11. Universal Mental Screening Program Usurps Parental
Rights
Sources:
Asheville Global Report (British Medical Journal),No. 284, June 24-30,
2004, Title: "Bush Plans To Screen Whole U.S. Population For Mental
Illness," Author: Jeanne Lenzer, http://www.agrnews.org/issues/284/#2;
Truth News, September 13,2004, Title: "Forcing Kids Into a Mental
Health Ghetto," Congressman Ron Paul, http://www.truthnews.net/world/2004090078.htm
Faculty Evaluator: David Van Nuys Ph.D.
Student Researchers: John Ferritto, Matt Johnson
In April of 2002, President Bush appointed a 22 member commission called
the President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health in order to
"identify policies that could be implemented by Federal, State
and local governments to maximize the utility of existing resources,
improve coordination of treatments and services, and promote successful
community integration for adults with a serious mental illness and children
with a serious emotional disturbance."1 Members of this
commission include physicians in the mental health field and at least
one (Robert N. Postlethwait) former employee of pharmaceutical giant
Ely Lilly and Co.
In July of 2003 the commission published the results of their study.
They found that mental health disorders often go undiagnosed and recommended
to the President that there should be more comprehensive screening for
mental illnesses for people of all ages, including pre-school age children.
In accordance with their findings, the commission recommended that schools
were in a "key position" to screen the 52 million students
and 6 million adult employees of our nation's schools.2
The commission also recommended linking the screenings with treatment
and support. They recommended using the Texas Medication Algorithm Project
(TMAP) as a model treatment system.3 TMAP, which was implemented
in Texas' publicly funded mental health care system while George W.
Bush was governor of Texas,4 is a disease management program
that aids physicians in prescribing drugs to patients based on clinical
history, background, symptoms, and previous results. It was the first
program in the United States aimed at establishing medication guidelines
for treating mental health illnesses.5 Basically, it is an algorithm
that recommends specific drugs which should be used to treat specific
diseases. Funding for TMAP was provided by a Robert Wood-Johnson Grant
as well as several major drug companies. The project began in 1995 as
an alliance of individuals from pharmaceutical companies, the University
of Texas, and the mental health and corrections systems of Texas.6
Critics of mental health screening and TMAP claim that it is a payoff
to Pharmaceutical companies. Many cite Allen Jones, a former employee
of the Pennsylvania Office of the Inspector General. He was fired when
he revealed that many key officials who have influence over the medication
plan in his state received monetary perks and benefits from pharmaceutical
companies, which benefited from their drugs being in the medication
algorithm. TMAP also promotes the use of newer, more expensive anti-psychotic
drugs. Results of studies conducted in the United States and Great Britain
found that using the older, more established anti-psychotic drugs as
a front line treatment rather than the newer experimental drugs makes
more sense. Under TMAP, the Ely Lilly drug olanzapine, a new atypical
antipsychotic drug, is used as a first line treatment rather than a
more typical anti-psychotic medication. Perhaps it is because Ely Lilly
has several ties to the Bush family, where George Bush Sr. was a member
of the board of directors. George W. Bush also appointed Ely Lilly C.E.O.
Sidney Taurel to a seat on the Homeland Security Council. Of Ely Lilly's
$1.6 million political contributions in 2000, 82 percent went to Republicans
and George W. Bush.7
In November of 2004, Congress appropriated $20 million8 to implement
the findings of the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. This would
include mandatory screening by schools for mental health illnesses.
Congressman Ron Paul, R-Texas introduced an amendment to the appropriations
bills which would withhold funding for mandatory mental health screenings
and require parental consent and notification. His amendment, however,
was voted down by a wide margin (95-315 in the House of Representatives).9
Paul, a doctor and long-time member of the American Association of Physicians
and Surgeons (AAPS) states, "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." Paul says the allegation "that
we have a nation of children with undiagnosed mental disorders crying
out for treatment is patently false," and warns that mental health
screening could be used to label children whose attitudes, religious
beliefs, and political views conflict with established doctrine. Paul
further warns that an obvious major beneficiary of this legislation
is the pharmaceutical industry. The AAPS has decried this legislation,
which they say will lead to mandatory psychological testing of every
child in America without parental consent, and "heap even more
coercive pressure on parents to medicate children with potentially dangerous
side effects."
Update by Jeanne
Lenzer: Whether it's the pills we take or the oil we use, it would be reassuring
to know that the information used to develop new medicines or to utilize natural
resources wisely is based on science-not corporate spin.
But blandishments
from Big Pharma to politicians and doctors have a profound effect on health care
in the U.S., making medical research closer to propaganda than science at times.
One
way drug companies, in collusion with doctors, increase their market share is
to expand the definition of diseases. When diagnostic criteria were liberalized
for attention deficit disorder in 1991, the number of children diagnosed jumped
by about 60 percent.
The American Psychiatric Association (APA) acknowledged in the July
2004 issue of Advocacy News that, "The BMJ story has gained some
traction in derivative reports on the Internet." But, they boasted,
"mainstream media have not touched the story, in part thanks to
APA's work, for which the [Bush] Administration is appreciative."10
The APA's boast is curious.
The article was the most downloaded article in the history of the BMJ. It clearly
struck a nerve with a public wary of doctors and politicians whose pockets are
lined with drug company money.
Given the interest in the BMJ story, it would
seem that the APA, instead of attempting to keep the story out of the mainstream
media, would be anxious to counter the widely circulated statements in the article.
It would also seem that the mainstream press could provide the Administration
and the APA the best possible vehicle to counter these supposed factual errors
in the BMJ article.
But, the facts might prove difficult to square with
the public. More than one in every 100 toddlers and preschoolers in the United
States are on powerful psychiatric drugs, such as Ritalin and Prozac, according
to a study published in the February 2000 issue of the Journal of the American
Medical Association.
Joseph T. Coyle, M.D., wrote in an accompanying editorial,
"It appears that behaviorally disturbed children are now increasingly subjected
to quick and inexpensive pharmacologic fixes, as opposed to informed mutimodal
therapy." He concluded, "These disturbing prescription practices suggest
a growing crisis in mental health services to children and demand more thorough
investigation."
But instead of issuing warnings about overmedication
or inappropriate prescribing, the experts on the New Freedom Commission warn ominously
that too few children are receiving treatment for mental illness. They cite escalating
numbers of toddlers expelled from daycare as evidence of potentially serious psychological
problems-problems to be diagnosed and cured with mental health screening and pills.
Social and economic reasons for the rise in kiddie expulsions are left unexamined.
As bad as this is for those put on drugs and labeled "mentally ill,"
the far bigger concern is the creation of a disease for every drug, a situation
made possible by the hand-in-glove relationship between industry and the government.
NOTES
1. http://www.mentalhealthcommission.gov/.
2. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39078.
3. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39078.
4. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39078.
5. http://www.news-medical.net/?id=3084.
6. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39078.
7. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39078.
8. http://www.truthnews.net/world/2004090078.htm.
9. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41606.
10. See Medicating Aliah: http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2005/05/medicating_
aliah.html.
Alliance for Human Research Protection "http://www.ahrp.org"
www.ahrp.org http://www.psych.org/join_apa/mb/newsletters/advocacy/AdvNewsJuly2004.htm#21.