Bush to screen population for mental illness

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | June 21, 2004

[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."

[garandgal]

Mental health is so intimately tied to the concept of fitness to participate in society at all, that the government fingers should be kept far, far away.

What is up with people supporting this, or any twisted version of this, on a Conservative message board? I'm beyond appalled.

[texasflower]

Your comments do make sense and the way you have phrased things makes it easy and desirable to really try to look at things from another viewpoint.

My feelings remain the same, but if we (Americans in general) can't ever find common ground, nothing would ever change.

You given me a place to start understanding the reasons for some of the very strong feelings here.

BTW, my ex-husband (terrific guy) is a Border Patrol Agent. You should hear some of the things he has to say about government programs. It's not pretty!

[HiTech RedNeck]

"Conservative" is such a complicated term. Many of us would qualify as being old fashioned liberals. Liberals who took the bible and the wisdom of ages seriously, while not resting until they could do something to better the world. This government-mental health push is too dangerously "new fashioned" and it comes at a very inopportune time to boot. Just read all the articles about pshrinks debating about whether gender identity problems are even mental illnesses at all.

[texasflower]

I am not supporting socialist techniques by caring about people.

Some people here are cold as ice. You may or may not be one of them but in both of your posts to me, you have made assumptions about me or labeled me.

Please stop.

[HiTech RedNeck]

My feelings remain the same, but if we (Americans in general) can't ever find common ground, nothing would ever change.

I have had a pet idea for a long time. Believing that the people in general rather than the government are the best heads to decide what kind of social betterment is good or bad, we should back off of government social programs in tandem with a new tax rule that donations to any charity become credits to your taxes rather than merely tax deductible. This should be managed so as to be revenue neutral. I bet a million flowers (and good ones, not gummint weeds) would spring up in a tearing hurry.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Ice is good for a fever.

It's "how" the caring is adminsitered that makes all the difference in the world.

Church history illustrates this quite well. When the church got mixed up with emperors, the dark ages fell. The rise of Protestantism, breaking this earthly monopoly, also saw the Renaissance.

[texasflower]

new tax rule that donations to any charity become credits to your taxes rather than merely tax deductible

That sounds like a really good idea. Could it ever happen?

[garandgal]

My assumptions have been derived from your many posts on the issue. I am proudly "cold as ice" to anyone who would try to infringe on parental rights, or any other freedoms that we are afforded as citizens of this great nation.

The schools already try to force-feed drugs to children who aren't suitably "calm"; God forbid they get the backing of the Federal government to twist the arms of parents who object.

[HiTech RedNeck]

It would take the rise of a new breed of liberal, one with more wisdom and common sense than lust for power, to pull it off. A mighty oak forest starts with a scattering of acorns.

[Cronos]

Bush to screen population for mental illness

I nominate Michael Moore to be tested first.

[texasflower]

Well it sounds like a good idea anyway.

[.30Carbine]

Someone may have already let you in on this, but just in case:

 

President's New Freedom
Commission on Mental Health

Achieving the Promise: Transforming Mental Health Care in America

Goal 4: Early Mental Health Screening, Assessment, and Referral to Services Are Common Practice

Recommendations

4.1 Promote the mental health of young children. 4.2 Improve and expand school mental health programs. 4.3 Screen for co-occurring mental and substance use disorders and link with integrated treatment strategies. 4.4 Screen for mental disorders in primary health care, across the life span, and connect to treatment and supports.

[Lazamataz]

You are one of the very first people Bush should force-screen for mental illness.

Schmuck.

[booann777]

Texasflower; Your post 905 leaves me totally speechless and in awe of your communication skills, as well as your knowledge and prevention regarding these critical and life saving issues.

I want to be you... :)

Thanks for enlightening all of us, every word you said is true. Really, speechless...

Warmest wishes, booann

[.30Carbine]

Argue with this:

 

President's New Freedom
Commission on Mental Health

Achieving the Promise: Transforming Mental Health Care in America

Goal 4: Early Mental Health Screening, Assessment, and Referral to Services Are Common Practice

Recommendations

4.1 Promote the mental health of young children. 4.2 Improve and expand school mental health programs. 4.3 Screen for co-occurring mental and substance use disorders and link with integrated treatment strategies. 4.4 Screen for mental disorders in primary health care, across the life span, and connect to treatment and supports.

[Corin Stormhands]

Sigh...yes I read that and I don't want to spend another day debating this.

1) Those are recommendations TO the President.

2) I have yet to have anyone SHOW ME where the document specifically says screening is for EVERYONE and not just at risk populations.

3) I have yet to see where the President has ACCEPTED these recommendations.

4) I have yet to see where the President OR The White House has said screening for EVERYONE.

[booann777]

darn it.. I typed a great post.. then lost it somewhere between preview and post... now my post will be dry...

You are not selfish, using "I" is normally used when telling a personal story..

... I think you are right...with PARENTAL CONSENT, and most solutions will be offered WITHOUT DRUGS.

Students are evaluated everyday by teachers, counselors, nurses.

I'm sorry to hear you're a victim, probably learned how to be one while picking up mangled victims off the highway for the last twenty years. Victim, indeed...

I also think you want as little governmental intrusion in our lives as possible, as you are a conservative. You make many points for administration of these types of programs in the schools that could save recreating a new infrastructure. But I'm sure everyone understands the nature of government "interrogation" and "forced medical treatment".

You have simply shared personal experiences that demonstrate possible outcomes that take care of those in need children or adults, instead of supporting criminals forever.

You have been attacked regarding your professional integrity. The poster speaks for themself and the attack is indicative of a small mind.

It's a double edged sword, but I thank you for your first hand experience of twenty years on the job. You're no dummy and, short of war time veterans, have seen more blood and guts than anyone on this board. It's called trauma.. too bad "they" think you are the victim, although one day on your job is more than I could take. Of course, I AM a professional victim.

Regarding big brother... everyone is right and I doubt you would disagree (not speaking for you, just about you :)

Gotta go, my other post (not posted) was much better and much funnier... oh well, not too entertaining but hope I covered some points at least...

Best to ya... booann

[Howlin]

Well, if you didn't require such a massive amount, perhaps they'd be enough for the rest of us.

[rwfromkansas]

Again, some commission recommendation that is vague and has no force of law.

If Bush adopts a proposal to screen all folks like WND says will happen, then we should be concerned, not when some impotent commission reports its recommendations.

[swarthyguy]

Just call it the Yossarian Clause.