Posted on 06/21/2004 10:19:15 PM PDT by JohnHuang2
President Bush plans to unveil next month a sweeping mental health initiative that recommends screening for every citizen and promotes the use of expensive antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs favored by supporters of the administration.
The New Freedom Initiative, according to a progress report, seeks to integrate mentally ill patients fully into the community by providing "services in the community, rather than institutions," the British Medical Journal reported.
Critics say the plan protects the profits of drug companies at the expense of the public.
The initiative began with Bush's launch in April 2002 of the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, which conducted a "comprehensive study of the United States mental health service delivery system."
The panel found that "despite their prevalence, mental disorders often go undiagnosed" and recommended comprehensive mental health screening for "consumers of all ages," including preschool children.
The commission said, "Each year, young children are expelled from preschools and childcare facilities for severely disruptive behaviors and emotional disorders."
Schools, the panel concluded, are in a "key position" to screen the 52 million students and 6 million adults who work at the schools.
The commission recommended that the screening be linked with "treatment and supports," including "state-of-the-art treatments" using "specific medications for specific conditions."
The Texas Medication Algorithm Project, or TMAP, was held up by the panel as a "model" medication treatment plan that "illustrates an evidence-based practice that results in better consumer outcomes."
The TMAP -- started in 1995 as an alliance of individuals from the pharmaceutical industry, the University of Texas and the mental health and corrections systems of Texas -- also was praised by the American Psychiatric Association, which called for increased funding to implement the overall plan.
But the Texas project sparked controversy when a Pennsylvania government employee revealed state officials with influence over the plan had received money and perks from drug companies who stand to gain from it.
Allen Jones, an employee of the Pennsylvania Office of the Inspector General says in his whistleblower report the "political/pharmaceutical alliance" that developed the Texas project, which promotes the use of newer, more expensive antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs, was behind the recommendations of the New Freedom Commission, which were "poised to consolidate the TMAP effort into a comprehensive national policy to treat mental illness with expensive, patented medications of questionable benefit and deadly side effects, and to force private insurers to pick up more of the tab."
Jones points out, according to the British Medical Journal, companies that helped start the Texas project are major contributors to Bush's election funds. Also, some members of the New Freedom Commission have served on advisory boards for these same companies, while others have direct ties to TMAP.
Eli Lilly, manufacturer of olanzapine, one of the drugs recommended in the plan, has multiple ties to the Bush administration, BMJ says. The elder President Bush was a member of Lilly's board of directors and President Bush appointed Lilly's chief executive officer, Sidney Taurel, to the Homeland Security Council.
Of Lilly's $1.6 million in political contributions in 2000, 82 percent went to Bush and the Republican Party.
Another critic, Robert Whitaker, journalist and author of "Mad in America," told the British Medical Journal that while increased screening "may seem defensible," it could also be seen as "fishing for customers."
Exorbitant spending on new drugs "robs from other forms of care such as job training and shelter program," he said.
However, a developer of the Texas project, Dr. Graham Emslie, defends screening.
"There are good data showing that if you identify kids at an earlier age who are aggressive, you can intervene ... and change their trajectory."
Yeah, that's the one. Thanks
Yah, it's totally irresponsible for the government to RECCOMEND that you get screened for illness.
Maybe you should read the article next time.
Review the history of Social Security and then try and tell me with a straight face that this program won't become mandatory in the future.
IMO, the imprudent route would be to go nuts over some minutae proposal(note the word proposal again), and yes I understand that politcal junkies are into minutae, and I guess that is the reason for the heated discussion.
But, common sense has to take over about the minutae. I do not believe for one moment that Bush's intent is as how Joe Farah portrays it. Thus my skeptiscism about him and his publication(World Net Daily), and my animus towards those on FR who take it for the God's honest truth.
I'll be voting for Conservative(and MP since '93) Jim Gouk on June 28th.
He'll get over 50%. The Libs, NDP, and Greens are each running for 2nd place in Southern Interior.
Best of wishes to the Conservatives in Canada next week. Kick Martin out as PM.
I have read all of that.
It does not say anything about force screening.
"All Americans who need it" does not mean people will be forced.
It just means that if a patient has a need, this program is designed to get them the help they need.
I absolutely will not go round and round with you about this.
You guys have it in your mind what you want it to be.
Fine. Believe what you want.
I'm tired of you all.
You seem to have the right idea.
No way am I reading this entire thread to see if anyone actually posted any proof of this nonsense.
WorldNetDaily is often little more than a tabloid scandal sheet so I'll just wait and read the WH report when I find the time.
How soon we forget, remember Campaign Finance Reform?
He does? Are all these people insane? Who is paying them to submit 100s of crazy proposals every day?
Jezez, no wonder the man wants everyone evaluated and screened for mental illness.
Groupthink can be a scary thing.
Your comment belongs to the flamefest. I've gone off this thread, reading others posts and not contributing for some time, but if you want to see some flames, try reading Don Joe's posts. They are some of the rudest here.
The fact that I disagree with Joseph Farrah's conclusions on this matter and do not believe they are accurate is hardly reason to charge me with "groupthink" now, is it? Or is that what you say to everyone who doesn't agree with you on every post?
This entire thread has become useless, due to the flaming that Don Joe began, sustained, and called others to. I have no interest in the subject at all anymore, I came in here to reply to your insult. I suspect that anybody who wants to can read the thread and find out where the problems began.
This article is speculation disguised as reporting. Apparently a number of people want to take it as gospel and written in granite.
Now, you may feel compelled to reply with another insult which you will justify by this post to you, NL, because you will have felt yourself insulted somehow. But I won't be around. I am sure, however, that DJ will be back to see how well his minions have kept up the "battle" over absolutely nothing.
And I hope the entire thing is moved to the "Smokey Backroom" because that's where it has belonged since Don Joe came on.
I'd like to be more optimistic, but that so many "conservatives" just don't get it does not bode well for our nation.
BTW, what's with copying the Admin Moderator?
I don't quitte follow how a little commission's recommendation somehow leads to the headline of "Bush to screen"...
It doesn't even sound like Bush is proposing anything.
Jezez, no wonder the man wants everyone evaluated and screened for mental illness
Wow Joseph, you with your above italicized quote you have become the epitomie of inane, IMO.
You post a couple of dozen crazy thoughts on FR every day, get a couple of praising posts, and you have your day made.
Quite a sad life, IMO.
Any other articles about this.
Sounds like hogwash to me.
It sounds like this is a little commission report that means nothing and has no power; as the lede even admits, the report just "recommends" screening for every citizen; it doesn't order it and there is no evidence in the article except for the idiotic lede that jumps the gun that Bush himself will push or order for such. The report will be issued and somehow WND makes this into a "Bush to screen..." story.
As usual, just a case of WND stretching the truth.
Now, you may feel compelled to reply with another insult which you will justify by this post to you, NL, because you will have felt yourself insulted somehow. But I won't be around. I am sure, however, that DJ will be back to see how well his minions have kept up the "battle" over absolutely nothing. And I hope the entire thing is moved to the "Smokey Backroom" because that's where it has belonged since Don Joe came on.
|
If you read the article, all this will be....at most....will be a plan with an initiative encouraging every citizen to get tested.
Not a big deal; they do the same with brushing your teeth or flossing. They don't mandate you do so.
As usual, WND twists the truth by exaggerating their headline.
And now you post this "You post a couple of dozen crazy thoughts on FR every day".
Hehehe....
Maybe I ought to go to work for the administration, eh Dane?
That's quite a leap there, IMO. It would be virtually impossible for it to be abused in such a manner as it would require a Congressional mandate.
2. Taxes: I don't want to pay for this crud.
But $1,500 hammers purchased by the military are okay, huh?
3. Constitutionality: When did providing mental health screening and health care become a responsibility of the Fed?
When did it become the responsibility of the Federal government to mandate seatbelt laws by essentially blackmailing the States with the threat of losing highway funding?
Go right ahead and put your resume in Joe. JMO, you could be the poster child for the administartion of what basking in tin foil does to a person.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.