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."
From June 2002 to April 2003, the 22 Commissioners met monthly to analyze the public and private mental health systems, visit innovative model programs across the country and hear testimony from the systems’ many stakeholders, including dozens of consumers of mental health care, families, advocates, public and private providers and administrators and mental health researchers. The Commission received feedback, comments and suggestions from nearly 2,500 people from all 50 states via personal testimony, letters, emails and a comment section on this website. In addition to public comment, the Commission consulted with nationally recognized professionals with expertise in diverse areas of mental health policy. The Commission established 15 subcommittees to examine specific aspects of mental health services and offer recommendations for improvement. The Commissioner page contains the Commission’s Membership Roster and the Subcommittee page displays the separate subcommittees and their report summaries.
The Commission will submit the final report to the President in May 2003, and the White House will, in turn, release the report soon thereafter. Once released, you will be able to access the final report on the "Reports" page of this website. The Commission wishes to thank all those who participated in this critical and historic effort. The final report to the President offers a vision of hope and recovery for people with a serious mental illness and their families.
Yes yes, but only the documented and their children will be required to submit to the screening process.
I'd take this story with a grain of salt considering it's from WND. I really doubt Republicans in Congress would fund such a plan anyway.
How about if we screen the nation for people needing a swift kick in the ass instead?
Darn straight. Can I help.
WND has lifted something from "The Onion"?
How about if we screen the nation for people needing a swift kick in the ass instead?
How about you waiting until and if/or it is proposed and read the poposal and not an article that doesn't even have a writer, byline.
Part of the new screening process is to evaluate individuals and their internet posting habits. So you best be careful.
Potentially being labelled 'mentally disabled' for one's political or religious views is hardly trivial IMHO. His views on leaving our borders virtually unprotected also gives me pause. This is not the agenda of a 'conservative', in any sense or meaning of the word. I will not simply vote for 'the lesser of two evils', for the lesser of two evils is still evil.
W has pushed to educate every child, and to make sure they can all stay in class the psychiatrists (in this instance "crazy doctors") have conned him into believing that drugging kids works.
I can't believe that W bought this, it won't work, will cause immense damage and the Rats will tie this around his neck like a 1984 boat anchor.
Maybe they already put some of this stuff in his coffee.
Increase the dosage!
It sure pushed your buttons though.
Bush plans to screen whole US population for mental illness
It's actually not really a WND story. It is lifted almost directly from the BMJ. The byline is Jeanne Lenzer.
The BMJ has more details.
What in the hell is wrong with giving a person the chance to break out of a mental depression that has robbed one of his or her life?
Do you think most people enjoy living under a dark cloud like some cartoon character? It's real. And, it's curable.
The same people that get all tied up in knots over abortion are ready to discount human life by the time you're tying your own shoelaces.
By mocking President Bush's motives, "you" all look petty.
Who knows, today, Prozac...tomorrow Viagra?
Opps! Post #72 has the link without my search terms highlighted..
This sounds like part of John Kennedy’s New Frontier. It led to the homeless problem in California which was blamed on Reagan. Democrats and various do-gooders believed that new "miracle" drugs and "services in the community, rather than institutions" were the answer. The movie One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975) helped spread the do-gooder message nationwide to follow California's example.
Democrat legislation forced the release of tens of thousands leaving just about 6,500 in the institutions. Reagan cut hospital funding subsequently.
The program fizzled. Little or no federal funds. The former patients failed to take the drugs.
Or.. maybe this is for all of us when President Bush tells his co-president, Fox, "I'm re-elected now, go ahead and send the rest of 'em up here. Gracias."
I know Farah hates Bush
Farah doesn't hate Bush. He merely tells it like it is, no matter where the blame falls. His articles often support Bush.
Let's compare, shall we?
World Net Daily:
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.
bmj.com:
A sweeping mental health initiative will be unveiled by President George W Bush in July. The plan promises to integrate mentally ill patients fully into the community by providing "services in the community, rather than institutions," according to a March 2004 progress report entitled New Freedom Initiative (www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/newfreedom/toc-2004.html). While some praise the plan's goals, others say it protects the profits of drug companies at the expense of the public.
Wow, that's almost word for word, isn't it?
Except of course, this from bmj.com
While some praise the plan's goals, others say it protects the profits of drug companies at the expense of the public.
becomes this:
and promotes the use of expensive antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs favored by supporters of the administration.
in WorldNet Daily (to put the WORST possible spin on it, you see?)
Now who was it up the thread who was asking why nobody signed this screed?
Link one of them, will you?
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.