"Are Your Children Crazy?"

[scotty]

http://www.healthsentinel.com/org_ne...rint_list_item

"Are Your Children Crazy?"
Health Sentinel
Dr. Jane M. Orient
July 27, 2006

Congress and President Bush apparently think that a lot of children have a "mental health" problem. Or that enough of them do to justify taking millions of dollars from taxpayers to fund a universal "mental health screening" for children, and eventually for everyone.

Personally, I think - from the perspective of a person who never had any - that almost all children act crazy. Those who don't are, by definition, abnormal, because they don't act like the others.

The main problem with about half of them is that they are boys. Such children are obviously made of snips and snails and puppy dog tails. On the farm there is a solution for that: a procedure for turning boy lambs into non-ram lambs. After a quick little operation, they act like peaceful little lambs instead of aggressive, disruptive rams.

We don't do surgery like that on little boys, of course, but we do have our methods: such as behavioral therapy and chemicals.

There are those who argue with some passion that society has to do something. Bad, disruptive, antisocial or depressed little kids make lots of trouble for parents and schoolteachers. Worse, they can grow up into dysfunctional, unhappy or troublemaking adults. That snotty little boy might become a dissenting nonconformist or even a rebellious man, who could throw a monkey wrench into our smoothly functioning society. We have to catch them early - for their own good.

Teams of experts are awaiting the infusion of cash. They'll be ensconced in your child's school before you even know it. A bonus is that your little darlings will probably give them quite a bit of information about you also, and then you too can receive therapy you didn't know you needed.
Do you sometimes raise your voice? Ever spank them? Hug them inappropriately? Have politically incorrect attitudes? Use forbidden words? Own a gun? Smoke cigarettes, especially indoors? Read extremist literature? Refuse to recycle? Prepare for a knock on the door.

There are many tools at the disposal of the mental health squad. Counseling sessions. Drugs (Ritalin, antidepressants, tranquilizers, maybe some new ones that need to be tested on some experimental subjects of your child's age). Group therapy. Removing the child from the home. (This may be a "last resort," but often the mere threat can accomplish wonders.)

If an interview with a child raises concerns, the next step might be a home visit. This could discover poor parenting skills, inadequate housekeeping, harmful literature, or a baby who is crying or has a bruise (signs of abuse?).

It is true that some interventions have potential side effects, say drug dependence or suicide, but to assure the health of the population some shared sacrifice and risk are needed. We will have excellent means of tracking outcomes to improve future therapies. The mental health workers' impressions will all be recorded in the school records. An added benefit could accrue to would-be employers or college recruiters.

Some cautions are in order. Democrats might think that potential future Republicans are crazy. Republicans might think the opposite. Should an extremist Christian be one of the screeners, he might think that nonbelievers are possessed by the devil. And an extremist secular humanist (if such exist) might think that an overly religious child is at risk for mental illness if not already impaired.

In fact, parents ought to be asking some very serious questions before the government experts interview the first child.

What are the credentials of the screeners? Most importantly, how many children have they raised to adulthood, and with what outcome?

What are the criteria for possible abnormality? What is the scientific validation? How often do different observers agree? Have any long-term studies shown a solid correlation with adult performance in life? Do today's oddball children fail, or might they turn into our greatest achievers?

Will you be allowed to get a second opinion? Can you see the record and enter corrections if indicated? Will the record at any point be destroyed, or will the stigma of a diagnosis such as "personality disorder" follow the child throughout life?

What will happen if your child fails the screen? What sort of treatment will be given? Who will supervise it? What if you don't approve of it?

What's the very worst thing that the program will have the power to do to you or your child, say if your worst enemy were to gain control of it?

Who might profit from the program (perhaps discoverable by asking who lobbied for it)? Do drug companies expect to have a large number of new consumers of their psychoactive drugs?

What are the results of studies of long-term use of drugs like Ritalin, which has effects on the brain similar to those of cocaine? Have there even been any such studies?

Can you refuse to participate in the program? If you do refuse, what are the repercussions?

What is the evidence that the program, at best, will be anything other than a waste of millions of dollars? Miraculously, throughout human history most of those crazy children have become stable, productive adults without federally mandated psychiatric treatment. Still more amazingly, their parents have managed also.

Psychiatry in the hands of government, instead of independent physicians who are working for patients, reeks of Orwell's 1984 or the Soviet era. The very need to ask the questions should tell us the right answer for this program: It's crazy.

Dr. Jane M. Orient is an internist practicing in Tucson, AZ and executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.
++

6574 Total Signatures to date: http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html School starts soon in many areas of the country. Please forward the petition to every teacher, school board member, doctor, legislator and anyone else you can think of and ask them to sign and forward it.

[kittyariel]

This just reeks of Big Brother,it scares me to death

[rdjanis]

What an article, the scary part is it is right on the mark.

I took the advice of the writer... I sent a copy of the petition to a few psychiatrist I know at children's programs!

[hope]

I woke up one morning and found my teenage son asleep on the couch and a teenage girl asleep on the other. When I asked "who??" "Wha?" my son put his finger to his lips telling me not to wake her up, and then proceeded to tell me how her dad's an alcoholic and hits her, and then kicks her out of the house. Apparently she'd been living behind a closed down convenience store for the past few weeks. When I tried to talk to her she clammed up, said a series of polite "yes mam's" and then said she was fine and left. Is a good dose of anti-depressants going to help her? Not unless you give a lethal dose to her dad I imagine. And if she went through the mental health screening, a seasoned abused teen who is by now a professional at hiding all the skeletons in her closet knows what to answer "yes" and "no" to. By the way, she is an honor student and an excellent musician - not your typical runaway. I don't know if by doing these screenings they are trying to "help" kids or are finding a way to up sales of drugs. The only way to tell is by really going to the source. These progams don't usually come about unless there is a hard core philanthropist wanting to make a difference, some parent groups who want this to happen, or the funding comes from somewhere else like some company. There have been a small number of suicides and homicides happen since my kids went to school. During one incident the kid, who was schizophrenic, locked himself up in a local church during a service. His parents called the police and told them, "It's only a BB gun!! Don't hurt him please!" The kid's dead - shot by police who say they never got the message? The school had a file several inches thick on him. He was in my son's class. Another kid down the street committed suicide and even left a note. Would screening have helped him? I don't think there's harm in asking and offering some informed interventions. I'd hate to be the parent who says, "how come nobody said anything to me?" "How could this have been avoided?" I've called parents on a few occasions and said, "You're kid has been breaking down in class ... is there something going on???" In those cases parents have thanked me for telling them something was up and were able to help their kids through. I chased a 7 year old all over the halls one day and the principal and I finally got him to tell us that his grandmother (he didn't have a mother at home and the grandmother was like his mom) had died. His dad reacted by offering to give him a few belts. The school counselor was able to talk to both of them. This was in elementary school where there was ONE school counselor for 700 kids. When I've tried to call the counselors at the high school it takes about 5 or 6 calls to get a hold of one of them. Not good odds for a kid on the edge.

I guess maybe what I am saying is a screening may or may not help, but what works best is educating kids about stuff like this, educating teachers on stuff like this, and everyone working in the best interest of the kid. A screening is only as good as the kid who answers honestly, and what kid, especially a teen, is trusting enough of the adult population in a school to answer honestly anyway?

I had a job at a hospital and one of the psych docs said, the drugs make a difference with the kids, but what they really need is parents who love them, a stable roof over their head, and a family that cares and is involved. Most of these kids have more stress on them than most adults are able to handle. Before they start offering screenings, I would hope they have some well-funded interventions in place - not just an appointments to the drug pushing shrinks. I mean family therapy, counseling, school counselors who care and return calls, even financial help. It's appalling some of the things I've seen happening with some of these kids that a prescription drug just aint going to fix. It's like saying, "yeah I can tell you what your problem is, but I don't have any money for tools, so try some duct tape for now - better yet, leave you name and number after the beep..."

Just some thoughts.

[scotty]

Originally Posted by hope

Before they start offering screenings, I would hope they have some well-funded interventions in place - not just an appointments to the drug pushing shrinks. I mean family therapy, counseling, school counselors who care and return calls, even financial help.

These suggestions I have no problem with, but alas, that's not what teenscreen is doing. It's "fill out this questionaire, oops, you answered question 12 wrong, go see this psychiatrist". Screening funded by pharma, No funding for therapy, questions so nebulous that anyone could test "positive" on any given day.
This is a feel good, pharma recruiting tool.

[Homerbcool]

My children are as crazy as their parents...and despite never seeing or hearnig from them...I love every inch of their uniquenss and quirkiness...no pill is ever going to change that...

[rph3664]

The reason schools are so aggressively trying to get your kid labeled "ADD" is because they get extra money for having special needs kids, and ADD is covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Did you know that people can even get SSI for having this? Yes, and people are actually encouraging their kids to act up in school for this reason. Just get your doctor to forge some papers, and bingo! Instant SSI.

Meanwhile, people with REAL disabilities like cancer, Down Syndrome, etc. must fight and struggle to get the services they deserve.

[rdjanis]

I agree, the schools get the extra money, but it is not enough to benefit the schools really. In Canada, in order to get any SSI or what is equivalent here the child must be severely handicapped, ADD or similar problems do not fall into that category.... may be different in the US?

It is the ADD children, or children of similar problems are the ones that are truly left behind. There is no patience for them. Classrooms are over filled, the kid causes a disturbance of any kind... they are ADD. Medicated and put in a LD classroom where the requirements are different and the teachers do not have an obligation for them to meet the regular standards.... very sad.

It was to my understanding that the US operated the same as in Canada from other parents I have spoken with....

[rph3664]

Parents (okay, unemployable single mothers who don't know who or where the father is) who face being kicked off welfare after 5 years (the limit nowadays) are doing exactly this to get an income.

Children with ADD do not have to be severely disabled in order to get payments, trust me.

You can even get SSI for being a drug addict or alcoholic. I could understand if addiction was the secondary diagnosis to, say, bipolar disorder, but no, the drug addiction is the primary diagnosis and since addiction is a disease, SSI is forthcoming.

I don't get it either.

[Katesmom]

Originally Posted by rdjanis

I agree, the schools get the extra money, but it is not enough to benefit the schools really.

It's not just the money, though. These kids get special exemptions when it comes to standardized testing. They have to take the tests, but their scores don't count.

So, the scenario goes like this:

There is a child who acts up a lot in class. This child is living below the poverty level. They don't actually have a home, but 'stay' with people. Mom or grandma or whoever happens to be their guardian this week, has lived in 'the system' their entire lives. So, when the teacher suggests the child might have ADD, the guardian knows that it could mean $$$ for them. The child goes on drugs and is labelled. The school gets extra money for the child AND then doesn't have to count this child's scores against the school's overall scores on the statewide testing. Low socio-economic children who live like this one have notoriously low test scores. The ranking of the school in regards to test scores effects the school and school districts funding from the state. If the entire school and/or district is low socio-economic, the stakes for getting state money are very, very high. So, this is a very, very common occurence. And, everyone wins: the guardian, the teacher, the school, the district. Everyone except the child, of course.

[rdjanis]

This is absolutely disgusting! I do not believe, to my knowledge, that it is this way in Canada. I know that any monies for disabilities have to be very severe. This definately does not include ADD..... this is very very sad to say the least. From the children I have met and parents of children with ADD only a few are actually LD, for the most part, they are labeled and put in these classrooms to make it easier for the teacher... not the child. I am not aware of the parents getting any extra $ help as well.......hmmm, something to look into for curiosity sake.

Makes you wonder if this is a common occurence why the heck nothing is done about it!

[Cindywho]

Katesmom hit this dead on. I used to work with mentally ill adults and "disturbed" children. It would not be uncommon for several kids in a family to receive checks from the government and of course they were all on meds. The adults encouraged the children to act up so that they could still get their "crazy checks". Yes, that is exactly what they called them.

[mom2one]

Originally Posted by Cindywho

The adults encouraged the children to act up so that they could still get their "crazy checks". Yes, that is exactly what they called them.

When I taught in NC I thought I misheard what a teacher was saying... but no, that's what the kids and parents called them... very sad.