels. Welcome to the two party/same corporate master system of government.

It is time for a real change in this country, and the two big parties aren't going to bring it about. All they can do is slow down, or speed up the rate at which this country is approaching the cliff edge.

And some of us won't be led like sheep, will you be one of them?

bush did this shit in texas. we warned them but they were too stupid to believe us.

so now they see what happens when you vote against your own best interests.

"Those who commit crimes such as murder, rape and large-quantity hard-drug dealing should be sentenced to life in a federal penitentiary in Alaska. There they would be forced to perform hard labor. Am I suggesting a gulag? You bet I am."

http://local.parade.com/oreilly_archive/shalt_not_spin.html

but I think Bill O'Reilly is wrong.

still support slavery <sarcsm>

Contact your local and state representatives and push for them to join this member of the other party in doing the right thing. Actually let's all raise hell about this omnibus bill - it's got too many dirty surprises in it.

We need to protest this. This is some kind of control thing.

it's taking away parental rights.

that's why this is THE perfect fight right now!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

several months ago. As a psychologist I can assure you that I believe this measure is appalling and further proof that we are half-way down the slippery slope of fascism. God help us!

No one should allow their children to be subjected to it, then it will be taken to the courts and struck down.

they'll have to pry them from my cold dead hands :-).

As a psychologist, I am too aware of the possibilities for abuse in a system like this...all couched in "well, it's GOOD for you" language, and "think how many people we'll help who would normally fall thru the cracks" bullshit.

I am amazed that this has flown under the radar as much as it has. On second thought, no I'm not. I would never have even heard of it were it not for DU.

"They're my kids....not the government's kids"
"Question Authority" was a family creed.

I guess that's TWO favorite lines.

Next time you wonder how people can believe in such wide-eyed conspiracy theories and ignore accepted scientific fact...look in the mirror.

and half the people here said it wasn't true because it wasn't on the TV.A few days later and it's still not being reported.I beg EVERYONE to stop calling things they don't want to believe "conspiracy theories" thats how we ended up in this mess.PLEASE,PLEASE,PLEASE WAKE UP at least DO IT FOR YOUR CHILDREN!! Have an open mind and check this website out: www.infowars.com Alex Jones is fighting for YOUR freedom.The time is at hand where people must take action instead of laughing off those things you want to call Conspiracy Theories. GOD HELP US ALL

suspected liberals ( err, meant terrorists ).
BTW, when I us in ICU at the hospital they had me
on Haldol and that is the nastiest drug I have ever
taken in my life. It rendered me totally psychotic
for about 8 hours after each pill. For the life
of me I could not tell what was real and what was
not.

What happened to that Republican concept? This is going to come down the pike and be blamed on the liberals. And women's groups because boys will be treated more often. Wait and see.

Sad thing is, I have always supported more mental health money for schools and society in general. But not like this. Almost afraid to talk about an idea anymore, they would have screwed up the Revolution, no doubt about it.

You think Bush wants to put someone in to ensure it does?

Very possible.

Next in order is the firing square and the big mental institutions to change the thinking pattern, 'eh?

Shame on our house! Only one congressperson dared oppose this, and he is a Republican?

This is what chaps my ass about my own party. I've had just about enough of them just sitting on their hands through this entire maladministration, whilst BushCorps takes this country apart brick by brick.

To our own Dem reps I can only say: For God's sake, STAND UP FOR SOMETHING BEFORE ITS TOO LATE!!!!!!!!

but pregnant women as well. CPS will be screening pregnant women too.

There is much flying under the radar these days. I learned about this on www.prisonplanet.com. Some of the stuff on this site may seem outrageous, but so far it's been right on. The implications are scary. I admit I find myself thinking, no way, but then next thing you know I am finding websites on the VeriChips, etc.

I've mentioned this before, but the Constitution Restoration Act of 2004 is also flying under the radar. I am not sure whether it's passed or not, but if it has or does, it'll shift authority for making decisions away from the courts, based on the acknowledgement that God is the sovereign source of decisions. You can google for more info. It's S 2082 IS.

www.prisonplanet.com and I go to www.infowars.com Alex Jones. My husband used to make fun of me until what Jones says seems to be coming to fruition. Now he reading LaRouche as well as Jones. I told him that LaRouche seems to be a little long winded for my taste.

as he can about the New World Order and the ruling elite.It's hard to call him a conspiracy theorist because he's careful to not bring up anything that can't be substantiated.In June of 2001 he was urging his listeners to phone the Whitehouse and tell them to not carry out the upcoming attacks,he felt there was enough info being talked about from those in the intelligence agency to issue a warning to his listeners. www.infowars.com www.prisonplanet.com www.prisonplanet.tv

Just like the good ol' days.

Only liberals fought it.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

determining who is mentally healthy. Welcome to Bushco world.

will come from the pharmaceutical companies themselves, FWIW.

...imagine getting so many people to be so stupid as to believe in creationism, and then to get those stupid people to somehow figure out how to fill out a ballot?

Why not screen for mental health?

The problem with the "stigma" of mental illness is that the stigma exists in the first place! Instead of worrying about "stigmatizing" people by screening them for mental health issues and helping them get treatment, how about working on eradicting the stigma itself? Why should depression be any more stigmatizing than diabetes?

is that the pharmaceutical companies will be involved in the process, and don't be surprised if forced drugs don't come into play at some point.

Also, they are pushing for another law wherein Drs will have to let the government know what drugs are prescribed to Americans. I don't know about you, but I think it's no one's damn business what drugs my Dr. prescribes for me. Also, they will be putting RFID chips on prescription drugs (a subset) going forward. Of course, they say it's to prevent counterfeiting, but IMO it's just another way of profiling us based on health conditions. What's next? Committing those who have taken prozac? One of the cable networks even had a scroll at the bottom saying that HIV drugs would have the RFID chip as well.

The laws changed. It is very difficult to detain someone for involuntary hospitalization. To be committed there needs to be clear evidence that you are a danger to yourself and/or others, and are not willing to seek treatment.

committment less difficult? This law is only the first step.

People with the least rights in this society are those labelled mentally ill. And that, at this moment, is one out of four Americans--an outrageous number. If you commit a crime and are sent to a mental institution because of it, you can be held INDEFINITELY. Yes, that is correct--indefinitely.

I've been in and out of the hospital for various issues. I have always signed myself in yet, I have watched many around me, those without friends and family easily committed.

If you have people looking out for you then you are ok. But if you are mentally ill and have no one watching over you, at least here in FL, get screwed and trapped in the system.

Because, you know, we don't have any money to Help these people. But Jeb can find money for corporate tax cuts in the state.

Bastard! :(

But here in Washington state, it is very difficult to commit someone for involuntary hospitalization.

It's too little recognition, which means less funding for preventitive steps that can keep someone out of being in a state that would warrant being involuntarily committed.

You're only going to be involuntarily committed, at least in the states I know of, if you are a danger to yourself or others. I know, my aunt tried to get my father involuntarily committed in NY, and even though he was clearly mentally ill, he only had to say "no," since he wasn't a danger to himself or others.

The real danger of "commitment" is people being warehoused in nursing homes b/c the state won't pay for home care.

Stop spreading these urban myths--you're just discouraging people from seeking help.

their unruly students...from there to mandatory mental health screening...please, this is serious aside from committments voluntary or involuntary to mental health institutions.

I've worked inside the state system in WA (which is way more progressive than a lot of states) for almost 16 years. Believe me, when the "mental health" processing starts on anyone, it follows them around for life. I have seen way too many kids given diagnosis for dangerous drugs in an effort to control their behaviors. In worse case scenarios it may be helpful, but children are still growing and these kinds of drugs often are over in the psychotropic arena.

I don't want my grandchildren subjected to anything mandatory about mental health screening and more especially so without their parents consent, approval and participation.

I find the very idea of mandatory mental health screening for any program attached to federal dollars extremely frightening as a carte blanche open door.

Teachers are not trained to diagnose. They can "suggest" Ritalin until they are blue in the face, but a responsible practitioner is going to do a comprehensive assessment. This should include input from the teacher about the child's behavior in school, but a responsible practitioner will diagnose based on ALL the available information. That said, I'm not claiming that EVERY practitioner is responsible. I'm sure there are some bad apples out there that just write a prescription for a drug without a thorough assessment, but I believe this is the exception to the rule.

in an elementary school in upstate NY, before I had my son. The school was in one of the poorer areas of town. On an almost weekly basis, some of the teacher's were bringing in students suggesting they needed to be evaluated for ADD/ADHD. They were even bringing pre-K students in stating they needed to be evaluated because they were unable to sit still & focus. Show me any four year-old that can sit still & I'll bet you that child is on medication! The student population was approximately 500 students. The school district had to hire another part-time nurse to assist with medication administration at lunch time, due to over 100 children being given medication (mostly for ADD/ADHD)!! I and this other nurse also worked per diem for a pediatric practice which consisted of 10 doctors & 4 nurse practitioners. The medical director from this practice was astonished to find out that 1/5 of this school's children were on these medications! This practice is also the school physician(s) for the school district---the docs rotate turns at the different schools in the district. When you have this many docs & each prescribes an average amount of these meds, it is compounded ten-fold actually 14-fold if you count the nurse practitioners!

...can't they get in trouble for that? That has to be a violation of some kind of professional standard of conduct.

Teachers are not psychiatrists.

As for the mental health screening...the issue is why isn't this treated much like the hearing tests, eye tests, etc. Should parents be allowed to decline, and if not, why not?

I can see arguments for not letting parents into the loop because so many people, as demonstrated on this board, are dangerously ignorant about mental health and will readily compromise their children's well-being for the sake of their own stubbornness.

On the other hand, the intricacies of these diagnoses means that standards shouldn't be applied universally with no way out. The test might show one thing, it's disproven on deeper analysis, but then next year you have to repeat the cycle.

for a couple reasons - 1. they aren't doctors, so they aren't qualified. 2. the school district could be found liable to pay for the treatment

You'll enjoy your 'hospital' stay.

You don't know what you are talking about. It is very difficult to have someone committed involuntarily, and it is equally difficult to keep them in the hospital if they don't want to be there. These days, getting people the treatment is a lot harder than getting them hauled off to the hospital forever, a problem that existed at one time, but doesn't exist today. Not only is it against the law, but no insurance company would pay for it. Read up on your state's commitment laws.

People get sent to state institutions all the time and are forced to stay there without recourse. Like a previous poster said, if you are connected,have money, family, etc.--that probably isn't going to happen to you, but it happens to plenty of people, especially people who are sent to mental institutions after being picked up by the police--they may not even have had a trial. They may be sent for evaluations, or they may be sent after a conviction, but once in a mental institution, they are at the mercy of the doctors in the institution. There are documented reports of people spending their entire lives in mental institutions because they didn't speak English!

Private institutions kick you out when the money runs out: the poor don't even start off there.

you need treatment. You should be in treatment until you get well. That is a different situation then involuntary detention. Say, for instance, a mother kills her children because of post-partum psychosis. She would be tried, and if found legally insane (which is a legal term that has much stricter parameters than the definition "mentally ill") she might be confined to a psychiatric hospital specializing in the treatment of those who have committed crimes. For instance, John Hinkley is in one such place.

As far as involuntary hospitalization goes, I stand by my assertion that is difficult to do, at least in my state. If someone is a danger to themselves or others, as determined by a trained mental health professional, and is REFUSING treatment, they can be detained for 72 hours for observation. After the 72 hours, it must be proven in a court of law that this person should be kept for longer. Usually, they are released on a less restrictive order.

The conservatives have turned our prisons into the centers for the mentally ill in the nation, just ask amnesty int'l (I don't have a link, but it would be easy to find the report on their site).

The #1 crime the mentally ill commit is drug abuse, as self-medication. Mentally ill people, on the whole, are not more violent; alcohol is a much, much bigger factor in violent crime than mental illness.

http://www.garynull.com/Documents/HiddenSideOfPsychiatry.htm

Your comments on this thread lead me to believe that you have had little contact with the mental health industry. I assure you that it is not all sweetness and light, and I pray that you never have the opportunity to be at the wrong end of a psychological "diagnosis".

A lot of the links that people have posted on this thread lead to anti-psychiatry articles on websites that are far from what I would call reputable sources. If you look at other articles on this guy's website, he also attacks medical intervention. I don't claim that there are not problems with both health and mental health care in this country. The system needs serious fixing. But come on-this guy is looking to sell his supplements. I believe wholeheartedly in natural methods of healthcare, and I think natural methods can be very effective in mental healthcare as well. But allopathic and Western medicine techniques are needed as well. Complementary medicine, blending allopathic and natural methods is the wave of the future.

Come on, now. I assure you that this is far from the only website out there like this one. Are we supposed to believe that only crazy people make assertions like this?

Isn't that exactly what the Republicans say about us?

And no, I won't stop posting links. Just because you don't like it and are threatened by it doesn't make it untrue. Sorry.

has been to a website with dubious content. You can post whatever you like, just don't expect to convince me of the validity of what you are saying with links to right wing drivel. When you post a link with content from a reputable source, maybe I'll see your point of view.

And sorry, but your attempts to intimidate me by insinuating that I'm threatened by your laughable attempts to discredit the mental health field are unsuccessful. As someone with an MSW (I assume, since you said you worked as a social worker) and a degree in research psychology, I'm sure you are aware that there is quite a lot of training required in this field. Therefore, I am not inclined to fall for your "techniques."

naked carrying a flashlight in broad daylight, baba. See how fast your rights are snatched away.

All it requires is a judge and you're in for three days in most states.

In times past and present, you could be institutionalized if you didn't follow the conventional wisdom, if you were gay, if you were a member of an opposition party, etc. With the Religious Reich in charge, how soon until atheists, and anyone with critical thinking skills are considered mentally ill?

IIRC, I think when the Patriot Act first passed, the pretzeldent said not to worry, it wouldn't be used against citizens... just terrists and such. I think it was maybe a month later we had the American Taliban, or some such. Then we had Homeland Security being used to track Democrats.

One thing you can count on, if these pricks get power, they will abuse it.

you are not institutionalized for not following conventional wisdom. Unless by conventional wisdom you mean that it's unhealthy to stand in the street holding a gun to your head and threatening to shoot. That MIGHT get you involuntarily committed. Might.

Be aware of the word "mandatory" here. Do you feel comfortable with that in a supposedly free society?

This is not, to me, about mental illness but about what is considered "wellness".

We are supposed to be in a system where the assumption is: innocent until proven guilty. That would apply to drug testing, also.

I feel that any mental problems should be self-evident to a well-trained and skilled educator. At that point, a child's behavior will indicate if intervention is prudent.

Does that make sense? Should people be forced to submit to testing? What other Draconian measures would then follow? How much should we be compelled to do?

Whow is watching the watchers? Who is policing the police? That is the qustion.

Teachers are not trained in mental health assessment. They are trained in education. As a mental health professional, I have worked with many teachers who had no clue about how to assess mental health disorders.

Unfortunately, a child's behavior does not always indicate if intervention is needed. Many kids fall under the radar, and since they don't act out, everybody assumes they are okay.

I see your point about the screening being mandatory. I think parental consent is essential.

Since you'are a "mental health professional".

Have you heard of the Texas Medication Algorithm Project? It's a plan to standardize treatment for all mental "problems". Even ones not evident to teachers & parents. The major treatment prescribed will be psychoactive drugs.

I'm not a doctor. I'm a clinical social worker. I work directly with clients, and if psychoactive drugs became the primary treatment modality for all mental lillnesses, it would actually mean LESS work for me! I believe that drugs are often needed in some instances, for some disorders (bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, etc.) but if used should be combined with therapy or another supportive service.

You are defending your profession.

the term used by substance abuse 'professionals' who have tremendous influence with the courts, even in the state of Washington.

"drink..........the........kool-aid.........
.....trust......your.......government........"

The one we have is turning out to be a full-fledged dictator--and dictators have long used the mental-health system to get rid of troublemakers.

We don't need mental hospitals in the new modern era--not with the broad spectrum of high-quality psychotropics available from dozens of pharmaceutical firms who all just happen to be run by Republicans.

everything put together by the repub leaders with little time to read thru the document???????

population."

You are sooooo right, MatrixEscape, and American citizens must rise up against this blatant continuation of Hitler's Nazi practice of human experimentation in mind and social control of our children.

Bu$h is a horrible, maniacal monster - why can't the republicans see what is going on in our country?

I take heart in responses of that kind.

They are ready to offer the blue pill now. We, however, choose to take the red!

We will not wash it down with the conceptual Kool-aid they offer ... no matter what color it is.

Things are progessing as they should and that will be more obvious with time.

It's so obvious now and getting clearer everyday.You really have to be brainwashed to not see the connection.

I think there are some misconceptions about how mental health screenings are conducted. There are no "tests" in the screening. Rather, the mental health professional conducts an interview, and looks for signs that might indicate a need for further assessment. For example, signs of depression can include feelings of chronic sadness and hoplessness, hypersomnia, and changes in appetite.

Nobody will be authoring diabolical tests intended to control the population. That's not how mental health screenings work.

"Nobody will be authoring diabolical tests intended to control the population. That's not how mental health screenings work."

Perhaps that was true before America became a fascist nation.

Now, you can count on mandatory governmental mental health screening to be part of the Bu$hler War Pig youth indoctrination program.

This is now. Who will administer these tests? What will they consist of? Will the professional mental health community be involved at all? Will the parents know what the tests consist of? Do you really trust this administration to do what is best for the child and the country? If so, please examine that omnibus bill to see what funding was cut, and what other cute goodies was snuck in.
There is some really nasty stuff coming down.

The professional mental health community should be involved. If not, then I would seriously doubt the legitimacy of the screenings.

that is what it means..without parental consent needed. At present in the public schools, a lot a screening already goes on..eyes, hearing, reading comprehension, etc. All require parental consent. However, you give your consent with the initial paperwork in enrolling your child..so, separate letters are not sent to you to inform you when your child is tested. This one is different...your consent is not needed at all...and...you will not be informed at all as to when your child will be tested...you probably will not even know that it was done. To begin, this testing of mental health in the schools will only be done sporatically..the children that are seen to be disorderly or problem children will be tested. In large school districts, this often is the poor child..and it will be the child of parents that who are not financially able to to fight the system. It will probably be years before this causes any notice at all..and by then it will be accepted...sorry to say.

as it is, being poor sets up you up to go to jail on crap charges, be openly discriminated against in college admissions, not get basic healthcare, get less funding for your schools...why are you suddenly so worried about this? What makes this so dangerous?

and it brings back happy memories of a quaint and distant past. But this is Amerikka now. It's not the country we grew up with. I don't trust this government further than I can throw it. When they tell me A, I automatically assume B. Under a responsible administration, I would welcome such screenings, with parental consent. But I won't turn my 5-year-old son's mind over to the fascists.

And welcome to DU, by the way!
:hi:

There has been dismissal of this idea just because it came from the Bush administration. I'm just saying, let's not dismiss the potential benefits of these screenings. I think we should evaluate this carefully and not jump to conclusions. It isn't black and white. Some people here seem to be saying mental health screening and treatment shouldn't even exist, and that all drugs are always bad, and the mental health system is part of the diabolical plot.

Thanks for the welcome!

It smacks of Nazi "culling" tactics. It has NO MERIT, except to increase customers of pharmaceutical companies...hell, they need the money, the way they are being sued over crappy, unsafe drugs. And it's an easy way to both mark and pacify anyone who isn't happy with the administration.

The minute you get the government involved, you get quotas. If the average number of mental health cases is X per thousand, the government screener will be looking to make their quota...and it could be you, if you are answering questions on a bad day, or don't like the questioner's attitude.

This is an issue that belongs between a patient and his or her goddamn DOCTOR. Just like choice. You don't need your mental health status to be a part of your secret gubmint file. And if they don't like you, because you are too liberal, opposed to the administration's policies, whatever, what is to prevent them from declaring you nuts and locking you up? For your own good, of course.

Of course, if we had REAL health care for Americans, people would have ACCESS to assistance. But no, far better to line them up, give them a quiz, and categorize them.

Fuck that shit!

the feds finally make a move toward expanding healthcare and what do we get but this knee-jerk "mind control" "social control" crap. jezuz why are so many people ignorant about mental illness? it's like a creationism conference in here.

suggests.:-)

What am I saying--as a "mental health professional" this will mean more work for you.

There will be ways of detecting "problems" that were not evident to parents or teachers. All treated by psychoactive drugs.

Doctors aren't accused of encouraging there to be more sick people just so they can have more work. Why should I be?

What's your profession, Bridget?

He and his "buddies" have been subjected to such examinations for years. He is as right as a right-winger can be, and he has stated the problems with these tests for years.

They are absolutely arbitrary.

It depends completely on which doctor is doing the screening.

An individual can take two tests, with the same doctor, with a span of several months in between, and pass one time and fail the next.

Plus, who all has access to this information?

Finally -- They have taken over childrearing...WTF?

In case he works some place without any mental health professionals.......

"While questions surround the dangers of drugging large numbers of citizens, also notable is who the New Freedom plan envisions will deliver psychiatric services.

"Mental health education and training will be provided to general health care providers, emergency room staff and first responders, such as law enforcement personnel and emergency medical technicians, to overcome the uneven geographic distribution of psychiatrists, psychologists and psychiatric social workers," the plan states.

New Freedom, "the future of mental health care in America," is being rolled out on a state-by-state basis, according to Power, who added in an Aug. 13 speech that the federal role is to "motivate, facilitate, and compel change."


http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1020-20.htm

Mental health screenings are not "tests" that you "pass" or "fail." These are preliminary screenings which look at many different factors. Usually, if there is any cause for concern, the screener will likely recommend FURTHER ASSESSMENT! People don't get diagnosed after one screening. There is much more to it than that.

And besides, what other medial diagnosis is given, based largely on client self-observation? If I come to you and tell you my arm hurts, you do certain tests and go through procedures to find out why--and you may find out its broken.

For mental illness, its the client's reporting of his own distress that brings him for help. And the current system assumes this indicates he is abnormal and in need of labelling and medical help. I suggest that the whole system is askew. We need a new paradigm. We need to trash the system and start over. People with depression, anxiety, etc. are often in need of support and coaching. This doesn't mean they are abnormal in any way, and yet this is how our society treats them.

to be abnormal. That's why I'm saying the label isn't the problem-the problem is the PERCEPTION of the label. There has been a lot of work done in the past 20 years to challenge the dominant paradigm. People have problems with the medical model because initially, this model did conceptualize mental illness as "abnormal." But the model has changed, and there has been a shift towards destigmatizing mental illness. Most in the profession look at these problems as biopsychosocial. I think the problem is in the old language, and in the tendency for society to judge those with mental illness in a way they would not judge someone with a physical illness.

Psychology is a huge business. More and more people are being dragged into the mental health system who ordinarily would have just been supported by family systems, religion, community, etc. And as more people are labelled with DSM tags, the more stigmatization goes on. The stigmatization against people seen as "different" is growing, not diminishing. And as the mental health industry grows, and more people's income depends on the labelling of people, the more people are pigeon-holed into tags which follow them all their lives.

Its a sick system, in need of total overhaul. Its a system which feeds on people least able to fight back.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Here are some articles from a DU thread about this:

Now Bush wants to test every American for mental illness--including you! And guess who will create the tests?
By Jordanne Graham

Never mind that it couldn’t have less to do with freedom; The New Freedom Initiative proposes to screen every American, including you, for mental illness. To this end, the president established a New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, to study the nation’s mental health delivery service and make a report. It’s interesting to note that many on the staff appointed to the Commission have served on the advisory boards of some of the nation’s largest drug companies.

The commission reported that “despite their prevalence, mental disorders often go undiagnosed,” so it recommended comprehensive mental health screening for “consumers of all ages,” including preschool children because “each year, young children are expelled from preschools and childcare facilities for severely disruptive behaviors and emotional disorders.”

Children and school personnel will be the first to be screened...
http://www.interventionmag.com/cms/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=830





These articles provide additional documentation...


President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health
http://www.mentalhealthcommission.gov/background.html


Nationwide Mental Health Screening Proposed
http://www.namiscc.org/News/2004/Summer/NationwideScreening.htm


Attempt to dump mental screening fails Rep. Ron Paul hoped to stop mandatory federal program for children
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40384


IL Children's Mental Health Plan gives legislators headache
http://www.illinoisleader.com/news/newsview.asp?c=18658

For the latest news, Google "New Freedom Commission on Mental Health".

Crystal Night is next, and will soon be brought to you by the 700 Club!

I don't think anyone but the people at DU, *, and all of his friends in the pharmaceutical industry know about this bill. And somehow, I'd bet that those security mom's would have a fit if they knew this was going on. I think it's time we let them, and everyone else, know.

How about it? I don't have kids, so I don't quite know where to start. PTA maybe? Teachers associations? This HAS to be stopped.
Suggestions everyone? And links. And anything else you can think of. I'm gonna get a really big mouth and very tired hands from all the talking I'm going to do and all the letters and emails that are going to be going out over this one.

I think I may have found my battle in life. :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

Many home-schooled children come from Republican families. They're watching this too.


Concerns About Mental Health Screening Legislation


http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/hslda/200411/200411170.asp

Recent reports and rumors that Congress is passing mandatory mental health screening legislation have been circulating the airwaves and media outlets. HSLDA has been watching and working behind the scenes on this issue for some time. Our concern stems from any attempt by the government to usurp the right of parents to direct the medical decisions of their children, including what medical tests their children receive and who tests them.

Unfortunately, the media reports have often been inaccurate. There is NO mandatory mental health testing requirement being imposed upon states or local schools. However, there is still a cause for concern and a need for continued vigilance....


The Commission's report does not specifically recommend screening ALL students. However, one could foresee how the recommendations in the report might lead to the mandatory screening of every child. For example, the report stresses that a major problem comes from undiagnosed children. They also suggest that "schools are in a key position to identify the mental health problems early and to provide a link to appropriate services." Any proposal that would lead to mandatory testing is dangerous and clashes with the principles which govern a free society....


HSLDA will continue to oppose attempts by the federal government or states to implement a mandatory testing system. It strikes at the heart of parental rights. This issue is not likely to impact homeschoolers directly at this time. If any mental health testing program is implemented by a State, it would probably begin with the public schools. Nonetheless, HSLDA continues to follow and oppose any attempt to usurp a parent's right to direct the medical decisions of their children.

I welcome everyone to this thread. Does it not appear that every raving, lunatic "conspiracy theory" is now becoming Conspiracy Fact?

The Regime is having a jolly old time, putting one evil scheme after another into operation, comforted by the knowledge that Good Murkins will not question them. Good Murkins hold fast to the maxim that their government will not hurt them. Moreover, they are certain that things like mandatory mental screenings will not take place because, "it's not on the news."

So, welcome all to the desolation of The Handmaid's Brave New 1984. Perhaps the Debunkers will come riding to our rescue!

:evilgrin:
dbt

Chemtrails and "phone" towers, anyone?

:grr:

~snip~

"We believe the drug companies and the psychiatric establishment convinced Sens. Arlen Specter and Bill Frist to block it," said Kent Snyder, executive director of the Paul-founded Liberty Committee. "We are extremely disappointed that the conference committee ultimately rejected Dr. Paul's language and that it was not added to the omnibus spending bill."

Critics of the mental-health screening 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.

Snyder says Paul won't give up on thwarting the screening and will take up the issue again in January when the new Congress convenes.

Psychology -- is a non MD -- profession. Psychologists offer different types of non drug therapy -- although some do work with Psychiatrists. Very often these two groups don't trust each other -- the Psychologists believe that Psychiatrists rely too heavily on medication and very often the psychiatrists are as well trained in human psychology -- temperament, personality etc etc etc etc.

There is also a concern in some non MD mental health circles that people are wrongly medicated -- when other methods may be more effective with far fewer side effects.

Very often Psychiatrists are seen to work FOR pharmaceutical companies.

Psychiatrist
<div class="excerpt"></div>
What is a Psychiatrist?

A psychiatrist is a physician who specializes in the diagnosis, treatment and prevention of mental illnesses and emotional problems. Because of extensive medical training, the psychiatrist understands the body's functions and the complex relationship between emotional illness and other medical illnesses. The psychiatrist is thus the mental health professional and physician best qualified to distinguish between physical and psychological causes of both mental and physical distress. </div>
http://www.psych.org/public_info/choosing_psych/whatpsych.cfm

What we need is more dialog about mental illness -- and telling the difference between normal people who are just "different".

There are some brain chemistry imbalances that should be identified early and medication can help: "manic-depression, panic disorder, anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder and schizophrenia."

What is not at all clear is what sort of psychological testing will be done -- and what are the qualifications of the people administering the tests. Why is there opposition to parental notification? If the kid is acting nutty at home -- then perhaps the family needs to be taught what early stage schizophrenia or bi-polar disorders symptoms are. Mitzy is a bit strange -- well actually Mitzy is more than a bit strange -- she has a mental illness.

The idea of secret testing and then forced medication based on unknown testing protocols is down right frightening.

Knowing bush as we do -- we cannot imagine that he would have a humanitarian bone in his body.

The cost to the schools would be enormous -- who the hell is going to pay for the testing and then enforcing that the kids take their meds? Will there be orphanages built to house the kids to make sure they are medicated? Will parents be forced to pay for the meds and perhaps the warehousing of their children?

What are the end goals of testing and medications -- who benefits?

There are a whole lot of questions -- now the next question will the American people accept this like the sheep that they seem to be?

(My degrees are in Psychology, Soc and Anthro with MA in counseling and post grad work in Personality development. When I was getting my Psy degree we dealt a lot with the Psychologist/Psychiatrist conflict.

I would only be for them if they gave them in massive amounts to Cristo-fundies and the rest of the cultist that harbor views favoring Armageddon \ rapture visions :D

As a one time victim of the pharma-culture industry I can honestly say Psychology along with a couple of Far-Eastern homeopathic therapy's is the only real healing methods worth employing. I was treated with a combination of drugs and group therapy on my first acute episode of schizophrenia. I hated them drugs and I made it my first mission to not have to take them (which has worked out for me for the last 25 years as far as I can tell)

The second episode about 14 years ago I kind of self treated myself (I am a independent S.O.B.) with a slight bit of help with Psychoanalysis from my untrained and unschooled but intelligent father. In this later episode I had a bit of study of Psychology under my belt (helped in the later stages of healing). The biggest thing though I think is giving people space and time for them to put it down so they can pull themselves together and get on with the rest of their lives.

I feel as if my life is working out okay now even though in the background I know that ugly thing has lurked and still does lurk to some extent. That's where the Psychology and a lot of philosophy comes in handy. I am a productive member of society with family, career and home that finds it easier to give than receive

Keep up the good work DELUSIONAL others might be depending on you and still others have things to teach you that you might never have known

http://www.questia.com/popularSearches/history_of_psychology.jsp
http://www.questia.com/popularSearches/psychoanalysis.jsp

From my studies in this subject (from a layman's view), although its thought that some apparent mental illnesses are caused by brain-chemistry imbalances, there is no scientific proof of this in a controlled study. In other words, given say, 100 test subjects, an independent researcher could NOT pick out the "ill" subjects. This of course, would be unacceptable in ANY other field. If you had 100 people and 5 had diabetes, for example, you could independently test for that and come up with the same 5 people. This doesn't happen with mental illnesses.

The brain is a poorly understood organ. And most of what we consider mental illnesses are only variables in personalities, and a matter of social and adjustment problems. The whole field is political, and its motivation is social control. One of the new religions is psychology.

And the people who suffer the most? People with the most sensitive natures, who the most easily manipulated by the system. On the other hand, sociopaths, who have no conscience, thrive in our culture of high-stakes capitalism, winner-take-all lifestyles, etc. The poet loses.

observations.

Some mental illness is found (or labeled as such) in only certain cultures. And even this research isn't well done.

But I do believe that some of the brain chemistry concepts for specific mental illness may have a valid foundation -- some forms of manic depression (also known as bi-polar disease) can be treated with lithium. Patty Duke suffered the symptoms of this disease for years until she was diagnosed and treated with lithium.

There is some suggestion that Parkinson's disease and schizophrenia are different sides of the same coin-- too much of one brain chemical in one case and not enough in another.

But there is no one drug fits all -- and most if not all of these drugs have powerful side-effect. Fitting specific drugs to specific personalities is not something that is done very well in this country.

Also an individual really has to want to get well -- and participate in the treatment. The fact is that some manic-depressive like the highs and they will put up with the lows in order to ride the highs. Some schizophrenic like the voices in their heads and will fight the medication -- also there are unpleasant side effects with many of these drugs.

The brain is a major chemical factory -- and the research has only just begun -- and has probably gone backward 40 years in the last 4 years.

(These are just general remarks -- there are several shelves devoted to mental health research in most large libraries.)

Humm -- so first "they" and test and then drug the kids -- state issued drugs are good. Next they test and then drug the parents. Everyone is happy, everyone is peaceful, everyone goes to church on Sunday and everyone listens to Fox News all day, every day.

People who are suicidally depressed, and can think of no other recourse but to jump off a bridge? People who hear voices telling them how horrible they are and that they should kill themselves because they are worthless? People who have panic attacks that are so bad that they can't leave the house? People who are so controlled by their obsessions and compulsions that they spend four hours a day clicking the light switches on and off?

These are not normal variations in personality. These are debilitating disorders. It is disrespectful of those that suffer to say that what they are experiencing is not real.

What I'm saying is that we need a new paradigm for mental health treatment. What's wrong with that? We need to shift the paradigm from one of sickness to wellness--from abnormality to normality.

The wellness paradigm is already becoming the new paradigm. Most MHP's look at it as mental health, not mental illness. However, we still can't deny that people can have problems in this area. This doen't make them abnormal or defective. Having diabetes doesn't make you defective, it just means you are a normal person that is struggling with a problem that CAN be managed. What is wrong with looking at depression this way?

when I speak of a new paradigm, I am speaking of the entire system. The way the system is now, more and more people are encouraged to go to psychologists, etc. Its pervaded every aspect of life. Even baseball players are being sent for counseling and getting their personalities analyzed so that their corporations can controll them and the next generation of players better.

Its dangerous social engineering, done at the expense of diversity of human expression.

There are many things that need to be fixed about the mental health system. It is underfunded, for example. People don't always get the best care because of this. Therefore, the system is perceived as failing by many.

Why are you associating counseling with mind control? Surely you must realize that sounds a little far-fetched. Most people I know would be happy to take advantage of counseling if they could afford it, or if it was covered by their insurance.

I fail to see how going to counseling crushes creative expression. If anything, it could help enhance it.

And yes, I'm in the field, but I have always believed in accessible, affordable mental health care. I believe it is as essential a right as physical health care!

The problem is in the FORCED intervention. This is dangerous and violates civil rights. I personally believe that I should be allowed to be depressed or anxious in the privacy of my own house if I want to, and I definitely don't think I should be forced to talk about it or take drugs to "fix" it by my own government.

And what happens when they decide that "questioning the government" in the privacy of my own home is a mental illness worth fixing? What then? Mental illness IS a stigma, and that is why the average American wouldn't question it if their government took their neighbor away for "schizophrenia" - they would breathe a sigh of relief that somebody was taking care of the problem. This is a very dangerous precedent, and you seem awfully naive about it. I imagine that you are defensive because you are in the profession - to admit that much of this is junk science would be very threatening to you.

Especially when somebody posts an unwarranted and completely untrue assertion that this is "junk science." Have you actually ever worked with someone who is chronically mentally ill? Their pain is real.

Insensitive people on this board are not only railing against the proposal, but against the very idea that people suffer from mental illness and the legitimacy of mental health care. It is regressive and reactionary, and a sign that the progress that LIBERALS have made in improving the care and treatment of mental health is in danger from seriously backwards thinking.

What is your profession? I'm sure you would defend it as well. The point is, I have always been interested in these issues, and I believed in accessible, affordable mental health care before I even entered the profession. Liberals are dedicated to progress, remember?

I have worked with the mentally ill. I was a social worker for a number of years. It was partially because of this work that I gradually came to believe that many of the "treatments" applied to the mentally ill were inappropriate, insufficient, and mainly designed to make the normal people feel less afraid/good about themselves.

As for my profession now: I am a research psychologist in a area other than clinical/therapy. It is because of my experience looking at and conducting actual scientific effort in the area of human behavior that I make the statement "junk science". The research that has been done on the positive effects of therapy has been at best inconclusive, and those are the studies that are conducted using appropriate methods - many clinical studies are done without control groups and have other problems. The one exception to this rule is possibly cognitive-behavioral therapy, which is based on sound theory backed up by decades of animal behavior research.

I do believe in accessible, affordable mental health care for people. I just don't think that the people who are trying to provide that in our current society are doing a good job, and in some cases I believe that they are actually harming people. I personally know several individuals who have been quite screwed up by mental health providers and facilities. If you are interested, I can certainly provide quite a few links to web sites detailing many many instances of "accessible mental health" care that is essentially torture (and is certainly not based on any actual understanding of human behavior).

And I certainly don't want my government mandating that I accept care from anyone that I consider to be one step removed from a witch doctor, or that I take drugs that haven't been adequately tested. If I choose to seek out that kind of care on my own, that's another matter.

are part of the problem. Human behavior may be too complex to study in an artificial environment. As for animal studies, I put little faith in those.

Look at the actual proposal. Is there anything in it that would mandate that people accept care and take drugs? So far, I have not heard any evidence on this board that there is. I haven't read the proposal yet (I plan to) and when I do, I'll draw my own conclusions. My original point was, and has been all along, that people on this board have been attacking more than just the proposal itself.

Psychaitric drugs are not without their problems, but you can't deny that they have made a significant difference for a lot of people. Progress is being made all the time in studying treatment methods. Nobody claims to have all the answers. But to say we should "throw out the baby with the bathwater" (so to speak) is just ridiculous. Instead of dismissing mental health care providers as "witch doctors" maybe you should look into researching and developing new assessment and treatment methods.

I am in treatment for clinical depression, and as long as I take my meds I can function as a "normal" person. But if I stop, I will become suicidal again. Let's not try to make everyone fit in pre-concived ideas of treatment. If alternative methods work for some, well jolly for them. I suffered too long to mess around and take chances on treatments.
As to manditory testing of children w/o parental permission, I can see all sorts of abuse of the system. The over-medication of the poor, because they come from unstable homes is just one possiblilty. This law is a bad one and we should protest.

You'll know, 100%, that my brain does NOT work the way it is suppose to.

I can't, in polite company, tell you what I think of these statements of yours:

"And most of what we consider mental illnesses are only variables in personalities, and a matter of social and adjustment problems. The whole field is political, and its motivation is social control. One of the new religions is psychology."

So son of a gun, all I have to do is 'change the variables in my personality' and I'll be cured? Who'd a' thunk it?

I suggest you try REALLY hard to get yourself an honest to goodness mental illness all of your very own. Bipolar disorder would be a great one for you.
The kind with WILD mood swings that change from minute to minute.
One minute you think you are the greatest thing since God and can do ANYTHING you want, and the next minute you are in a corner, in the dark, on the floor, crying as if your life depended on it and begging to die to get out of the pain.

"Change the variables in my personality" my ass.

One of these days, when I've got the energy, I think a thread on educating the masses who THINK they know about mental illness, but don't, would be in very high order. And believe me, the only people who REALLY know, are the people who SUFFER from these VERY REAL ILLNESSES. Even the doctors don't know. They can only guess.
And sadly, that's the way they try to treat us, with their guesswork.

Edited to add: Not every mental illness is 'easily treated.' I'm going on five years with my first correct diagnosis, and so far, no miracle drugs, not even a tiny hope of a drug that will work for more than a month at best. Or at worst, having to stop it within days due to the horrid side effects.
I have always said I would not wish this illness on my worst enemy. But I do wish it, short term, on anyone who really needs to UNDERSTAND what it truly is. That person would come out of it a changed human being. And a truly thankful person as well. Because they would know that their 'illness' was only temporary. I've had mine for 48 years and counting -- but the doctors, I've lost count of how many, had not been able to accurately diagnose it till 1999. Fun huh? I didn't have to go to school to become an expert in this field. All I had to do was to be born. Besides, you can't become a true expert in this field until you've lived it. I don't care how many books you've read, how many tests you've taken, how many degrees you have. The only true experts are the poor souls who have these dreaded diseases. I've heard mentally ill patients say that they wished they had cancer instead. Or had lost an arm or leg. Because at least then, people could understand them better. Pretty horrid don't you think? Wishing for cancer instead of a brain disorder?
THAT'S how horrible these diseases are.

If I have a mission in life, it would have to be this. To make people understand, as best as they can, without having the illness, what a life of hell on earth it is to live with these brain disorders. I didn't ask for it. Because of it, I can't handle a job, a relationship, or even the thought of having children. I wouldn't dare give birth to a child, for fear they would inherit this horrid disease. I am the only child of the man and woman who created me. I am adopted and I know them. I am thankful that I am the only one. This strain of my disorder will end with me. No chance of passing it on. It's that bad. It's a hell of a sad life, because most times, it is hell. Period.

In my state we have to give parental permission for MANY things, even taking our kids out of school on a field trip to the bowling alley.

And they DARE think they will screen my child without my PERMISSION? NEVER.

Think about this. Can you send you kid to the doctor without you being there? NO. They will not treat your child without your permission. Therefore they will not be allowed to treat my child. That's the end of it.

Where is the ACLU? Countdown to lawsuit 5..4..3..2..1

Oh, and if you google this bill http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&q=pork+in+omnibus+spending+bill+

You'll see entry after entry of pork. An estimated 11 billion. Even ramped up the amount they are allocating for ABSTINENCE ONLY programs. Yeah, that'll work. It works so well the abortion rate goes up under Bush.

Rant off/

me first before I let them test and drug my children. This is outrageous. Is there some list of email addy's for every single Senator and Congress person available on DU. I apologize for not knowing, I'm relatively new to the site. This is an issue, like the draft, that B**h crime family should not have messed with. If there is anything that brings bipartisan folks together it is blatant threats to their children. I feel the mother bear in me getting ready to rip some Republicans to shreds. This must never happen. DEMOCRATS, if you bend over on this one, and it seems you have already, there will be hell to pay. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

anyone have this? I need to read this for myself, I can't keep reading peoples takes on a bill, without reading it myself. I went on the white house site, but that is his "plan"... not the bill ....

can ANYONE help me with this, please?????????????

I did a search on "mental health screening" at
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.html

1 . Let Parents Raise Their Kids Act of 2004 (Introduced in House)
2 . Positive Aging Act of 2004 (Introduced in Senate)
3 . Positive Aging Act of 2004 (Introduced in House)
4 . Children's Mental Health Screening and Prevention Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)
5 . Veterans' Enhanced Transition Services Act of 2004 (Introduced in Senate)
6 . Keeping Families Together Act (Introduced in Senate)
7 . Keeping Families Together Act (Introduced in House)
8 . Leave No Child Behind Act of 2003 (Introduced in Senate)
9 . Leave No Child Behind Act of 2003 (Introduced in House)

Doesn't it just warm your heart to know your govt is looking out for mental health.

Here are a bunch of sites I found, but still nothing on the EXACT wording of the bill. I was thinking of writing to Rep. Paul and asking him if he could give me/us the exact bill number and wording. That is the first link below. If anyone wants to beat me to it, go for it. I have not had chance today. Plumbing problems kept me off the computer all day.


Rep. Paul who is fighting to get parental consent into the bill.
http://www.house.gov/paul/index.shtml

Lawmaker tries to block mental-health screening
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41511

Attempt to dump mental screening fails
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40384

Forced mental screening hits roadblock in House
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40365

Bush to screen population for mental illness
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39078

White House blah blah blah info on themselves and all the 'great' :puke: work they've done so far.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/newfreedom/toc-2004.html

This is the report that was given to the White House and where the bill idea came from.
http://www.mentalhealthcommission.gov/reports/reports.htm

President's Bogus Mental Health Screening Initiative Is a Thinly Veiled Scam to Boost Pharmaceutical Profits
http://www.newstarget.com/001688.html


Last three are articles against the bill.
http://www.graphictruth.com/Article4.phtml

http://www.mindfreedom.org/

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul204.html

Are DUers the only sensible ones left on the planet?

Whatever happened to "no more big government telling us how to live our lives"?

Psychological labels are purely political. There is little if any science involved.

People like me have been trying to convince people of this for years and there are groups dedicated to this subject, but most of the population, including lawyers, have ignored it. The public doesn't care because they don't see themselves as having a stake in it, and lawyers love the psychological system because they can manipulate it, using it to their advantage in the legal system.

The truth is: Psychology is a political tool used for social control, and its been misused by totalitarian governments to the extreme.

This mental health screening system of *'s is something I've been talking about for months and months. Its hard to get people to listen because they don't believe the system will ever be used against them. Americans suffer from lack of empathy and critical thinking skills. Its like the Iraq War--they vote for a war criminal, without thinking of the consequences in the long run.

<snip> Snyder says Paul won't give up on thwarting the screening and will take up the issue again in January when the new Congress convenes. <snip>

Maybe there's hope to stop this? Anyone know the vote tally on this? What the hell is wrong with these people?

there would seem to be a lot of speed bumps on the way to implementing this. Who administers the "tests"? Who pays them? Can state governments, and county governments, fight this? ALL judges, at county and state levels, can't be pushovers for this, can they? I think this can be fought on many levels, county, municipal, state. And when and how is the announcement to be made to the public? Will it just be disseminated via schools, or will it be more public? I see many levels at which this detestable program can be monkey-wrenched and held up in courts for years. And don't forget to send info on this to all media outlets. (I would do so, but still learning basic computing skills!) Anyway, I think a general uproar over this could stop it in its tracks.

Guess they just didn't want to fuck with their 200K+ earners tax cut. They can put their children in private schools, so it's not a worry for them! Notice how the uberconservatives are all homeschooling and private schooling their kids?? THEY won't be subject to this.. but it will be used to take down our public schools.

I talked to my daughter's jr. high school staff about this.. they had NO idea about it. I directed them to the White House's own website on the program. Scary stuff, indeed... AND headed up by the drug companies.

on the Genesis News Network. You want to know whats coming up in the near future from your government listen to his radio show from Austin Tx. you can find it here www.infowars.com

Anybody notice that it's not a problem to have so many children
living in poverty and to go without physical health insurance, quality nutrition, yet they want to force "mental health screenings" on children, with the drugs not proven to solve anything, anti-depressants
now having warnings to increase suicide risk and the long rotten
history of "mental health" treatment being everything from a hidden torture to just inept diagnosis?

Where are the democrats on this and many issues?

one man is even angry he voted for Bush...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1287529/posts

Was curious as to what their reactions were. Don't like to go over there and wander around, feel all icky afterward.

ok folks just pull a bit togheter maybe there will be some "baptised" FReepers coming over.

Perhaps there will be a day when its not a matter of Reps and Dems but a matter of Americans and Stalimericans

:grouphug:

stay strong over there

to ask if he could borrow a snowplow.

I always thought it would be cold day in hell before the Freepers agreed with us on something.

This too good. I found two who said they regretted voted for *. Hellooooooooooo freepers, maybe they'll finally wake up. Thanks for sharing this. I am just trying to figure out when to spring this on my repug family who have kids in school.

they VOTED for all this 'wonderful' stuff Herr * has thought up for all of us? Did they think he'd leave them out because they gave him their very misguided vote? hahahahahaha.

Here are some to share:
(I didn't do a spell check. I'd be here all night. :evilgrin:).

To: George Frm Br00klyn Park
Scary from the perspective of making big bucks for drug manufacturers but even more so from the perspective of shifting the entire population toward some group-think standard. Conform or else. Stalinish. What the hell's wrong with Bush? I'm writing my well-known left-of-liberal congressman, maybe he can oppose it.
(Uh oh, they might be catching on. See the word 'Stalinish?') :evilgrin:

To: George Frm Br00klyn Park
This is a pretty cool way to make it illegal for millions and millions of Americans to ever own a fire arm. So, the gub-mint wants to see if you're a nutter, fine. What if they decide (based on some half baked formula) that you are. What's next, Mandatory drugging....with let's say...
Prozak? If that's the case...think of how many people would be banned from applying for legal fire arm ownership. Once you take those types of drugs....you effectively are banned from ever owning a firearm.

This is a nice end run around the second ammendment. :)

(Now when it comes to messin' with their guns, well, it don't get no more seriouser than that!) Hey, just trying to spell along with them. lol.


To: infowars_victory
This makes me want to vomit.
Vomiting won't help.

Making some congresscritters unemployed will.

(Oh no. Now they want blood. lol.)

To: George Frm Br00klyn Park
Keep in mind, readers - No Child Left Behind was just an idea bopped around between Candidate Bush and Ron Paige in 1999-2000. Now it's federal law, and is strangling *good* school districts everywhere.
This plan looks like it's marching lock-step into becoming another huge federal octopus like NCLB.

What it's going to do is force people en masse out of the public school system. What will happen to those remaining inside won't be funny at all.
(Honestly, are heads exploding or are light bulbs finally going off?)



(HERE IT IS! The moment we've been waiting for. THEY want to move too! LMAO!)
To: Wolfie
LOL.
There comes a time where we must draw a line in the sand and say this far, and not one bit further and really mean it. Government has pushed and pushed but mandatory mental health screenings are over the line.

I don't think anyone is going to be forcing pills down my throat. At that point this nation will no longer be worthy of my presence and I'll emigrate. I'm not kidding.


To: George Frm Br00klyn Park
Mandatory federal mental health screening for your children, compliments of our "Conservative" President.
( LOL )

To: Wolfie
My guess is the vast majority will go along.
My guess is you're right.

The character of the American people is nothing to be proud of lately. They've become easily manipulated herd animals. I can't really think of much they won't tolerate.
(This one is scary. They are talking about themselves, but don't know it. :scared: )


To: George Frm Br00klyn Park
I have a few questions... first, who will pay for the drugs when a family cannot afford that medication? Will it be the federal government or the local school district?

Second, how is compliance going to be enforced? Will the child need to take the medication in front of the school nurse? What will be the penalty for noncompliance?

Third, how about side effects of the drugs? Who will determine if the student is having legitimate adverse reactions? What will be done in the event of side effects?

Fourth, will "treatment" other than medication be offered so that a child can eventually be drug free?

Fifth, even at nursing homes, there is a standard that says the patient needs to be maintained on the lowest possible dosage of any psychotropic. That means the patient needs to be consistently evaluated and drug dosages adjusted for compliance. Will this be the case in our schools? In schools with hundreds and perhaps thousands of students, who will be doing this evaluating and who will be paying for this evaluation? Innercity schools come to mind with barely enough resources to pay for teachers and text books. Where will this money come from?

Finally, who will be libel for drastic adverse effects on a student? Tell me that will you. Just who is going to bear the responsibility for any negative outcome, now that the parent will be helpless in the care of their own children.

This is just horrible and I can't even imagine the buearacracy involved in implementing this. I mean, what on earth will be the punishment for noncompliance? What about incorrect assessments? Will someone be able to challenge an assessment?

Sigh... I'm old enough to remember a mostly free society and I'm very glad to be heading into the twilight years. But I really grieve for my grandchildren and how they have to live in the mess we are handing them.

(Ooops, someone just told the truth without realizing it).


To: Motherbear; stockpirate; SJackson; Travis McGee
If this comes to pass under the Bush administration, I will rue the day I voted for him and the Republican ties to the pharmaceutical industry.
The New Freedom Initiative is the President's own project.

Mandatory mental health screening = "New Freedom." LOL! Orwell and Huxley are chuckling right about now.
(It just gets better and better. Wanted to stop here but a few more deserve to be posted. lol.)


To: Fatalis
This is such a violation, I will also rue the day I voted for him. I am mad as a hornet that he has done this. These drugs are not safe.
(Keep going *. You're going to lose your base in a matter of weeks if you keep this up).

To: Fatalis
He did the same thing in Texas.
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, Whistleblower
(Duh. What HAVE we been trying to tell them for years?)

To: Fatalis
Welcome to the USSA.

I wonder where our "Serbsky Institute" will be located, where troublesome citizens will be "treated" for anti-social attitudes?

To: vaudine
Mandatory mental screening for "every" American? Normal by whose standards? Good grief! and shades of big brother. This is scary stuff.
In the Soviet Union, if you disagreed with the State you were often declared "mentally ill" and locked up. How long before we start locking folks up for "hate thoughts"? Hmmmmm?

(Yep, they are catching on. Ain't it fun to read?)

To: myrabach
What about incorrect assessments? Will someone be able to challenge an assessment?
This is Catch 22. If you challenge the assessment, it will prove you're mentally unstable.

(Freepers getting paranoid).

To: stockpirate
Critics of the mental-health screening 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.
Unfortunately, this is the kind of thing that gets traction under a pro-business government and is one of the reasons some of us are still holding our noses...

(Pro-business government? Who told? OK, come on, who let the cat out of the bag to the freepers? :evilgrin: ).

To: BearWash
Well, one thing I am seeing with the Bush and people under him is their "Socialist Agenda." And I supported Bush in both elections, but I will not support a "Socialist Aganda," and will do what is needed to prevent and if that fails to not comform to the law.
(Do you smell a freeper war against *? lol!).

Sigh. That was the best freeper thread I've ever read. And here I was having a bad day. This sure cheered me up. LOL.)

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2004/roll438.xml#N
Why is our side so incompetent? It's issues like these that are why Dems lose. Because they don't know when to pounce until it's too late to pounce. I am going with the opinion that there was something else in the Ron Paul bill that they didn't like or that they weren't given the chance to read Ron Paul's amendment before it was brought up, for now.

Or maybe they were stupid enough to take the big pharma money over creating a huge wedge issue for Repugs which is futher proof of why DLC corporate funding has been harming this great political party.

If they are smart, they'll come out now and say they weren't given a chance to read the amendment or come up with some reason for voting against it.

requiring parental notification!

UNFUCKINGBELIEVABLE!!!! EVERY DEM BUT ONE!!!!

I now have a newfound respect for my Republican Representative, Judy Biggert. She voted IN FAVOR of the Paul amendment to require parental notification!

This is totally indefensable. It's a rout. I'm giving them the benefit of doubt, knowing that Dem strategists are notoriously slow to react.

If the Dems are so in support of this loony idea, I must wonder why teh fuck I'm a member of this fucking party!

There is something else going on.

Every last one of them with a single exception chose to support this crap.

EVERY LAST DEMOCRAT WITH A SINGLE EXCEPTION!!!

It's going to be damn hard to get me to vote against Judy Biggert (R) in 2006 because she at least had the guts to say AYE to the Paul amendment!

Would there be a single solitary chance of this being signed into law under a Democratic President? No.

There is something else going on here. You don't support this and many (most?) of the Dems in Congress agree with you on most every issue, and I think this one too.

If you were right, every Dem in the House could have voted "Aye" and the amendment requiring parental notification would have passed, a HUGE win for the Dems.

Instead, every Dem save one voted against parental notification for this abomination.

There is nothing else going on here because these fucks agree with this shit!

No way will my child be submitted to these intrusive tests without my consent.

Please elaborate.

Unless the bill was written for the side purpose of destroying the public school system, in which case they also win.

You evaded my question. How will my homeschooled child be forced to submit to this screening?

I just know that they will try their best to make sure that "no child will be left behind" in their brainwashing and getting them addicted to big pharm's drugs. I know their motives and you are reacting exactly as they expected and hoped you would.

Instead of the actions you are taking you need to lobby Dems so that they know that there is something very wrong with this bill that they overlooked that will undermine the whole school system in this country. These bills are pushed through so fast that Dems have no chance to read them, so that it why I expect that Dems voted against Paul's ammendment and they also probably want to make sure that folks see what Repugs are willing to pass and sign into law when they are in total control.

A teacher abused my child long before this legislation passed. I filed charges against her. It is because of THIS that I removed my child from the school.

How can my pulling my child out of the public school system BEFORE this legislation passed be considered a "reaction?"

And I am a member of the homeschooling legal defense association. They are fighting this law tooth-and-nail. They advocate for all parents.

So you are saying that, on principle, I should LEAVE MY CHILD IN A SCHOOL WHERE HE WAS ABUSED BY A TEACHER? (Actually, it has happened three different times, with two different teachers. ) No, I won't leave him in a dangerous situation. I fought the school in the only way that I could--I filed charges. When the abusive teacher's trial comes up, it will be plastered in the media here. The administration will have to answer a LOT of questions about why they never responded to my concerns until it was too late.

You have some stereotypes about homeschooling parents with which you need to deal. Quit lumping us all in one big group.

You are condemning the whole public school system because the public school in your specific area is either corrupt or a single teacher (has that teacher been fired or repremanded, btw?) acted in a way that is against the law.

Let me repeat that. The teacher broke the law. That teacher's actions are NOT tolerated within the system, under the law.

Most Americans have neither the time or funds to homeschool so you are working hard to leave THEM to hang out to dry by telling the wealthier folks to get out of the system, since they can afford it, instead of fixing the problems within the system.

That said, you obviously prefer to homeschool and thats fine with me. But don't be selfish about it. Remember that other folks don't have the time, the knowledge or the wealth to do what you are doing and don't forget about them.

If I abandon a broken school system, my property taxes still have to be paid and those property taxes still support the schools I choose not to use.

I'm sorry, but I will NOT subject my children to this sort of bullshit. It would be ABUSE in my opinion to do so.

Most Americans have neither the time or funds to homeschool so you are working hard to leave THEM to hang out to dry by telling the wealthier folks to get out of the system, since they can afford it, instead of fixing the problems within the system.

That said, you obviously prefer to homeschool and thats fine with me. But don't be selfish about it. Remember that other folks don't have the time, the knowledge or the wealth to do what you are doing and don't forget about them.

children, that's not my fault.

It doesn't take wealth to stand up to a corrupt system. Most of the people in the system are fundamentalist Christians who have NO PROBLEM with the way the school operates.

The people who called me after they heard I had pressed charges--the people whose very children had been abused by the SAME TEACHER--thanked me for doing this. But when I asked them to address the school board with me, what do you think they said?

If they won't stand up for themselves, they aren't my responsibility.

I could walk away from the fight--it would reduce my stress level immensely--but I chose to continue the fight for the kids whose parents don't have the fortitude to publicly stand up and stop it.

I don't have "time" either. I am finishing my PhD--but my son's well-being is my priority, so I made myself TAKE THE TIME. It doesn't take a PhD or wealth to stand up, though. They comply with a corrupt system because they want to, not because they have to.

DO stand up for their kids in other areas. Have you thought about moving, btw? If the other parents who live there refuse to act on their own kids' behalf when it happens to them, maybe the problem is the local voters and not the overall school system.

I'd move if I were you. And I'd make sure that these contemptable people who let this happen to their own kids without standing up FOR their kids, know that you are thinking about moving because of them.

A public school is only as good as its administrator. The school superintendent AND the principal tried to cover for the teachers. This has happened MORE THAN ONCE. I have addressed the administration, only to see that I was getting NOWHERE.

And my son was expected to continue enrollment in the abusive teacher's class. I asked that he be moved, and administration REFUSED. You say that her actions are not tolerated under the law? Well, the trial hasn't come up yet, and she is STILL teaching. And I have been called by a multitude of other parents who thanked me for confronting the system, because she had abused their kids, too. The administration at this school protects its teachers at all costs, even when they physically abuse children. And mentally abuse them, too. My son's teacher from last year told him, "I would hurt you really badly if I could, but if I did, your mom would go try to get me fired." This is a teacher who has been with this system for over twenty years! I complained, and the response I got was, "She's been here a long time, and we've never had a complaint about her."

You can talk principle all you want. When my kid's mental and physical health are endangered by abusers and the people in charge do NOTHING but cover for the abusers, it's time to get my kid out of that institution.

How do you think that I am not fixing the problems? I filed charges, will talk to media, have written representatives, and will continue the battle. HOWEVER, I will not subject my son to an abusive situation under any circumstances. The battle I am fighting IS for the other kids. My kid is out of the system now. Others aren't. The potential for abuse is still there for them. THAT is why I am continuing the fight and refused to drop charges. And, when this goes to trial, the media will call, and, believe me, I will open a can of worms that this system NEVER wanted made public.

You are condemning the whole public school system because the public school in your specific area is either corrupt or a single teacher (has that teacher been fired or repremanded, btw?) acted in a way that is against the law.

Let me repeat that. The teacher broke the law. That teacher's actions are NOT tolerated within the system, under the law.

And I'm going to add that you are doing the right thing in your fight to rid the system of some of it's corruption. You are BIG TIME doing the right thing in this. That teacher *and* the administrator need to be removed.

My issue is that you were telling folks to leave the system, rather than fight to remove some of it's corruption it in your ealier posts. Although, its obvious that you yourself are trying to get rid of some of it's corruption.

Where in any of my posts did I condemn "the whole public school system?"

I have always been a public education advocate. I even have a position in state government in which I advocate for children. I have not quit advocating. I have pulled my son out of a bad situation until the situation gets better.

Hopefully, I will take a job in another area soon, after I receive my doctorate, and I can put him back in the public school system. But as long as we are here, he won't go back. Not until the school board corrects its problems, which I don't anticipate, because all of the school board members are conservative Republicans, none educated above the high-school level.

Thanks for telling me that I am doing the right thing. I really had no choice, and it broke my heart to have to do it. My story will be made public soon, and hopefully the major embarassment it brings to the school system will result in some vast changes.

I think we've agreed on pretty much everything then. Even tho it might not appear on a scan that we have, I think we do.

As for Where in any of my posts did I condemn "the whole public school system?"
Post #66, when taken without the context you've added in later posts can be interpreted that way.

I may be here the rest of my life, but as with any PhD working in higher education, if a better opportunity develops elsewhere at another college or university, I'll move.

I have no immediate plans to move. I anticipate living where I am now for at least four more years.

Pull your kids out if you don't want them subjected to this bullshit. That'll stop 'em until they have the funds to go after everybody else.

They just destroyed the public school system and you are walking right into that trap.

Please elaborate on your claims that homeschooled children can be forced to submit to tests.

Are you saying that homeschooling destroys the public school system? I disagree. The public school system in my area is self-imploding. I pulled my child out for very valid reasons (educationally inept, teacher abuse, testing without my consent BEFORE this law passed). However, the mandatory screening proves that I made the right decision.

But most parents don't have the resources to bring their children home to school them. I am fortunate that I did.

And please lets limit the debate to ONE thread, rather than two. Redundancy will only confuse.

I won't send my children to public schools that practice this bullshit. NEVER!

My son has been physically abused. He has been discriminated against because the teachers and administration in his very conservative public school district (which is run more like a private school--prayer, spanking, etc) know that I am a liberal, and when asked questions in class by prying teachers, he answers them honestly.

See, they know that children trust authority, and they have misused that authority.

Have you joined the Homeschooling group here? It's never too early to start thinking about your future kid's education.

I had been wondering if I had done the right thing, and then this news developed. I have no regret.

I need a bumpersticker that says "Homeschooling isn't just for fundies anymore."

the immediate reaction to this story by a friend of mine who develops medical technologies was "Oh my God; nanotechnologies". He said that if the screenings could offer the government the opportunity to implant locater tags (I'm a little sketchy on the specifics) that could contain various bits of information about us (like tiny RFID tags). Real tinfoil hat stuff, but I guess you can't put anything past these bastards now.

The chips are out there and approved for FDA use in mid Oct. More info can be found by googling Verichip. I have read the the Mexican DOJ has them, and also heard something about our military getting them. Just read that these chips will be used in surgeries, so that Drs. know where to operate. (what happened to the old days when they looked at your chart?) While they will be external on tags, how much of a stretch is it to imagine a scene where they are implanted?

No, none of this surprises me at all, as I have cross referenced several resources on it.

or are they exempt from the testing

distance stare in their eyes, and the perpetual
smile ( albeit a little drooling ) on their faces.
The churches must be spiking the holy water.

I posted this in the other thread, too.

I have googled this story, searched for Kathryn Serkes and Rep. Paul and only found this story at newsmax and worldnetdaily. There was a reference to this story from several months ago on snopes.com, but I haven't seen anything else on this. And there is nothing on the Congressman's web site...

at the bottom of the above article at the world net daily site.

You can also read about it on the whitehouse website (Google "new freedom initiative".)

and the White House (HHS) site has not been updated in months.

I find it curious that NO ONE else has picked up this story. I would think at least Rep. Paul's home town paper would have written about it.

I have been listening to a discussion of this this a.m. One of the things he's mentioned has been some of the type of questions that may be asked, like...do you have feelings of being confused? What child doesn't have feelings of confusion?

Anyway, his show airs nightly too from 9 to midnight central and you can pick it up in streaming audio by going to www.infowars.com and then click on listen. If your computer doesn't do that, it's also on shortwave and some radio stations in the country (handful of states)

http://www.mindfreedom.org/mindfreedom/bush_psychiatry.shtml

I posted it once before in this thread. Apparently you didn't see it. This bill is so scary, yet it appears to be passing under the radar of most. I also don't understand why the REPUBLICANS don't get up in arms about it, as it is such an intrusion of the government into citizens' private lives. Although, I guess that's the sort of concern that the Republicans *used* to get upset about, but not anymore.

that the Newsmax story http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/11/22/215244.shtml
quotes Rep. Paul from this web site, but never acknowledges this was a written statement, nor that it was made before the vote. I can't find a single story from AFTER the omnibus bill passed that mentions anything about this issue. I would love to see a more...trusted...new source than Newsmax or worldnetdaily. I see how troubling this can be, but the link you provided is from before the bill was passed. I want to see someone, anyone, reacting AFTER the fact, in a legitimate news publication.

Quoted material from this site and the newsmax story:

“At issue is the fundamental right of parents to decide what medical treatment is appropriate for their children. The notion of federal bureaucrats ordering potentially millions of youngsters to take psychotropic drugs like Ritalin strikes an emotional chord with American parents, who are sick of relinquishing more and more parental control to government.

“Once created, federal programs are nearly impossible to eliminate. Anyone who understands bureaucracies knows they assume more and more power incrementally. A few scattered state programs over time will be replaced by a federal program implemented in a few select cities. Once the limited federal program is accepted, it will be expanded nationwide. Once in place throughout the country, the screening program will become mandatory.

“Soviet communists attempted to paint all opposition to the state as mental illness. It now seems our own federal government wants to create a therapeutic nanny state, beginning with schoolchildren. It’s not hard to imagine a time 20 or 30 years from now when government psychiatrists stigmatize children whose religious, social, or political values do not comport with those of the politically correct, secular state.

“American parents must do everything they can to remain responsible for their children’s well-being. If we allow government to become intimately involved with our children’s minds and bodies, we will have lost the final vestiges of parental authority. Strong families are the last line of defense against an overreaching bureaucratic state.”

of their kids. Most of this site has the problem you found with the mindfreedom site, in that info has not been updated. It's pretty much true for this additional site that I found (psychrights.org), but this site has an opt-out legal form for parents who object to the bill's intrusiveness.

http://psychrights.org/index.htm

Apparently, some of the bill's provisions allowing testing of students are in conflict with the earlier No Child Left Behind Act, so this form presents parents with the opt out based on the latter law's provisions. (Do you see the irony here?) :)

I would like to see evidence that this proposal will allow the federal government to require children to take drugs, as stated in this article.

will be defined as a mental illness?

"Knowledge and reason, change like the season - a jester's promenade"

We are now dealing with a regressive, "puritanical" government.

The same type of people that burned "witches" at the stake a few centuries ago.

Mental health professional standards can now be politically altered into a social nightmare promulgated by religious fanaticism, totally beyond the realm of reason and genuine ethical scientific guidelines.

Anyone?
i am referencing pharmaceutical grade drugs, BTW. ;-)

my guess would be 10%.

affects 80% of the people in this country.

30% suffer from some type of serious depression at least once in their lifetime.

Red pill, blue pill... Doesn't matter. The Matrix is gonna nail you if you're awake or asleep.

They can't fund treatment.
That is what is so goofy (and why there IS alot more to this than what it sounds like)

Looks like Illiniois is already trying it (and not liking it).
http://www.illinoisleader.com/news/newsview.asp?c=18658

fyi - Pills are not the reccomended 'best practice' for anything but short term depression. Anything more SHOULD have therapy.

SOME mental illness is biological, but NOT all - and they can't afford it now (proper treatment). Parents have to release custody of their kids to become wards of the state, in order to get PROPER treatment.

Health insurance doesn't cover adequate treatment.

That's why there has got to be more than what they are saying.

Involuntary commitment laws are changing. It USED to be hard, but in some states it's getting excessively EASY again (FL) same with forced treatments.

(everyone should get chills)

today.. I was transferred to 5 different people. No One had ever heard of this... One person that I talked to in General Accounting was astonished and pretty upset about this bill. This person had worked in Social Services in LA County, and quickly recognized the potential problems with this.. I was finally transferred to the Communications Department. I was told to send an email with my questions and concerns, it was obvious that the woman had NO idea what I was talking about, and that they would then contact me to let me know the "appropriat people to talk to regarding this issue"... So.. Anyone in Portland Oregon.. Our school district knows SQUAT and they are giving me the run around.. I would greatly encourage any other Du'er parents in Portland to Please call as well.. You want to speak to the "Communications Department"for Portland Public Schools...

I doubt many schools have a clue that this has passed or what it is and giving them a heads up might help. My friend is a teacher that works with children with autism and was beside herself when I told her about it. She is in the school district and had never heard of it. I think may schools would want time to plan how to prevent this and the backlash it would cause for them. Maybe I am too optimistic. I will be in touch with my sons elementary school via email with links the Monday after the holiday.

Board of Education. After several transfers, again, talked to someone at the Superintendant's office. They took my name and number and said that they would have someone call me today.. So, we'll see what happens... If I don't hear from anyone today. I will continue calling on Monday.. These people will be so sick of hearing from me... I WON'T give up!!!!

Why is there a double-standard for mental illness? The etiology for many of these diseases is better estabilshed than diabetes or other non-brain ailments.

Of course, it is a problem when teachers play psychiatrist and start pushing specific medications when they are not qualified, but that's a separate issue.

talk about identifying "aggressive" kids and giving them a "different trajectory"

So what's to stop them from targeting outspoken kids that are not ill at all?

Or the kids who say "My mom said that Bush is a blithering idiot and if I could vote I'd vote for Kerry"?

Or the shy kid? Or the one who looks like she might wear Berkenstocks one day?

This is appalling.

When my son was in 3rd grade his teacher told me he had ADD because he refused to sit in his seat - when he was concentrating he liked to have one foot under his rear in the chair.

She wanted him medicated. Of course I ignored her worthless ass.

My son is now 18 years old. As a high school senior he was on the Academic Decathlon team and his team came in 4th in the state (the first and third place teams have alternated winning the NATIONAL championship for about 10 years now).

He is in college, studying journalism (there IS hope for the future . . .) and he has all "A"s.

He doesn't have ADD. Never did.

Scary that these clueless numbskulls can "send" a kid for testing. What happens if you don't want to medicate your child after their "diagnosis"? Will they expel him?

Sickening.

I got straight As, went to f'n Harvard, have written for publication, never could sit in my seat or follow more than a minute of conversation...and only finally broke down, ignored all the stigma from people like you, and got treated for adhd this year at age 25. ADHD does not keep you from succeeding, it just makes life really really difficult. And the medications are old diet pills--mild and safer than aspirin. And if you really are so med-phobic, you can get treated without medication--but that should not be the parents' decision, but the children's.

Of course your son's teacher was in no position to make a medical diagnosis. But if your son actually does have ADHD, your stigmatizing ADHD may end up causing him a lot of pain for the rest of his life.

Antidepressants and adhd medications are not mind control drugs. If you hate bush when you take one...you'll stay hate bush once you've taken it. Just ask anyone who's taken one.

Finally, another voice of reason.

or is that me getting paranoid?

You never can tell with us mentally ill people...

I really think that people are letting their negative views of Bush get in the way of rationally looking at this issue. The truth is that millions of people suffer needlessly because they have symptoms that are unrecognized. Case in point: AD/HD. So many adults have gone their whole lives wondering why they can't concentrate, stay focused, or get organized. When they are finally diagnosed as adults, as you were, they are usually pretty happy to have an explanation for their troubles.

Don't miss the real issue that can be extrapolated from the information at hand.

People are clearly concerned about mandatory anything and what the implications of it might be. That is the duty of American citizens as framed by our Forefathers.

We oppose tyranny in any way, shape, or form if we are to do our duty in that respect.

The brunt of this issue is trust, mind-control, and intent behind the perceived goals of this "Initiative". Freedom is at stake, not mental health care.

Keep in mind that improper diagnosis does exist and that, like it or not, a person/child can be stigmatized and affected for the rest of their life by the history of the diagnosis. Societal stigma is a separate issue.

Some on this thread ARE attacking the very notion of mental health care itself, not just the idea of mandatory mental health screenings.

We already have mind-control--it's called propaganda, and it's been around forever and alive and well. That's the threat.

And yes, the focus on treatment to the exclusion of prevention is just as bad in mental health as it is in other fields of healthcare. But for those of us who have already been screwed, treatment is what's necessary.

I put psychology and astrology in the same mubo jumbo bullshit group.

I trust neither.

...this really elucidates where people who don't "believe" in the proven scientific facts of mental health are coming from; it's the same kind of denial-for-its-own-sake as the people who are against evolution.

By the way, we're talking about psychiatry, not psychology. Psychologists can't prescribe meds.