Thread: NEW DANGER IN OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Websites for Wisdoms: www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd64.htm
www.newswithviews.com/Eakman/beverly26.htm

http://www.sierratimes.com/05/05/16/24_ ... _25370.htm



Do you need any other reason NOT to send your kids to a "government"
school?
Junction Jim



Mental Health Screening
Signals End Of
Parental Rights
By Nancy Levant
The Sierra Times
6-4-5

In the 2005-2006 school year, all parents will receive written
notice of new policies from your children's schools. Many schools
will ask you to sign permission slips, allowing school counselors
or "advocates" to have conversations with your children. You will be
told how your local schools are now involved in vision and dental
screenings, learning disabilities and speech impediment screenings,
and other acts of kindness, but watch for the small print or the
extra little blurb, which states that your children will also be
evaluated for emotional wellness. Watch for wording like "happiness
indicators" or "family participation."

The fact is that our president has mandated that every American
child, age 3 through 18, is federally ordered to be evaluated for
mental health issues and to receive "enforced" treatment. Welcome to
President Bush's New Freedom Initiative and New Freedom Commission
on Mental Health. Welcome to life-long profiling and drug
addictions, New Freedom-style.

52 million students and six million adults working in schools,
according to this commission, will be tested and should flush out at
least 6 million people, or shall we say new customers, who will then
be mandated to receive "treatment." What treatment does our
president's commission have in mind? The newest drugs in the
pharmaceutical pipelines, of course. The commission
recommends "specific medications for specific conditions."

One of the state-of-the-art treatments, and most expensive, is an
implanted capsule yes, that's right, implanted. The capsule delivers
medication into a child's body without the child having to swallow a
pill or the need for parental permission for dispensation.

The New Freedom Commission named the Texas Medication Algorithm
Project (TMAP) a model treatment plan. Medical algorithms are a
flowchart-style treatment indicator. If you have A symptom and B
symptom, take C medication. TMAP began with the University of Texas,
big pharma, and the mental health and corrections system in Texas.
The American Psychiatric Association concurs that TMAP is brilliant.

However, the New Freedom Initiative and Commission is a political-
big pharma marriage. Many companies who supported TMAP were also
major contributors to Bush's re-election funds. For example, Eli
Lilly manufactures olanzapine - one of the drugs recommended in the
New Freedom plan, and furthermore, George Herbert Walker Bush was
once a member of Lilly's board of directors. Our current President
Bush appointed Lilly's chief executive officer, Sidney Taurel, as a
member of the Homeland Security Council. Eighty-two percent of
Lilly's $1.6 million in political contributions in 2000 went to Bush
and the Republican Party. Do tell...

Texas Algorithm grossed over 4 billion dollars in 2003 and
olanzapine is Eli Lilly's top selling drug. A 2003 New York Times
article by Gardiner Harris claims that 70 percent of olanzapine
sales are paid for by government agencies, such as Medicare and
Medicaid. And lo and behold, guess who is now able to bill Medicaid
for health services? Public schools, of course, as they are now
under the big pharma-political profits/pay-back umbrella once they
adopt screening policies. Public schools can now be paid to screen
and drug your kids.

Now, if you ever wonder, ever again, if public-private partnerships
care about people, then you need a brain transplant. Your children
are now the legislated guinea pigs and lab rats for the
pharmaceutical companies who bought and paid for our president's
campaign. Favors are now returned to those companies in the form of
enforced, juvenile customers, their health, and their future drug
addictions.

But wait, there is more. The New Freedom Commission also calls for
enforced treatment. That means that parents have no rights to refuse
the treatment recommenced by TMAP and other drug dispensing
corporate-bureaucratic apparatuses. And as the mental health
bureaucracy is also involved in this financial game of insidious
cruelty, parents and families are also to be investigated via the
result of their children's screenings in schools. In other words,
schools are now the across-the board, or shall I say nation,
diagnostic tool for big pharma and child control.

And there's more. The U.N. Agenda 21 has also called for total
intrusion into schools and children lives. No more religion, no more
individuality, no more real education, no more real grades, no more
real teaching, no more teacher respect for parents, and no more
truth from teachers or principals. This sounds very familiar and
very political to me. And I've said it before, and I will say it
again: if you are of a religious ilk and you refuse to allow your
children to be abused by our "educational" system, the stage is
being set for you to lose physical custody of your children. I
suggest that you read this: Rethinking Orphanages for the 21st
Century by Richard McKenzie, ed

Still got your kids in public schools? Shame on you, and may God
bless your poor children and forgive you.

Websites for Wisdoms: www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd64.htm
www.newswithviews.com/Eakman/beverly26.htm

http://www.sierratimes.com/05/05/16/24_ ... _25370.htm





-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This one is crazy. If local school districts wanted to do something like that, you could vote with a bus pass and send your child somewhere else. That won't be possible with this unless you do go to a private school.

I want to make something adamantly clear. Psychology has a great deal of guess work in it. It is not a science.. it is thoroughly studied behavioral patterns, and there is not a single soul in the world who can force anyone to tell them the truth. Even with drugs.. you get psycho babble. So the kids being forced to undergo analysis allow a huge opportunity to see the kids play very serious psych games with school councilors.

Freedom Initiative? Isn't this called communism? I guess all the Mexican drug cartels will now be under the guise of Federally Funded Drug Pharmacies. Is there no end to all of this crap? America's kids got 'Left Behind' a long time ago, thanks to this administration!

Mess with me it is one thing, mess with my kids and you are giong to be in a world of hurt!

Contact the sponsor and co-sponsors and let them know as parents we are NOT going to allow the damn government to experiment on our kids!!!
Support this bill to STOP THIS!

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c ... 109w0QYDt::


Parental Consent Act of 2005 (Introduced in House)

HR 181 IH


109th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 181
To prohibit the use of Federal funds for any universal or mandatory mental health screening program.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 4, 2005
Mr. PAUL (for himself and Mr. FEENEY) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Education and the Workforce and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A BILL
To prohibit the use of Federal funds for any universal or mandatory mental health screening program.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Parental Consent Act of 2005'.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Congress finds as follows:

(1) The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) issued findings and recommendation against screening for suicide that corroborate those of the Canadian Preventive Services Task Force. `USPSTF found no evidence that screening for suicide risk reduces suicide attempts or mortality. There is limited evidence on the accuracy of screening tools to identify suicide risk in the primary care setting, including tools to identify those at high risk.'.

(2) The 1999 Surgeon General's report on mental health admitted the serious conflicts in the medical literature regarding the definitions of mental health and mental illness when it said, `In other words, what it means to be mentally healthy is subject to many different interpretations that are rooted in value judgments that may vary across cultures. The challenge of defining mental health has stalled the development of programs to foster mental health (Secker, 199. . . .'.

(3) The Surgeon General's report also says, `The diagnosis of mental disorders is often believed to be more difficult than diagnosis of somatic or general medical disorders since there is no definitive laboratory test or abnormality in brain tissue that can identify the illness.'.

(4) Accurate mental health diagnosis of children is difficult as admitted by the Surgeon General's report that says, `The science is challenging because of the ongoing process of development. The normally developing child hardly stays the same long enough to make stable measurements. Adult criteria for illness can be difficult to apply to children and adolescents, when the signs and symptoms of mental disorders are often also the characteristics of normal development.'.

(5) Authors of the bible of psychiatric diagnosis, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, admit that the diagnostic criteria for mental illness are vague, saying, `DSM-IV criteria remain a consensus without clear empirical data supporting the number of items required for the diagnosis. . . . Furthermore, the behavioral characteristics specified in DSM-IV, despite efforts to standardize them, remain subjective. . . .' (American Psychiatric Association Committee on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-IV 1994), pp. 1162-1163).

(6) Because of the subjectivity of psychiatric diagnosis, it is all too easy for a psychiatrist to label a person's disagreement with the psychiatrist's political beliefs a mental disorder.

(7) At least one federally-funded school violence prevention program has suggested that a child who shares his or her parent's traditional values may be likely to instigate school violence.

( Despite many statements in the popular press and by groups promoting the psychiatric labeling and medication of children, that ADD/ADHD is due to a chemical imbalance in the brain, the 1998 National Institutes of Health Consensus Conference said, `. . . further research is necessary to firmly establish ADHD as a brain disorder. This is not unique to ADHD, but applies as well to most psychiatric disorders, including disabling diseases such as schizophrenia. . . . Although an independent diagnostic test for ADHD does not exist. . . . Finally, after years of clinical research and experience with ADHD, our knowledge about the cause or causes of ADHD remains speculative.'.

(9) There has been a precipitous increase in the prescription rates of psychiatric drugs in children:

(A) A 300-percent increase in psychotropic drug use in 2 to 4 year old children from 1991 to 1995 (Journal of the American Medical Association, 2000).

(B) A 300-percent increase in psychotropic drug use in children from 1987 to 1996 (Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine, 2003).

(C) More money was spent on psychiatric drugs for children than on antibiotics or asthma medication in 2003 (Medco Trends, 2004).

(10) A September 2004 Food and Drug Administration hearing found that more than two-thirds of studies of antidepressants given to depressed children showed that they were no more effective than placebo, or sugar pills, and that only the positive trials were published by the pharmaceutical industry. The lack of effectiveness of antidepressants has been known by the Food and Drug Administration since at least 2000 when, according to the Food and Drug Administration Background Comments on Pediatric Depression, Robert Temple of the Food and Drug Administration Office of Drug Evaluation acknowledged the `preponderance of negative studies of antidepressants in pediatric populations'. The Surgeon General's report said of stimulant medication like Ritalin, `However, psychostimulants do not appear to achieve long-term changes in outcomes such as peer relationships, social or academic skills, or school achievement.'.

(11) The Food and Drug Administration finally acknowledged in September 2004, that the newer antidepressants are related to suicidal thoughts and actions in children and that this data was hidden for years. The Food and Drug Administration had over 2000 reports of completed suicides from 1987 to 1995 for the drug Prozac alone, which by the agency's own calculations represent but a fraction of the suicides. Prozac is the only such drug approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in children.

(12) Other possible side effects of psychiatric medication used in children include mania, violence, dependence, weight gain, and insomnia from the newer antidepressants; cardiac toxicity including lethal arrhythmias from the older antidepressants; growth suppression, psychosis, and violence from stimulants; and diabetes from the newer anti-psychotic medications.

(13) Parents are already being coerced to put their children on psychiatric medications and some children are dying because of it. Universal or mandatory mental health screening and the accompanying treatments recommended by the President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health will only increase that problem. Across the country, Patricia Weathers, the Carroll Family, the Johnston Family, and the Salazar Family were all charged or threatened with child abuse charges for refusing or taking their children off of psychiatric medications.

(14) The United States Supreme Court in Pierce versus Society of Sisters (268 U.S. 510 (1925)) held that parents have a right to direct the education and upbringing of their children.

(15) Universal or mandatory mental health screening violates the right of parents to direct and control the upbringing of their children.

(16) Federal funds should never be used to support programs that could lead to the increased over-medication of children, the stigmatization of children and adults as mentally disturbed based on their political or other beliefs, or the violation of the liberty and privacy of Americans by subjecting them to invasive `mental health screening' (the results of which are placed in medical records which are available to government officials and special interests without the patient's consent ).

SEC. 3. PROHIBITION AGAINST FEDERAL FUNDING OF UNIVERSAL OR MANDATORY MENTAL HEALTH SCREENING.

(a) Universal or Mandatory Mental Health Screening Program- No Federal funds may be used to establish or implement any universal or mandatory mental health screening program.

(b) Refusal to Consent as Basis of a Charge of Child Abuse or Education Neglect- No Federal education funds may be paid to any local educational agency or other instrument of government that uses the refusal of a parent or legal guardian to provide express, written, voluntary, informed consent to mental health screening for his or her child as the basis of a charge of child abuse or education neglect until the agency or instrument demonstrates that it is no longer using such refusal as a basis of a child abuse or education neglect charge.

(c) Definition- For purposes of this Act , the term `universal or mandatory mental health screening program'--

(1) means any mental health screening program in which a set of individuals (other than members of the Armed Forces or individuals serving a sentence resulting from conviction for a criminal offense) is automatically screened without regard to whether there was a prior indication of a need for mental health treatment; and

(2) includes--

(A) any program of State incentive grants for transformation to implement recommendations in the July 2003 report of the President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health; and

(B) any student mental health screening program that allows mental health screening of individuals under 18 years of age without the express, written, voluntary, informed consent of the parent or legal guardian of the individual involved.

H.R.181
Title: To prohibit the use of Federal funds for any universal or mandatory mental health screening program.
Sponsor: Rep Paul, Ron [TX-14] (introduced 1/4/2005) Cosponsors (36)
Latest Major Action: 2/9/2005 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Education Reform.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COSPONSORS(36), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]: (Sort: by date)
Rep Akin, W. Todd [MO-2] - 3/2/2005 Rep Bartlett, Roscoe G. [MD-6] - 2/8/2005
Rep Bilirakis, Michael [FL-9] - 5/12/2005 Rep Burton, Dan [IN-5] - 5/17/2005
Rep Calvert, Ken [CA-44] - 3/1/2005 Rep Camp, Dave [MI-4] - 3/1/2005
Rep Chabot, Steve [OH-1] - 4/12/2005 Rep Davis, Jo Ann [VA-1] - 2/1/2005
Rep Everett, Terry [AL-2] - 2/16/2005 Rep Feeney, Tom [FL-24] - 1/4/2005
Rep Foxx, Virginia [NC-5] - 3/2/2005 Rep Garrett, Scott [NJ-5] - 2/1/2005
Rep Goode, Virgil H., Jr. [VA-5] - 2/1/2005 Rep Gutknecht, Gil [MN-1] - 2/9/2005
Rep Herger, Wally [CA-2] - 4/12/2005 Rep Hostettler, John N. [IN-8] - 3/8/2005
Rep Hunter, Duncan [CA-52] - 2/8/2005 Rep Hyde, Henry J. [IL-6] - 1/25/2005
Rep Jones, Walter B., Jr. [NC-3] - 2/2/2005 Rep Kennedy, Mark R. [MN-6] - 2/1/2005
Rep King, Steve [IA-5] - 3/15/2005 Rep Manzullo, Donald A. [IL-16] - 3/1/2005
Rep McCotter, Thaddeus G. [MI-11] - 1/6/2005 Rep Miller, Jeff [FL-1] - 1/25/2005
Rep Musgrave, Marilyn N. [CO-4] - 5/3/2005 Rep Neugebauer, Randy [TX-19] - 2/9/2005
Rep Northup, Anne M. [KY-3] - 5/3/2005 Rep Norwood, Charlie [GA-9] - 2/8/2005
Rep Otter, C. L. (Butch) [ID-1] - 2/1/2005 Rep Pence, Mike [IN-6] - 2/8/2005
Rep Rogers, Mike [MI-8] - 2/16/2005 Rep Rohrabacher, Dana [CA-46] - 5/24/2005
Rep Simpson, Michael K. [ID-2] - 2/8/2005 Rep Tancredo, Thomas G. [CO-6] - 2/1/2005
Rep Terry, Lee [NE-2] - 3/8/2005 Rep Wamp, Zach [TN-3] - 2/8/2005

Here is another place to find the info!


http://capwiz.com/liberty/issues/bills/?bill=6834806

Congressional Legislation

Parental Consent Act, H.R. 181
Bill # H.R.181

Original Sponsor:
Ron Paul (R-TX 14th)

Cosponsor Total: 37
(last sponsor added 05/24/2005)
37 Republicans






About This Legislation:
The American tradition of parents deciding what is best for their children is under attack. Powerful corporations, institutions, and politicians are quietly moving to have the federal government implement universal mental-health screening of children. This would likely lead to the forced drugging of children.
The New Freedom Commission on Mental Health (a presidential commission formed in 2002) is the front group for this attack on the family. Michael Hogan, chairman of the commission and director of the Ohio Department of Mental Health, thinks universal screening is a good idea. It's just that Mr. Hogan fears recommending it now is "a little premature and probably controversial" although it "might be the right thing to do." (Christian Science Monitor, January 20, 2005)

A little premature? Probably controversial? You bet it is!

No parental consent? The right thing to do? No it is not!

H.R. 181 would prohibit the use of federal funds for any universal or
mandatory mental-health screening program.

Congress and President Bush can act quickly when they want to act. In 2003, the Do-Not-Call Implementation Act was passed by Congress and signed by President Bush in less than six weeks.

Since they acted quickly to stop telemarketers from calling people at home, they certainly should act just as quickly now to block the forced mental screening of children.

Background


Detailed, up-to-date bill status information on H.R.181.

Cosponsorship Search:

Show:
All
Republicans
Democrats
Independents
Who Are:
Cosponsors/Sponsors
Non-Cosponsors
Both


From: All States Alabama Alaska American Samoa Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Guam Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virgin Islands Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming

This is to sell a drug called Rydelyn (spelling).

It is a high grade narcotic given to children that are over active.

They are not over active because of chemical issues in the brain.

They are over active because they o. d. on sugar.

DO NOT LET OUR CHILDREN EAT TOO MANY SWEETS. They explode with energy caused by simple sugars in the body, designed to give you quick energy, that is what sugar does. Too much of it sends kids over the top with energy they can not control.

This drug counter acts that by basically druggin 'em, puts them in a stupor; and causes who knows what other types of physical damage to their little bodies.

Control the sweets.

Also, DO NOT GIVE YOUR CHILDREN ANY PRODUCT THAT CONTAINS ASPARTAME. It used to be called Nutra-Sweet. It is in gum, diet sodas, many foods now. It carries a warning label with a reason. It was zoomed through FDA against the recommendation of the FDA Review Board because it caused brain lesions and brain disease in the monkeys used in the trials. It is a wicked evil product manufactured from industrial sludge and recycled and sold to corporate America as a food sweetener.

For example, all Wrigley's gum is now sweetened with this dangerous sweetener insteasd of sugar. They converted last year...at least that's the first time I saw it on a Wrigley's gum package and of course put it back on the shelf.

Evil Abounds....From the Top Down.

Wait a minute!!! President Bush is "concerned" about our kids mental health....but could give a heck about their physical safety. I'll tell you what....let's start this program by testing the mental health of the leader of the country.

With over 4,000 unknown people illegally entering the U.S. on a daily basis, do you think our schools could be in danger? I'd say so. We all remember what happened in Russia in the school which was taken over by terrorists, with more than 200 people being killed. THIS IS A REAL POSSIBILITY IN AMERICA AS A RESULT OF THESE OPEN BORDERS.

Yes, mental health screening is a good idea for people holding powerful positions in the United States. Not for our children.

With over 4,000 unchecked and unknown people entering our country on a daily basis do you think diseases such as TB and Leprosy could be endangering our children? You bet, and for those of us working to stop this massive invasion we are well aware that these diseases are actually breaking out rapidly around the country IN OUR SCHOOLS.

Yes, mental health screening is a good idea for people holding powerful positions in the United States. Not our children.

This is really scary. What else does he have in store for us? I can only imagine. I am going to go to DC this week. I want some some face time and I want some answers. This is completely out of hand. Everyday its something new. This article is the straw that broke the camel's back.

GO GET 'EM LegalUSCitizen....our government is completely out of control.

I have a 9 year old nephew and a 14 year niece whom I adore. They are in public schools in Northern Virginia. My niece has an 19 year old male foreign student in her 9th grade class!!!! She doesn't know if he is legal or not.

In my day, this would have been unthinkable!!

What is wrong with the PEOPLE in our educational system that would allow this?



Mandatory Mental Health Testing of Students IS OUTRAGEOUS!!

If they want to do some testing....why don't they check for papers on illegal aliens?