# Bush to make MANDATORY mental health screenings



## Merlin (Sep 13, 2004)

The re-election of President Bush has caused a major spike in the stock prices of weapons manufacturers like Raytheon and prescription drug companies like Merck. Why the rise in their valuation? Because investors know that Bush supports wars and drugs, and that in his second and final term, the President is no longer held back by public approval ratings. From here on out, it's all guns, bombs, needles and pills, folks!

Under the Bush administration, pharmaceutical companies are likely to benefit financially thanks to ongoing political efforts to outlaw the importation of legal medications from countries like Canada. Elderly people who "smuggle" a bottle of statin drugs across the border will soon be arrested and imprisoned as felons. And once the borders are completely locked down, just watch as U.S. drug companies hike their prices even further. Nothing makes prices skyrocket faster than a monopoly sanctioned by the U.S. government and its federal law enforcement workers.

That why, upon hearing the news that Bush had been re-elected, the stock prices of companies like Merck and Pfizer leaped up as much as 4% in one day. Investors know that Bush strongly favors the pharmaceutical companies, and in turn, those same companies coughed up millions of dollars for his re-election campaign. If you thought the Bush-supported drug discount card program was a fiasco, just wait until you see what unfolds in Bush's second term! For starters, we're looking at mandatory mental health screening of all Americans, with mandatory dosing on antidepressants or other brain chemistry altering drugs if you get singled out as being "abnormal" for any reason.

In other words, we're about to enter a new age of mass chemical incarceration. And one of the ways you could be considered "mentally imbalanced" is if you publicly state that you don't believe in pharmaceuticals. Authorities will declare you to be mentally disturbed and force you to start taking brain chemistry altering drugs that YOU have to pay for -- at whatever prices they choose to set!

More ... http://www.newstarget.com/002078.html

Frankly, that's scary...


----------



## Arduinna (May 30, 2002)

Not to mention the immunity from being sued that he has given them!


----------



## Meiri (Aug 31, 2002)

If this country cannot even provide healthcare to 100% of the citizens, how is he going to force 100% mental health screenings?

Considering how hard it is for people without coverage to get the mental healthcare they need, this would be too much like helping them, and thus not in character for this administration.

Not to say that I disagree that the pharmaceuticals won't be benefitting from Bush staying in office, but it won't be from this tactic IMO.


----------



## Merlin (Sep 13, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meiri*
Not to say that I disagree that the pharmaceuticals won't be benefitting from Bush staying in office, but it won't be from this tactic IMO.

I surely hope so. I don't want to be drugged or even using these pharmaceutical drugs.


----------



## momamuseskim (Oct 23, 2004)

i just got this email from a list that i frequent that opposes the psychiatric drugging of children, and in fact anyone of any age.

i had seen this thread and thought it should go here to show that we can do something about it.

i'm definately sending emails to my state representative.

fortunately, my daughter is 18 now, and was homeschooled through middle and high school, but i will be pregnant soon. i don't know how they are going to enforce or make mandatory these mental health screenings, but i certainly don't want to have to worry about this kind of labelling and drugging while i'm pregnant.

i thought others might find this interesting and also put it into the realm of we can do something about this.










***********************

ACTION ALERT!
Action needed by Nov. 16th
TELL SENATORS TO "JUST SAY NO!" TO UNIVERSAL PSYCHIATRIC SCREENING AND DRUGGING CHILDREN

The Senate will re-convene the week of Nov. 15 with the sole purpose of passing an omnibus appropriations bill - work left incomplete before the elections.

Included in the current version of the appropriations bill is funding for grants to implement universal mental health screening for almost 60 million children, pregnant women, and adults through schools and pre-schools.

The bill would fund initiatives of the "New Freedom Commission on Mental Health," including a program designed to subject every school age child in this country to psychological testing and recommendations for treatment - including psychotropic drugs, antidepressants, etc.

The House has already voted to appropriate $20 million for the scheme, and the Senate wants to bump it up to $44 million. This is a dangerous scheme that will heap even more coercive pressure on parents to medicate children with potentially dangerous side effects.

Further, even the government's own task force has concluded that mental health screening does little to prevent suicide.

Take action now and tell the Senate not to fund any programs that call for universal mental health screening of our children.

Tell the Senate leadership to remove the funding for grants to implement the recommendations of the New Freedom Commission in Mental Health from the omnibus appropriations bill.

Protect our children from being screened, stigmatized, categorized, and forcibly treated.

Call your Senators & Majority Leader Sen. Bill Frist, M.D. (202) 224-3121

To find out who your Senators are, go to http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/

Type in your zip code and a list of your elected Representatives will come up. Click on the Representative for their email and phone number. Please call AND send your Senators emails stating you are opposed to mandatory mental health screenings.

You can also send a letter from the Health Action Center website here;

http://www.healthactioncenter.com/ac...p=2&item=22505

*********************************


----------



## guerrillamama (Oct 27, 2003)




----------



## Seeking Refuge (Nov 2, 2002)

I have known about this for awhile now.

To answer your question about how this is going to work, let me tell you about the pilot program" the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health is running in the elementary school where my sil works. They are handing out psychological dot tests for the kids to take along the same line as the basic skills tests the teachers administer now. The teachers also fill out a dot "assessment" of each child. The results of these tests will then be put in the child's permanent record and children who "have problems" will go to the school counselor who refers them on from there.
My SIL has already been told, because she asked, that parents who refuse to medicate their children could be reported to CPS for failure to provide "necessary" medical care.

Thanks Bush supporters.

I have two kids stuck in school because they are from my first marriage but you can bet my younger two will never see the inside of a school building.

ETA You know this just occurred to me. I live in a state where we have to fill out a CPI and the home schooled kids have to have a basic skills test administered every year. Do you suppose they are going to change the laws in every state to mandate that homeschooled kids have to take the mental assessments also?


----------



## daylily (Dec 1, 2001)

Wouldn't HMOs and other insurance companies have strong objections to this type of screening/mandatory drug taking? It would cost them quite a lot of money to pay for the prescriptions of those who are insured. The HMO lobby must be equally as powerful as the pharmaceutical lobby.

And what if you have no health insurance? How could the gov't force you to buy drugs that you can't afford? It's like asking for universal health care, which we know we'll never see while Bush is president.


----------



## Seeking Refuge (Nov 2, 2002)

The HMO lobby and the pharmaceutical lobby often work hand in hand, which has always struck me as weird too. For example, here in Iowa the insurance companies are refusing to pay for VBAC's which makes no sense because this type of delivery is much cheaper than a C-Section.

This is not a new program,

http://www.mentalhealthcommission.gov/


----------



## RachelGS (Sep 29, 2002)

I have a doctorate in clinical psychology, and find this completely horrifying. I can't imagine the expense of actually running a program like this, and I hope that that alone will keep it from happening. But there's no way in hell I'd send my child to school if it meant that I might be forced to give her psychotropic medications-- which, by the way, are now recognized to be potentially dangerous in children. As far as the testing goes, it violates every known ethical principle of psychological testing to base any kind of treatment recommendations for anything on a single measure administered without the expertise of a psychologist. I can't think of too many therapists who are going to be willing to endorse this-- or too many psychiatrists who would prescribe for children who have not been adequately evaluated and referred for treatment for a specific reason.


----------



## User101 (Mar 3, 2002)

UPDATE:
Here's an update:
November 8, 2004

High-priced lobbyists in Washington are tough to beat; especially the ones
who represent the pharmaceutical industry. But we can't let them win this time.
On September 7th, we told you about the New Freedom Commission on Mental
Health's plan (a presidential commission) to subject every child in America
to mandatory mental-health screening; a plan that will result in the forced
drugging of children. Two days later, Congressman Ron Paul tried to stop this
insidious plan by offering an amendment to the Labor, HHS, and Education
Appropriations Act for FY 2005. The amendment received 95 "yes" votes, but it failed
to pass. However, Congressman Paul and several of his colleagues are not
giving up. Neither are we. They have drafted a letter to Congressman Ralph Regula,
chairman of the House Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services,
Education Appropriations, asking for his help. The letter will be
sent to Mr. Regula this Friday. As of today, 11 Hous! e members have signed
the
letter which is a very good start. But the high-priced lobbyists representing
the drug companies are already working to oppose our effort, so we need to
get additional support for our side. Read the letter and then urge your U.S.
representative to sign it.
If you think mandatory mental-health screening can't happen in the good ol'
USofA,
think again. In 1995, while George W. Bush was governor, the state of Texas
launched the Texas Medication Algorithm Project. The state of Illinois launched
a similar program in 2003. Backers of those two state programs now want to go
nationwide! We must stop them!!
To read the letter and send your message, go to
http://www.thelibertycommittee.org/regula.htm

Background
http://www.thelibertycommittee.org/update09.07.04.htm

Kent Snyder
The Liberty Committee
http://www.thelibertycommittee.org


----------



## Seeking Refuge (Nov 2, 2002)

That would make sense because my sister teaches at school in the Chicago area.


----------



## Galatea (Jun 28, 2004)

This has got to be a terrible bad joke, right? I keep hearing about it, but I can't believe it.


----------



## lunamomma (Mar 10, 2004)

just curious if anybody else considered not applying for a ss# for their children? We did, but were pressured to get them ..... now i'm kind of sad that we did. I mean with had unassisted homebirths and unschool.

Just trying to think of ways to protect my babes...


----------



## Arwyn (Sep 9, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mom2radata*
To answer your question about how this is going to work, let me tell you about the pilot program" the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health is running in the elementary school where my sil works. They are handing out psychological dot tests for the kids to take along the same line as the basic skills tests the teachers administer now. The teachers also fill out a dot "assessment" of each child. The results of these tests will then be put in the child's permanent record and children who "have problems" will go to the school counselor who refers them on from there.
My SIL has already been told, because she asked, that parents who refuse to medicate their children could be reported to CPS for failure to provide "necessary" medical care.

Thanks Bush supporters.

OK, this scares the sh!t out of me. I can't quite imagine it's true (at least the part about requiring psychotopics), but I don't know why, I mean, I know what the state of birth is in the country, or alternative health-maintenance approaches (like selectively- or not-vaxing) - denial, maybe?

re: screening, part of me thinks it's maybe not such a bad idea. Goddess knows we, as a culture, could use a lot more education on the nature of mental illnesses - but since our understanding of more "physical" illnesses is so limited, it's not like making mental illness equivalent to other illnesses in the mind of the public is all that great a step forward...

This is all coming, btw, from a woman who HAS a "certified" (certifiable







) mental illness that REQUIRES medication (at least for the immediate future) - sometimes psychotropics are part of the right answer. (Did I mention PART OF?) Could I have used screening in school? Well, I was certainly symptomatic in HS - but would being "diagnosed" by a fill-in-the-bubbles test have helped? Probably not. Not to brag, but there is no multiple choice test I have ever taken that I couldn't pass...

So, I'm back to just being scared sh!tless.

Yup, Bu$h is president...

(Sorry. Don't mean to co-opt this thread for bashing. This definitely doesn't have to be a partisan topic. And as much as they have my allegiance, I'm not sure this wouldn't have happened under a Dem. president just as fast and as crappily. Money just wins over morals way too often in politics - and the morals are kind of murky when you've been raised in a culture that's as body-divorced and pill-happy as we are, anyway.)


----------



## reeseccup (Jul 3, 2003)

Is this what you are talking about? New Freedom Commission on Mental Health H. CON. RES. 292 1. H.CON.RES.292 : Expressing the sense of Congress that Congress should adopt and implement the goals and recommendations provided by the President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health through legislation or other appropriate action to help ensure affordable, accessible, and high quality mental health care for all Americans.
Sponsor: Rep Napolitano, Grace F. [CA-38] (introduced 10/2/2003) Cosponsors (33)
Committees: House Energy and Commerce
Latest Major Action: 10/6/2003 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.

Sponsor: Rep Napolitano, Grace F. [CA-38] D
COSPONSORS(33), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]: (Sort: by date)
Rep Acevedo-Vila, Anibal [PR] - 10/16/2003 DRep Ackerman, Gary L. [NY-5] - 10/17/2003 D
Rep Baird, Brian [WA-3] - 10/17/2003 DRep Bell, Chris [TX-25] - 10/16/2003 D
Rep Berman, Howard L. [CA-28] - 10/16/2003 DRep Cardoza, Dennis A. [CA-18] - 10/21/2003 D
Rep Carson, Julia [IN-7] - 10/17/2003 DRep Cummings, Elijah E. [MD-7] - 10/21/2003 D
Rep Davis, Danny K. [IL-7] - 10/16/2003 DRep Doggett, Lloyd [TX-10] - 10/16/2003 D
Rep Eshoo, Anna G. [CA-14] - 10/21/2003 DRep Frost, Martin [TX-24] - 10/16/2003 D
Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [AZ-7] - 10/16/2003 DRep Hinchey, Maurice D. [NY-22] - 10/16/2003 D
Rep Kaptur, Marcy [OH-9] - 10/17/2003 DRep Kennedy, Patrick J. [RI-1] - 10/16/2003 D
Rep Kildee, Dale E. [MI-5] - 10/16/2003 DRep Kilpatrick, Carolyn C. [MI-13] - 10/16/2003 D
Rep Kind, Ron [WI-3] - 10/16/2003 DRep Lee, Barbara [CA-9] - 10/16/2003 D
Rep McCarthy, Carolyn [NY-4] - 10/16/2003 DRep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] - 10/16/2003 D
Rep McNulty, Michael R. [NY-21] - 10/16/2003 D Rep Millender-McDonald, Juanita [CA-37] - 10/21/2003 D
Rep ******, George [CA-7] - 10/16/2003 DRep Murphy, Tim [PA-18] - 10/17/2003 R
Rep Roybal-Allard, Lucille [CA-34] - 10/16/2003 DRep Serrano, Jose E. [NY-16] - 10/16/2003 D
Rep Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [NY-28] - 10/16/2003 DRep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] - 10/16/2003 D
Rep Towns, Edolphus [NY-10] - 10/16/2003 DRep Van Hollen, Chris [MD-8] - 10/16/2003 D
Rep Waxman, Henry A. [CA-30] - 10/16/2003 D

Or are you talking about this one which is connected to the previous one HR 3063 IH H.R.3063
Title: To authorize the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Secretary of Education, and the Attorney General to make 10 grants to demonstration facilities to implement evidence-based preventive-screening tools to detect mental illness and suicidal tendencies in school-age youth at selected facilities.
Sponsor: Rep DeLauro, Rosa L. [CT-3] (introduced 9/10/2003) Cosponsors (41)
Latest Major Action: 10/6/2003 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Education Reform.

Sponsor: Rep DeLauro, Rosa L. [CT-3] D

Rep Acevedo-Vila, Anibal [PR] - 9/10/2003 DRep Ackerman, Gary L. [NY-5] - 10/28/2003 D
Rep Berkley, Shelley [NV-1] - 10/30/2003 DRep Berman, Howard L. [CA-28] - 10/16/2003 D
Rep Brown, Corrine [FL-3] - 10/8/2003 DRep Carson, Julia [IN-7] - 3/18/2004 D
Rep Christensen, Donna M. [VI] - 9/10/2003 DRep Delahunt, William D. [MA-10] - 9/13/2004 D
Rep Doggett, Lloyd [TX-10] - 12/8/2003 DRep Emanuel, Rahm [IL-5] - 10/8/2003 D
Rep Foley, Mark [FL-16] - 10/16/2003 RRep Ford, Harold E., Jr. [TN-9] - 10/20/2003 D
Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4] - 9/7/2004 DRep Frost, Martin [TX-24] - 9/16/2003 D
Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [AZ-7] - 9/10/2003 DRep Gutierrez, Luis V. [IL-4] - 12/8/2003 D
Rep Johnson, Eddie Bernice [TX-30] - 2/4/2004 DRep Kaptur, Marcy [OH-9] - 10/16/2003 D
Rep Kennedy, Patrick J. [RI-1] - 9/16/2003 DRep Lantos, Tom [CA-12] - 11/21/2003 D
Rep Lewis, John [GA-5] - 9/16/2003 DRep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] - 9/16/2003 D
Rep McNulty, Michael R. [NY-21] - 9/16/2003 DRep Millender-McDonald, Juanita [CA-37] - 9/16/2003 D
Rep Napolitano, Grace F. [CA-38] - 10/20/2003 DRep Neal, Richard E. [MA-2] - 10/8/2003 D
Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [DC] - 9/16/2003 DRep Olver, John W. [MA-1] - 9/7/2004 D
Rep Owens, Major R. [NY-11] - 10/28/2003 DRep Payne, Donald M. [NJ-10] - 10/8/2003 D
Rep Roybal-Allard, Lucille [CA-34] - 10/8/2003 DRep Ryan, Tim [OH-17] - 11/5/2003 D
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] - 11/21/2003 DRep Serrano, Jose E. [NY-16] - 9/10/2003 D
Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] - 9/16/2003 DRep Strickland, Ted [OH-6] - 2/4/2004 D
Rep Tauscher, Ellen O. [CA-10] - 9/16/2003 DRep Towns, Edolphus [NY-10] - 9/10/2003 D
Rep Van Hollen, Chris [MD-8] - 12/8/2003 DRep Waxman, Henry A. [CA-30] - 9/10/2003 D
Rep Wexler, Robert [FL-19] - 10/16/2003 D

I agree, we must fight these bills.

Here is one to counter the objectionable wording Let Parents Raise Their Kids Act of 2004 (Introduced in House) HR 5236 IH Let Parents Raise Their Kids Act of 2004 (Introduced in House)

HR 5236 IH

108th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. R. 5236
To prohibit the use of Federal funds for any universal or mandatory mental health screening program.

I have just written my Representative and encourage all to do the same, esp. if your Representative is one of the Sponsors.

Write to your Representative


----------



## Galatea (Jun 28, 2004)

Reese - your links expired.


----------



## reeseccup (Jul 3, 2003)

Thanks, sorry will get that fixed.









strange, i did a search through the gov.and it's time limited.

go to and type in New Freedom Commission on Mental Health


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

I've read other articles that say a parent can opt their child out of the screening...

And as for pregnant women, well, the test isn't rocket science. The "wrong" answers are going to be obvious. You don't have thoughts of harming yourself. You don't hear voices. You don't feel blue, empty, hopeless, or alone. You have lots of friends and hobbies.

I think the screening is wrong, but I don't think it will affect us as individuals unless we don't know how to lie (if necessary).


----------



## Benji'sMom (Sep 14, 2004)

"Why is this a handout to drug companies? Because these so-called mental health "disorders" are often fictitious diseases (like ADHD) that can easily be attributed to nearly anyone."

I can't believe I'm NOT the only one who thinks ADHD is fake!







This WOULD HAVE made my day if the rest of the article weren't completely frightening!


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Benji's mom, you're not the only one...


----------



## Galatea (Jun 28, 2004)

I think ADHD is totally fake too.

I know we can lie, but I think this has got to be unconstitutional. Doesn't it scare anyone in the mainstream?


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

The mainstream is probably thinking, "Oh good! This scientific test used to find these scientifically-proven brain diseases will help weed out all those kids who need help, and, if my child needs help, will assist him to get the absolute best care that will meet his needs."


----------



## gardenmom (Apr 9, 2003)

The idea that we even have to discuss this is disgusting to me, but in the same breath I say who could possibly force you to medicate your children or yourselves? It's pretty easy to say "oh yes, doctor" and then throw the script out when you get home. Or worse yet, if you really had to you could always FILL the prescription, toss it and lie about administering it to your kids...not that we should have to resort to those types of measures, but it's a worst case-scenario...

I recently sent an email to my rep (Carolyn McCarthy, one of the sponsors of the bill above), regarding how I think that the passage of the mandatary resident identification card (mandatory USA ID card which has already passed the house and senate, btw) is trampling on our freedoms of movement, speech, purchases and medical freedoms, and how I would like that part of the bill removed before they smooth out their differences and finalize the law. Her office sent me a canned "I'll do everything I can to pass this legislation" letter, totally ignoring the fact that I'm against it, and maybe hoping that I'm stupid enough to believe that because she responded at all, I'd be happy with that







: I just can't justify spending time writing letters that will be ignored...so what to do???


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

It depends on the drug. If you are court-ordered to take lithium or antipsychotics, they do blood tests to make sure you are taking them. I don't know how this works with antidepressants or ritalin.


----------



## Annie (Feb 14, 2004)

Will they have to take this mental health screening too? Just curiouse. This sounds very orwellian,







! No wonder shrub was compared to hitler


----------



## User101 (Mar 3, 2002)

I don't think ADD/ADHD is fake but I do think it is disgustingly over-diagnosed.

I, too, wonder about the far-reaching implications. Where do homeschoolers fit in here?
Annette


----------



## CryPixie83 (Jan 27, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lunamomma*
just curious if anybody else considered not applying for a ss# for their children? We did, but were pressured to get them ..... now i'm kind of sad that we did. I mean with had unassisted homebirths and unschool.

I'm wondering the same thing... can we just *not* get a SS# for dd? we homebirthed with an outlaw midwife (i live in illinois), we're not putting dd in any form of public school (I've pretty much got DF convinced to let me homeschool until Kairi is ready to decide herself how she wants to learn). Anyone know?


----------



## purplegirl (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *RachelGS*
I have a doctorate in clinical psychology, and find this completely horrifying. I can't imagine the expense of actually running a program like this, and I hope that that alone will keep it from happening. But there's no way in hell I'd send my child to school if it meant that I might be forced to give her psychotropic medications-- which, by the way, are now recognized to be potentially dangerous in children. As far as the testing goes, it violates every known ethical principle of psychological testing to base any kind of treatment recommendations for anything on a single measure administered without the expertise of a psychologist. I can't think of too many therapists who are going to be willing to endorse this-- or too many psychiatrists who would prescribe for children who have not been adequately evaluated and referred for treatment for a specific reason.

Another therapist piping in here and I heartily agree with this writer. I wouldn't participate in any such "forced treatment" of children.


----------



## Arwyn (Sep 9, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Greaseball*
The mainstream is probably thinking, "Oh good! This scientific test used to find these scientifically-proven brain diseases will help weed out all those kids who need help, and, if my child needs help, will assist him to get the absolute best care that will meet his needs."









Well, yea, that is what they're thinking, and why not? Their world-view is based on an entirely technocratic POV - that is, people are machines, so diseases are the machine malfunctioning, so there should be some pill or procedure or surgery that will fix the machine!

And, quite frankly, I do believe that there is value in that worldview. It does hold some truths. We KNOW there are genetic and biological components to many mental disorders, like schitzophrenia, bipolar disorder, etc.

The problem comes not because that world view doesn't have value, but because it's seen as the ONLY necessary piece of the puzzle. And that just isn't the case - scientific evidence says that thoughts matter, that talk therapy works, that excercise helps, that many and numerous factors that aren't supposed to be part of the "machine" and therefore are supposed to have no relevence under the techocratic POV MATTER. THAT'S the problem with these one-size-fits-all-let's-just-medicate-'em-to-health "solutions".

So the problem is, how do we get the US government, a body known for its polarizing policies, to address a very complicated problem without oversimplifying the solution?

I don't know. Maybe we should just try to convince them to stay out of it. But that doesn't make much sense either (yea, I'm not a libertarian).

Anyway. Just felt like injecting some interesting muddlement into the conversation.


----------



## RiceMomma (Jul 23, 2004)

I got an email about this and came here to check it out- sure enough, you're all talking about it. That's why I love MDC.

I'm emailing everyone i know about this.


----------



## AllyRae (Dec 10, 2003)

Wow...kinda freaky... I agree with the clinical psychologist who posted and said that it is not ethical to administer these tests without being trained clinically.... (I'm a couple credits away from graduating with a master's in counseling education).

I don't think children should be screened. However, I'm starting to believe that pregnant women should be screened...not forcibly screened, but voluntarily screened for postpartum and antepartum mood disorders. But, I also don't think that medications should be prescribed by force either. I just think if more women were screened, they could be presented with options (vitamin/herb regimines, counseling, additional help, medications, etc.) before depression/anxiety got out of control, instead of letting so many women slip under the radar... So, I'm not really for mandatory screening, but perhaps giving people the option to get tested and presented with all possible interventions, even if it's not drugs...that may be helpful (not for the general population of course...I'm mainly talking about pregnant women, since PP mood disorders are something near and dear to me, and I'd like to see more women get help)....and definately don't make it government funded.


----------



## momamuseskim (Oct 23, 2004)

ok, i sent off all my letters to my representatives, my congressman and the majority house leader. my husband also sent off letters. later tonight, i'll ask my daughter if she will send off hers.

this is scary to me.

i mean my husband said that it would probably be just kids in the public schools and if you went to a hospital and you were pregnant.

thankfully, we homeschool and homebirth, but still, i have nieces and nephews and friends.


----------



## Ms. Mom (Nov 18, 2001)

It passed!!!!







:














I'm so sad, I want to move to Canada......

New Freedom Initiative/Mandatory Mental Health Screening of American Children Passes

If it helps, my sister is a mainstream mental health worker. She does similar tests that are court ordered for a living - she is APPAULED by this.

This is what hit me hardest.

Quote:

One of the nation's leading medical groups, the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons (AAPS), decried a move by the U.S. Senate to join with the House in funding a federal program AAPS says will lead to mandatory psychological testing of every child in America - without the consent of parents.
I'm OUTRAGED that MY child can be tested without my consent!!! Is this going to lead to MANDITORY drugs being pushed on children too? Ladies, I'm truly terrified by this.


----------



## lotusdebi (Aug 29, 2002)

:


----------



## GoodWillHunter (Mar 14, 2003)

OH MY G-D. I just can't believe it. NO F-ING WAY. not my kids. NEVER. Watch me bite back, you freaking money grubbing sons of ....


----------



## CryPixie83 (Jan 27, 2004)

Without the consent of parents????? WTF?? There must be some way around this. Religious/philisophical exemption (like vaxes), maybe? I'll be damned if the government is going to make my baby go through "mental health screenings" and hop her up on drugs.
At what age do they plan to start these screenings?

It's things like this that tear me...do I leave the country to seek safety or do I stay and fight (a possibly dangerous fight) for what is right...

How can this possibly be a good thing? I hope Bush's supporters are proud of themselves.


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

We can't have it both ways. We just had another brutality in Texas of a mom killing her child and all I hear is the system failed this woman. Now the "system" is going to want to mentally screen everyone and we're complaining. People think that minors should be able to get abortions with out parental consent, yet the same people are up in arms about mental screening without parental consent. You can't have it both ways. It would be best if the "system" left us all alone and nobody ever did anything to a minor without parental consent.


----------



## Ms. Mom (Nov 18, 2001)

SQ, I agree the story of the woman in Texas was tragic but I don't see how mental health screening on her school-aged children would have stopped this situation?

I don't understand your comparison between testing children WITHOUT parental consent and teenage abortion; the issues are not the same at all.

As a parent, I know my children best. I do not believe that medications are the 'cure' for mental illness, they're a tool and they're not appropriate in every case. A government agency running a few tests on my child should NOT give them the right to diagnose them WITHOUT my involvement.

Quote:

"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."
I have to agree with this statement from the above-mentioned article. We are the protectors for our children - period.

I don't know what we can do to fight this, but I am looking into it. I will do whatever it takes to protect my children from this.


----------



## sleeping queen (Nov 10, 2003)

Ms. Mom, let see if I can make myself a little clearer. How is the system going to help people like the Texas women if her mental health had not been observed and documented? Is this how the system failed this woman as so many complain about? Now we have the government ready to document and observer americans from an early age on their mental health. You can't say that the system failed if the system isn't involved.

Quote:

the issues are not the same at all.
Yes the issue is the same. Do you or don't you condone medical intervention of a minor child? I do not condone anything done with a minor child without the consent of the parent.


----------



## Ms. Mom (Nov 18, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SleepingQueen*
Ms. Mom, let see if I can make myself a little clearer. How is the system going to help people like the Texas women if her mental health had not been observed and documented?

Actually, this woman had sought out mental health services and somehow slipped through the cracks, but that is not the topic here. The topic is our children being evaluated, diagnosed and possibly treated for mental illness WITHOUT the consent of parents. With this bill in place schools can make testing MANDITORY for all students and possibly strong-arm parents into medicating children based on this evaluation.

It's OUTRAGOUS that the government be given that kind of power. As parents we should have the right to make decisions based on our families individual needs. Help should be available if needed.

I'm not opposed to a school system approaching a parent about a potential problum. If a child is struggling or having problums socializing, then it is their duty to bring it to the attention of the parent. However, they should NEVER attempt to diagnose or treat a child.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sleeping queen*
Do you or don't you condone medical intervention of a minor child? I do not condone anything done with a minor child without the consent of the parent.

On this we are in total agreement. I do not condone medical intervention of a minor child in ANY situation.

I rarely come to Activism anymore, but this topic stuck a deep cord in me. I'd like to discuss this further and possibly find some answers and solutions. I'm willing to do whatever it takes to overturn this.

Our children's rights are on the line here and as parents; we must fight to protect them. We are their protectors and guides.


----------



## chicagomom (Dec 24, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annettemarie*
I don't think ADD/ADHD is fake but I do think it is disgustingly over-diagnosed.

I, too, wonder about the far-reaching implications. Where do homeschoolers fit in here?
Annette

In IL homeschoolers are not exempt - everyone is included.

http://www.illinoisleader.com/opinio...ew.asp?c=18533


----------



## gardenmom (Apr 9, 2003)

OK, help me out here--I'm trying to find the _actual legisla_tion that relates to this so I can read it and see what we're up against (if I can understand it).

Despite searching the web for the last hour, all I can find is the funding bill that passed, not a bill that actually makes the mental health screening recommendations. Does anyone know if there actually is a mental health screening bill, or have we just given funding for "recommendations" that doesn't exist yet? Or are we saying that the funding in itself is the thing which dictates what will be done?

Also, just FYI, I found HR3063, Children's Mental Health Screening and Prevention Act of 2003 (Introduced in House), does anyone know if this is it?

Just trying to get a clear picture in my mind of what this is about...


----------



## dharmamama (Sep 19, 2004)

Not that I'm a fan of HSLDA, but a friend of mine forwarded me this email from HSLDA.

"Concerns About Mental Health Screening Legislation
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 Labor HHS appropriations bill contains block grant money that may be used by the States for a number of different programs at their discretion. Some critics are concerned that states will use this money to implement some form of mandatory mental testing program for all students throughout the school system. This concern stems largely from recommendations of New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, a non-policy making body created by President Bush in 2002 to propose ways of eliminating waste and improve efficiency and effectiveness of the mental health care delivery system. The Commission went far beyond their mission and recommended that schools be used as the means for discovering mental health problems.
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.
Keep in mind, this commission has no legislative or executive power. Congress legislates and the Department of Health and Human Services implements policy.
The House and Senate HHS appropriations committees have appropriated $20 and $40 million respectively which could technically be used by each state to implement some form of mental health testing. This wouldn't be much more than $600,000 per state which is far short of the money needed to implement a mandatory system.
Congressman Ron Paul (TX-14) and others are currently working on committee report language that would require parental consent before any mental testing could occur.
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."

Also, I think it's a bit disrespectful to claim that someone else's medical diagnosis is a fake. I think ADHD is overdiagnosed, but I don't think it's a fake condition.

Namaste!


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

What Ms. Mom said. This woman had previously been in a psychiatric hospital. She was known to have mental health issues, and after hospital discharge someone is supposed to do follow up. Why should my child be screened because the system failed this woman?

As a parent, I know when my child has a problem. I know better than the schools do. If my child had a mental health issue I would notice and we could proceed from there. But some people assume that parents are just dolts nowadays and don't know what's going on with their children.


----------



## CryPixie83 (Jan 27, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sleeping queen*







We can't have it both ways. We just had another brutality in Texas of a mom killing her child and all I hear is the system failed this woman. Now the "system" is going to want to mentally screen everyone and we're complaining. People think that minors should be able to get abortions with out parental consent, yet the same people are up in arms about mental screening without parental consent. You can't have it both ways. It would be best if the "system" left us all alone and nobody ever did anything to a minor without parental consent.

There is a HUGE difference between teenage abortion (her body, her choice) and MANDATORY mental health screenings. And it comes down to choice and control. And, we can have it both ways becase they're completely different issues.

How about the government leaves our health choices up to us?


----------



## Ms. Mom (Nov 18, 2001)

gardenmom, this has some information, but I agree what I've found on-line has mostly been hearsay. This link talks mainly about disabled Americans.

I do want to do some more research on this; it's weighing on me heavily.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/ne.../toc-2004.html


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Greaseball*
I've read other articles that say a parent can opt their child out of the screening...And as for pregnant women, well, the test isn't rocket science. The "wrong" answers are going to be obvious. You don't have thoughts of harming yourself. You don't hear voices. You don't feel blue, empty, hopeless, or alone. You have lots of friends and hobbies. I think the screening is wrong, but I don't think it will affect us as individuals unless we don't know how to lie (if necessary).

Haveyou ever taken the MMPI?

Michigan (or is it Minnesota) Multiple Personality inventory? I know a lawyer who uses this test to screen his prospective surrogate mothers.

I took it years ago for employment with a chiropractor and with Mervyns department store.

"One of the questions is, 'I see myself as a -

(a) swan in a pond. (b) pelican near a estuary. (c) quail near a lake.'"

What is the wrong answer there?

-or-

"I have already raised enough hell in my youth and I am quite done."

(a) true -or- (b) false

What is the correct way to answer that question?

It is as if they were asking when the applicant stopped beating their S.O.

You are damned if you do and damned if you do not.

But then if you are sane, what do you have to lose by taking the test? :LOL


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

that is maddening!







:

how would this effect homeschoolers then?


----------



## applejuice (Oct 8, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon*
that is maddening!







: how would this effect homeschoolers then?

Ask yourself how mandatory health screenings affect homeschoolers - ?

- how mandatory vaccination laws affect homeschoolers - ?

- how mandatory academic testing affects homeschoolers - ?

- how mandatory school attendance laws affect homeschoolers - ?

Then you have your answer...

The answer is - you do not know.

It all depends on how far the government would want to strong-arm those who resist.

And how was your day?


----------



## RiceMomma (Jul 23, 2004)

I'm really interested in this issue as well. I come from a family with serious mental health issues, and while part of me wishes there were a way to force certain people to seek mental health treatment, this is not the federal government's responsibility. When it comes to my children, it's my responsibility. As a parent, these are choices I should make, not some federal beaurocrat who lives hundreds or thousands of miles away from me and doesn't know my children at all.

From what I've gathered, what's happened is that president has formed the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, and they have recommended to him, among other things, mandatory mental health screenings for children. Congress then granted them funds to carry out these plans in the Appropriations bill for 2005. There was a bill that failed to amend the Appropriations bill that said none of those moneys should be used for mandatory mental health screening programs.

So, if I'm correct on that, mandatory screenings are just a recommendation, but they've been given funds to carry out their recommendations. So it sounds like more than a recommendation to me.

Here are some links where I found this info:

About the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0020429-2.html

The commission's final report:
http://www.mentalhealthcommission.go...eport/toc.html

The amendment to the appropriations bill:
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/...9&congress=108

There is a great deal of info on those pages, and I haven't had the time to read it all closely, so if anything I've said needs to be corrected or elaborated on, please do!

Mental health is important, but it is not the place of the federal government to tell us how to care for our mental health, or the mental health of our children.


----------



## Ms. Mom (Nov 18, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *RiceMomma*
Mental health is important, but it is not the place of the federal government to tell us how to care for our mental health, or the mental health of our children.

Andrea, I completely agree with you. Thank you for the links. I think we all need to do some more reading about this.

I look forward to pouring through it tonight when I get the kids to bed.


----------

