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."
I thought that's what you guys wanted?
Sure did, 95% of this hyperactive kids stuff is bunk, and they don't need drugging. Energy and activity are good for kids and inconvienenced adults and teachers should just get used to it.
However if they want to put lots of this stuff in liberals, communists, lefties, and Rats, well OK by me.
Oh yeah, and especially "progressives".
God help our children who will have to live with this crap...unless WE do something about it.
[And both parties are guilty of this kind of thing. Pay no attention the the propagandists who use these issues as a reason to suuport the other guys.}
I don't think that anyone here has denigrated mentally ill people - certainly not me. The idea of testing every American (and especially kids in school)is an unwarranted and dangerous intrusion on individuals. I'm all for mentally disabled people getting the help they need - just leave me alone and let me seek help myself, if I feel I need it.
That's all well and good, but the government has no business being involved in it on any level whatsoever. Mental illness is the epitome of private concern, and the science of psychiatry is centuries away from having the technology to be able to do something like this responsibly.
What's wrong with it? 4 million American boys drugged into submission is what's wrong with it. The ease with which ficticious illnesses can be created, and people coerced into taking drugs that they don't want nor need, is the problem with it. And government involvement, on my tax dollar, is also the problem with it.
Can you imagine what a Democrat President would do with such power? How far a step is it to deciding that anyone with a particular political opinion is mentally ill and must be drugged for their own good?
This is extremely frightening stuff and it has no place in a free society.
---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). ---
We did this already, under Reagan in California. Now the crazies are all over the streets in Santa Cruz, San Francisco, and Berkeley. It's just wonderful: I'm moving.
I assume that the more sinister potentials in this proposal will be cut out either by Congress or the courts, with a healthy assist from public opinion, and indeed the media.
If I am wrong in this assumption, then it would indeed be wrong for me to call it a "trivial issue."
But in any case, there are many other issues. And I would continue to insist that any conservative who does not find Bush clearly preferable to Kerry is simply too stupid or too unhinged from reality to debate with.
There is far too much at stake.
You didn't read past the first paragraph, did you? The stuff is all there in the BMJ article, just rearranged by WND. Try reading paragraphs 7-10..
Anyhow, I don't know if I have an issue with this or not. I have no problem whatsoever with making mental health more accessible and more integrated. I do have a problem with misdiagnosing and overmedicating.
I'll just wait and see what, if anything, gets announced next month and then I'll decide. That's what everyone else should do to.
This has to be a joke. How can I work for his re-election if this is true?
Busted!
But then it may be buried in all of that bureaucratese.
Nope you are referring to the things that HAD to be done because of the Doyle- ( some other name) bill that passed in CAlifornia in the late 50s. Reagan was never the instigator
Sheesh.. I dunno what's up with all the typos in that last post of mine. Anyhow, I guess it's clear enough regardless..
I don't know about that! I used to think the same about Clinton. Nowaday some 'RATS think he' the second coming.
ROTFLMAO....PIMP.
That was too funny Joe.....I'll be going to bed smiling over that one.
It's 'for the children', y'know. Some things in the Federal Govt. just keep rolling along, no matter who's in office.
Screen EVERY citizen? And get them on meds? No, it should NEVER be trotted out, not in the US of A
WND POLL:
What do you think of President Bush's plan to screen all for mental illness?
Is this guy trying to lose election on purpose? 28.92% (59)
Just test Bush and Kerry and leave the rest of us alone 27.94% (57)
It's thoroughly unconstitutional 16.18% (33)
I think Bush has gone nuts 8.82% (18)
I'm opposed to the idea 8.33% (17)
Plan has some merit 3.43% (7)
Sounds like killing a gnat with a sledgehammer 2.45% (5)
Sounds like a good idea, but I'd like more details 1.96% (4)
Other 1.47% (3)
It's Bush's best initiative yet 0.49% (1)
Just not going kneejerk that your new favorite comdian, joehadenuf has made into an artform.
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.