No Child Left Undrugged

[Alaska Darin]

Send the Message to DC. Stop Motherment

 

Congressman Ron Paul, a physician by trade, has sponsored HR 181. Here's how he explains his cause … A presidential initiative called The “New Freedom Commission on Mental Health” has issued a report recommending forced mental health screening for every child in America, including preschool children. The goal is to promote the patently false idea that we have a nation of children with undiagnosed mental disorders crying out for treatment.

 

One obvious beneficiary of the proposal is the pharmaceutical industry, which is eager to sell the psychotropic drugs that undoubtedly will be prescribed to millions of American schoolchildren under the new screening program. Of course a tiny minority of children suffer from legitimate mental illnesses, but the widespread use of Ritalin and other drugs on youngsters who simply exhibit typical rambunctious, fidgety, and impatient behavior is nothing short of criminal. It may be easier to teach and parent drugged kids, but convenience is no justification for endangering them. Children's brains are still developing, and the truth is we have no idea what the long-term side effects of psychiatric drugs may be. Medical science has not even exhaustively identified every possible brain chemical, even as we alter those chemicals with drugs.

 

Dr. Karen Effrem, a physician who strongly opposes mandatory mental health screening, warns us that “America's children should not be medicated by expensive, ineffective, and dangerous medications based on vague and dubious diagnoses.” She points out that psychiatric diagnoses are inherently subjective, as authors of the diagnostic manuals admit. She also is concerned that mental health screening could be used to label children whose attitudes, religious beliefs, and political views conflict with the secular orthodoxy that dominates our schools.

 

The greater issue, however, is not whether youth mental health screening is appropriate. The real issue is whether the state owns your kids. When the government orders “universal” mental health screening in schools, it really means “mandatory.”

 

… Parents must do everything possible to retain responsibility and control over their children's well-being. There is no end to the bureaucratic appetite to rule every aspect of our lives, including how we raise our children. Forced mental health screening is just the latest of many state usurpations of parental authority: compulsory education laws, politically-correct school curricula, mandatory vaccines, and interference with discipline through phony “social services” agencies all represent assaults on families. The political right has now joined the political left in seeking the de facto nationalization of children, and only informed resistance by parents can stop it. The federal government is slowly but surely destroying real families, but it is hardly a benevolent surrogate parent.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Send the Message to DC.  Stop Motherment

 

Congressman Ron Paul, a physician by trade, has sponsored HR 181. Here's how he explains his cause … A presidential initiative called The “New Freedom Commission on Mental Health” has issued a report recommending forced mental health screening for every child in America, including preschool children. The goal is to promote the patently false idea that we have a nation of children with undiagnosed mental disorders crying out for treatment.

 

One obvious beneficiary of the proposal is the pharmaceutical industry, which is eager to sell the psychotropic drugs that undoubtedly will be prescribed to millions of American schoolchildren under the new screening program. Of course a tiny minority of children suffer from legitimate mental illnesses, but the widespread use of Ritalin and other drugs on youngsters who simply exhibit typical rambunctious, fidgety, and impatient behavior is nothing short of criminal. It may be easier to teach and parent drugged kids, but convenience is no justification for endangering them. Children's brains are still developing, and the truth is we have no idea what the long-term side effects of psychiatric drugs may be. Medical science has not even exhaustively identified every possible brain chemical, even as we alter those chemicals with drugs.

 

Dr. Karen Effrem, a physician who strongly opposes mandatory mental health screening, warns us that “America's children should not be medicated by expensive, ineffective, and dangerous medications based on vague and dubious diagnoses.” She points out that psychiatric diagnoses are inherently subjective, as authors of the diagnostic manuals admit. She also is concerned that mental health screening could be used to label children whose attitudes, religious beliefs, and political views conflict with the secular orthodoxy that dominates our schools.

 

The greater issue, however, is not whether youth mental health screening is appropriate. The real issue is whether the state owns your kids. When the government orders “universal” mental health screening in schools, it really means “mandatory.”

 

… Parents must do everything possible to retain responsibility and control over their children's well-being. There is no end to the bureaucratic appetite to rule every aspect of our lives, including how we raise our children. Forced mental health screening is just the latest of many state usurpations of parental authority: compulsory education laws, politically-correct school curricula, mandatory vaccines, and interference with discipline through phony “social services” agencies all represent assaults on families. The political right has now joined the political left in seeking the de facto nationalization of children, and only informed resistance by parents can stop it. The federal government is slowly but surely destroying real families, but it is hardly a benevolent surrogate parent.

364871[/snapback]

 

Oh, yeah, there's a brilliant idea. Universal - and hence incomplete and half-assed - mental health screening for children, which will of course be done by a profession that has yet to distinguish between mental illness and being a teenager. That would be a really successful government program.

 

The comparison to mandatory vaccinations, though, is complete BS. Vaccines, despite what the ignorant masses would like to believe, aren't given to individuals to prevent their illness. They're given to populations to prevent endemic disease. If people weren't so flat-out ignorant about it - or about pediatric mental illness, or most other things - such programs wouldn't be necessary to begin with.

[Terry Tate]

Maybe this isn't such a bad idea. I have two kids, and I'm pretty convinced they are both mental. Probably got it from hanging around me.

 

I checked the list, my congressman is not a cosponsor, so I dropped him a line. There's only 639,295 people in my district, so I'm sure he'll get right back to me.

[UConn James]

I guess Eli Lilly wants more kids enrolled in their space program.

 

AD, for as much as you and others spout about how great your third party is, it's pretty sad that this guy is basically a Libertarian. And this is the drivel we get from him.

[blzrul]

They ought to worry more about all those fat kids getting Type 2 (also known as "adult onset") diabetes. If they're in wheelchairs, blind or dead by age 25 why worry about their mental health...

[Terry Tate]

AD, for as much as you and others spout about how great your third party is, it's pretty sad that this guy is basically a Libertarian. And this is the drivel we get from him.

I'm not clear as to what exactly you are being critical of. Ron Paul? Libertarianism? This issue? Or all of the above?

[Alaska Darin]

I guess Eli Lilly wants more kids enrolled in their space program.

 

AD, for as much as you and others spout about how great your third party is, it's pretty sad that this guy is basically a Libertarian. And this is the drivel we get from him.

364935[/snapback]

Care to explain how passing a bill making the government gain parental permission before subjecting your children to government mental testing is an infringement on your rights? Or did you not understand the actual article?

[Chilly]

I agree to agree with the people that thought that bill is a bad idea.

 

Besides, I thought libertarians were against stuff like this that wasn't a choice made by the person to do it, but something imposed upon a person to be done by government.

[Terry Tate]

I agree to agree with the people that thought that bill is a bad idea.

 

Besides, I thought libertarians were against stuff like this that wasn't a choice made by the person to do it, but something imposed upon a person to be done by government.

364991[/snapback]

Can you and UConn James go back and read the link Alaska Darin provided? Because I get the impression you misunderstood it.

[Chilly]

Can you and UConn James go back and read the link Alaska Darin provided? Because I get the impression you misunderstood it.

364996[/snapback]

 

Unfortunately I haven't been able to connect to the link that AD had posted, so if what he posted was a commentary on the situation then I probably have misunderstood.

 

What AD posted was " report recommending forced mental health screening for every child in America, including preschool children. "

 

The part that I'm not sure of based upon this is why a libertarian would support forced mental health screenings for children.

[KRC]

The part that I'm not sure of based upon this is why a libertarian would support forced mental health screenings for children.

365328[/snapback]

 

They don't.

 

From the link:

Petition in Support of

H.R. 181 -- Parental Consent Act of 2005

to

House Speaker Dennis Hastert

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay

 

The American tradition of parents deciding what is best for

their children is under attack.  Powerful corporations,

institutions, and politicians are quietly moving to have the

federal government implement universal mental-health

screening of children.  This would likely lead to the forced

drugging of children.

 

The New Freedom Commission on Mental Health (a

presidential commission formed in 2002) is the front group

for this attack on the family.  Michael Hogan, chairman of the commission and director of the Ohio Department of Mental

Health, thinks universal screening is a good idea.  It's just that

Mr. Hogan fears recommending it now is “a little premature

and probably controversial” although it “might be the right

thing to do.” (Christian Science Monitor, January 20, 2005)

 

A little premature?  Probably controversial?  You bet it is!

 

No parental consent?  The right thing to do?  No it is not!

 

I strongly urge you to schedule a vote on H.R. 181 – Parental

Consent Act of 2005 and support its passage.  H.R. 181

would prohibit the use of federal funds for any universal or

mandatory mental-health screening program.

 

Congress and President Bush can act quickly when they

want to act.  In 2003, the Do-Not-Call Implementation Act

was passed by Congress and signed by President Bush

in less than six weeks.

 

You acted quickly to stop telemarketers from calling people

at home.  Act just as quickly now to block the forced mental

screening of children.

[KD in CA]

They ought to worry more about all those fat kids getting Type 2 (also known as "adult onset") diabetes.  If they're in wheelchairs, blind or dead by age 25 why worry about their mental health...

364936[/snapback]

 

Maybe if we actually allowed those people to die at 25, people would start to alter their behavior on their own.

[Chilly]

They don't.

 

From the link:

365353[/snapback]

 

Ah, okay. Thanks for posting that, no wonder I was confused since I couldn't go to that link.