Thursday, March 15, 2007
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
CHATHAM -- The Library of the Chathams, 214 Main St., has a variety of programs in the works:
Dr. Lloyd Ross, Ph.D., FACAPP, from the International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology, will present the seminar, "Depression and Suicide: A Guide to Understanding and Resolution," on March 29 at 7:30 p.m.
Dr. Ross will discuss ways of working through depression that provide real help without the use of dangerous and brain-damaging chemicals.
Some of the topics to be discussed are diagnosis of depression and suicide; medication side effects; the research that drug companies do not want you to know about; real diagnosis and effective treatment; how parents can work with a school that wants the child on medication; and teenscreen -- a dangerous drug company-supported program coming to a school near you.
Persons who would like to attend this program are asked to sign up at the Circulation Desk or call (973) 635-0603.
Make Web Sites and Blogs
Featuring information you need to know before you consent...
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Just To Annoy TeenScreen and SOS
So...add me to the list, because if one more parent can learn about this effort which has been shown to produce false positives in identification of teens, and have in fact caused kids to get therapy and medication unnecessarily, and who have been screened without their parents knowing, then I'll be happy.
And I am not even a Scientologist! (eye roll)
So if you haven't seen these then you should and pass them along to your friends who have kids in government or private schools:
Video showing the TeenScreen national controversy
Video: Mother speaking out
A smoking gun - Tax Records showing millions in Pharmaceutical funding for Signs of Suicide
TeenScreen survey questions
Some more points for the public to know:
The developer of TeenScreen acknowledges that his screening tool "would deliver many who were not at risk for suicide, and that could reduce the acceptability of a school-based prevention program." The program has an 84% rate of false-positives, which means that the chances of your child walking away falsely labeled as "suicidal" or "mentally ill" is 84%.
TeenScreen's purpose is to get those kids into treatment. A recent study showed that 9 out of 10 children who saw a psychiatrist walked out of the office on drugs.
As far as the reliability of screening, in 2004, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) stated that they "found no evidence that screening for suicide risk reduces suicide attempts or mortality." Furthermore, they found "insufficient evidence that treatment of those at high risk reduces suicide attempts or mortality."
Ned Calonge, the chairman of the United States Preventive Services Task Force, was quoted in the June 16, 2006 Washington Post: "the panel would reach the same conclusion today... Whether or not we like to admit it, there are no interventions that have no harms... There is weak evidence that screening can distinguish people who will commit suicide from those who will not... And screening inevitably leads to treating some people who do not need it. Such interventions have consequences beyond side effects from drugs or other treatments.. . Unnecessary care drives up the cost of insurance, causing some people to lose coverage altogether."
The questions asked on these screening surveys may actually put suicide ideation into the heads of impressionable teens.
According to our government department of Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services (SAMHSA), TeenScreen is not listed as an evidence-based program - meaning the evidence doesn't support the program's aims. All of SAMHSA's programs for "evidenced-based" have been deemed by them to be "Experimental" programs, so even an inclusion on this list would still be experimenting with our children - not a purpose that most parents would support in their daughters' school.
The statistics thus far for TeenScreen resulted in one-third of the subjects being flagged as "positive" for mental health problems and 50% of those flagged were recommended for mental health treatment. If this system, already proven to be woefully inaccurate, is set loose on the 52 million public school students, it would mean affixing some sort of label on 17 million American children and putting 8 million children into the hands of the psychiatric/ drug industry. Imagine the financial gain for this monstrous industry with government taxpayers footing the bill. Follow the money.
A message to every taxpayer: don't let this nonsense into your schools.
A message to parents: talk to your kids about refusing participation in these types of programs without talking to you first.
A message to TeenScreen and SOS: We are on to you, and we'll continue to blow the whistle.
Write Letters. To the local school board. To area school principals. To the local paper. To anyone who will listen.
The Post-Standard (Syracuse, New York)
TEENSCREEN PROGRAM USED TO PUSH DRUGS TO STUDENTS
I read the article "New program focuses on fifth and ninth-graders" that appeared on Jan. 14 and am appalled at the contents.
The article states as if it were a fact that children need to be screened for mental health issues and that mental health issues for children are a growing concern nationally.
The program described in the article is called TeenScreen, a joint effort by psychiatric and pharmaceutical front groups. TeenScreen has been created in order to use our schools as a recruit pool for new patients.
According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, the suicide rate among children, including teens, actually dropped 25 percent in the last decade. A May 2004 Preventive Services Task Force concluded that there is no evidence that screening for suicide reduces suicide attempts. In essence, the program is unwarranted and unproductive.
Additionally, nine out of 10 children who go to see a psychiatrist leave with a psychiatric drug prescription. When this frightening statistic is combined with the fact that 100 percent of the 10th graders tested under TeenScreen at Hoover High in Fresno, Calif. had "positive diagnostic impressions," you are looking at some terrifying results.
Santa Rosa, Calif.
Monday, March 12, 2007
By Nicole Stricker
and Glen Warchol
The new law bars schools from forcing parents to put their kids on psychotropic drugs such as Ritalin. The law is the first of its kind in the nation, said Madeline Kriescher, a health policy associate at the National Conference for State Legislatures.
"Utah is pretty much on the forefront of doing that sort of thing," she said. "But New York has a bill right now that's similar in language."
Huntsman had vetoed similar legislation in 2005 and the 2002 and 2006 versions never made it to the governor's desk. This year's measure was virtually identical to the 2006 version, which had added language to clarify topics teachers may discuss with parents, and eliminated phrases banning school personnel from recommending psychological evaluations.
The Utah Board of Education opposed the legislation and urged Huntsman to veto the bill. Members said the board already has a rule prohibiting teachers from pushing medications and worry that replicating it with a law singling out psychiatric drugs would chill communication between teachers and parents.
It was those concerns that drove Huntsman's 2005 veto.
"This is a great bill. There are way too many kids on psychotropic drugs," said the Senate sponsor, Sen. Chris Buttars, R-West Jordan.
The reason for the bill's success this year is simple, Buttars said. "The governor told us the problems he had with the bill and we corrected them and he signed it."
More than 100 lines of text in the new law outline what teachers may and may not say to parents regarding children's behavior and possible psychiatric solutions. It says school personnel can't keep kids out of school or report parents for child abuse simply because parents refuse psychotropic medications.
No teacher who reads the law, Buttars maintains, would fear repercussions from discussing a student's needs with parents. Buttars said the law allows teachers to recommend a professional evaluation for a child, but not medication. "They can't say, 'We think he should be on Ritalin.' ”