I don't read that speech and end up thinking that he is going to ask that every person in America is screened, then medicated as needed.
|
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 just scanned it but it sure reads like it's intended to infuriate conservatives and re-arm the libs..and also, as soon as some British source is sited, the skepticism level shifts up..
I second it.
Anyone have any ideas on how to handle this? It's time to do something about this because they've been going too far. They'll have your children on drugs also!! Wonder how much prozac is delivered to Pennsylvania Ave?
I agree, and where have I stated that Bush is perfect.
He is a human being, like you and me, frailties included. JMO, he would agree with the previous statemnt, Kerry I don't know, but would publicly dismiss.
MY beef is with those on FR who automatically think that Joe Farah is some kind of clairvoyant god.
RUN..............HIDE!!!!
Thanks (i think) for the link. This is bad news for the nation.
That's an affirmative. We know they push policies through in "their own way", and we can NOT sit idle on this and what other things they've got up their sleeves. Before we know it, they'll be leading you down the path to camp. Sorry if anyone gets offended, but we must protect ourselves and loved ones because prying into anyone's personal info is illegal. Oh, there's that Patriot Act again, BS! C'mon fellow freepers, time to stand up!
You said: What seems a crystal certainty, however, given past experience with federal medical bureaucracies, is that any proposal will simply be an opening bid. The program will balloon, costs will spiral, and missions will creep.
I can agree with that. And I can agree that the President's initiative goes a lot further than we're comfortable with. Given the chance, I'd like to offer the President some advice on a number of issues.
But, I still don't see the President calling for mass screening of everyone.
The article said: 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.
I don't see it, no one has shown me where the report of the commission OR the White House progress report says that.
We can speculate about what it all means until the Hillarys come home. But I don't see it saying what the article (as well as many on this thread) says it does.
That's all I'm saying.
So, how do you actually like these proposals?
I share your aversion to tinfoil, but does anything about these proposals make you feel bad/sad, angry, or disappointed?
If so, I'm certain that you're glad the Government is going to 'be there' for you with a cheery smile, a diagnosis, and a pill.
I'm sure you find that comforting, because you're a normal person, not some raving tinfoil freak.
I don't read that speech and end up thinking that he is going to ask that every person in America is screened, then medicated as needed.
|
Oh, I've got a great doctor now, which may be part of the cause of being able to laugh about incompetent docs ;). I suspect you have a good one, too? Now, of course, hehe.
Your attitude has been noticed. It has been noticed, you know.
When the dr is incompetent and can't do his job, it's all in your head, right? Hell, bet he charged you a nice fee for that visit, didn't he? Then these drs wonder WHY they're being sued for malpractice because they want their country clubs, etc..I hope you went to another dr for a second opinion, and I hope you found yourself a NEW doctor and requested a copy of your entire chart as well. I don't know what state you reside in, however, there's a couple online sites where you can research your dr to see if and how many times he's been sued. Then they have the audacity to cry about tbeir insurance premiums rising! Time to oust these incompetent so-called drs. Get yourself a good attorney!
They're coming to take me away...hee hee...hi hi....ho ho....
The proposals probably go further than any of us like, but he also probably gets proposals putting out plans turning mecca into a sheet of glass.
Some on FR, would cheer incessantly about that proposal about mecca.
He's got a tough job and I will trust him basing it on his actions of the last 3 1/2 years. I take that into account, and the actions of his electoral opponent in November.
JMO, Bush is much better than Kerry, and a hyperbolic article by Joe Farah be damned.
I'm not sure I belive this is for real. When Fox or one of the other newschannels mentions it then I'll believe it. Though I have to admit it is pretty weird. First they want us to take marriage classes and then the government "tests" us to make sure we're "mentaly healthy"? I don't know -- slippery slope anybody?
As I said in my reply #544, I am squeamish about the proposals, note proposals.
JMO, the BMJ and Joe Farah's WND pounced on those proposals and made them look they were official policy. I will trust Bush. He has an enemy on two fronts the islamofascists and the press(even the medical press).
I trust the man, GW Bush, that is something that I could never say about Clinotn and the current demo nominee Kerry.
BTW, Heads get out and vote for Harper next Monday.
It will do my mood good seeing ex-Canadian Peter Jennings choking on the words of a Conservative victory in Canada, although that choking by Peter Jennings will be 20 minutes into the broadcast.
Let's not broadcast it. We don't want them to discover the strategery. We are not worthy of such political genius!
I just saw a guy who was arguing with a telephone pole.
I walked up and told him President Bush was going to help him with his mental illness. He turned around and said, what? I then saw that he was holding a cell phone to his ear. So I quickly said, Uh, President Bush is going to help me with my metal business, as I quickly walked away.
Certainly excusable because of the times, and the impending election, but imprudent if followed methodically, imo.
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.
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.