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."
It certainly does. Unfortunately many folks here seem to have an interest in ignoring the issue, and they do so by attacking the messenger. Now I don't mean to pick on any particular posters, but I think these posts are illustrative of this tendency to ignore things we dislike. Consider this dynamic:
#8 "This is idiotic." (Howlin)
#12 "I don't believe it." (Judith Anne)
#39 "...I'm with Judith Anne. I don't believe this." (Howlin)
#66 "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." (Dane)
#79 "in WorldNet Daily (to put the WORST possible spin on it, you see?)" (Howlin)
#139 "I'm not trying to discredit WND. I AM discrediting them with their own web site." (Howlin)
#175 "Farah is a hysterical nutcase in my opinion...He does indeed hate George Bush..." (texasflower)
And thus, in the space of only 175 posts spanning 2:09, we've gone from the plan itself being idiotic to the plan being completely disregarded because the messenger is a "plagiarist" who "hates Bush". The remainder of the thread is little more than a flamefest, and the discussion of the initial plan has been buried in namecalling and over-the-top rhetoric.
Groupthink can be a scary thing.
If today was 6/22/92, Bill and Hillary would be high fiving each other over your post.
I don't think they kiss.
Sad, really sad. Anyone who takes WND at face value needs to have their head examined. No joke intended.
Did you see the link? It's not from WND which I think is a bit tabloid anyway. It's from the Whitehouse website.
No doubt, those who go off on wild tangents over a WND article.
Groupthink can be a scary thing
NL, please let Orwell be Orwell and leave your Rich Little like cyber imitation of Orwell out of this thread, thank you.
They are proposals from a commission Bush appointed.
I will wait for the final proposal and not go doom and gloom orgasmic over a WND article.
"Sounds like he wants those who are sick to get help if they need it and he isn't forcing them into it that I can see."
If this will get the Neocons off the streets, then I am all for it.
You are quite welcomed to your own opinion, but do not dismiss those of us concerned about such policies.
I will wait for the final proposal and not go doom and gloom orgasmic over a WND article
This is the same thing as the media going nuts over the "torture memo". Someone writes a proposal for the President (something that happens every dang day on just about every subject) and the memo/report/proposal gets out and one side or the other goes crazy.
I think saying "This is idiotic" pretty well sums up my feelings about it.
And I said I don't believe the part about the ADMINSTRATION OF DRUGS TO THE GENERAL POPULATION.
Sorry we didn't respond as you feel necessary, but it did give you a chance once again to put on your Holier Than Thou shrowd, didn't it?
And it's just a suggestion, but you better be a little more skeptical of Newsmax and WorldNet Daily; as we are able to post fewer and fewer actual news articles (and as even those we excerpt "disappear" within a few weeks/or months), we are relying more and more on "rearrangments" from those two entities.
In the past, neither one of them has proven to be the most reliable sites on the internet. Now it might not bother you that they copy articles almost word for word without crediting the source, as it probably suits your agenda; (and as an added bonus, you get to come on these threads and poke us with a stick because WE question the source), but some of us prefer to know what we're dealing with.
It looks like this is an inhouse WorldNet Daily article, when, in fact, it's not; you may "consider" the dynamic of our replies, while we consider the "dynamic" of you not being bothered by a plagiarised article.
What's Tom Tancredo's position on this abomination?
I do dismiss those who go into knee jerk mode over an article on WND.
President Bush probably gets 100's of crazy proposals each day. He has the guts to post them on the White House website for knee jerkers like you to chew on to get some feedback.
Now think, nothing has been proposed by the President, and yet you automatically go into knee jerk mode from a WND article.
Think about how you can be manipulted.
As has been pointed out numerous times, the WND article is little more than a rehash of other legitimate sources. Sabertooth was even so kind as to post the Bush speech delivered when the committee was formed. Why are you ignoring these other sources and only attacking WND?
Did you see me saying I wouldn't vote for Bush? I am voting for Bush, so not exactly knee jerk is it? I think you're a jerk for throwing around name calling where it doesn't apply.
Apparently so. He needs to be screened quickly & then "prescribed" some heavy True-Conservative meds.
New Freedom Initiative
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/freedominitiative/freedominitiative.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/newfreedom/
http://www.hhs.gov/newfreedom/init.html
Google search results
New Freedom Commission on Mental Health
http://www.mentalhealthcommission.gov/
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/04/20020429-2.html
Google search results
Actually the original source is the British Medical journal.
And as I said earlier on this thread,
Medical journals would never ever publish a hyperbolic article.(/sarcasm)
JMO, you are one naive puppy.
One in four people in the U.S. are mentally ill. Look at your three nearest neighbors; if they seem fine, then it's 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.