Military Homeschool -- Controversial Topics: Mental Health

Controversial Topics: Mental Health Assessment of School Children

February 2006:

Why Children Are Not for Screening
This article, by Larry and Susan Kaseman, was originally published in the November-December 1993 issue of Home Education Magazine.

April 2005

When Education Becomes Abuse
A Different Look at the Mental Health of Children
by Raymond S. Moore, Dorothy Moore

November 2004

Mental Health Assessment of School Children
Bush Admin aims to give drugs to school children
H.R .5236: To prohibit the use of Federal funds for any universal or mandatory mental health screening program. This Act may be cited as the "Let Parents Raise
Their Kids Act of 2004."

September 2004

From the Connecticut Homeschool Network

Bulletin #37 Mental Health Assessment 9/13/04 Did you know? Children's mental health will be assessed along with their academic standards in the new proposed testing initiatives. Pregnant and new mothers will also be tested. Federal legislation is calling for this and recently the Illinois State Board of Education has been given the responsibility to develop the appropriate tests and policies to go along with this legislation. Consider this quote: "Every child in America entering school at the age of five is mentally ill because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our founding fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It's up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well by creating the international child of the future." (Harvard psychiatrist Chester M. Pierce, speaking as an expert in public education at the 1973 International Education Seminar)

Even back in 1912, John Dewey, the father of progressive education said the society or group is most important, and that independent individualists have a form of "insanity." There is a lot of history between then and now, and suffice it to say that this has been brewing for a good long time. Let's come forward now to our present time. President George W. Bush signed an Executive Order on June 18, 2001 supporting community-based services and programs for individuals with disabilities. This Executive Order directs key federal agencies to work together and with states to ensure full compliance with the Supreme Court's ruling in the Olmstead case (1999) and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. The intention of this order was to make sure that persons with disabilities are helped and integrated into society. The fact sheet gives a good background on this executive order and on its face it probably was well-intentioned. Federal agencies should assist the states to ensure their compliance with the Olmstead decision. This issue was then taken a step further when an additional federal government mandate, The New Freedom Initiative, issued on April 29 2002,was directed to improve America's mental health service delivery system for individuals with serious mental illness and children with serious emotional disturbances. The executive order says a commission should be set up, and describes its membership, mission, guiding principles, administration, reporting and eventual termination. One part in section 3 reads: "(c) Formulate policy options that could be implemented by public and private providers, and Federal, State, and local governments to integrate the use of effective treatments and services, improve coordination among service providers, and improve community integration for adults with serious mental illnesses and children with serious emotional disturbances". Lest you think this is just a partisan issue, please understand that it is not. Both sides of the aisle have had a hand in the steps arriving to this point and it is a fact that in 2001, President George W. Bush worked with U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy to pass the federal "No Child Left Behind" legislation. The No Child Left Behind Act is already carrying forward the ideas of expanding mental health in the schools and early identification. Here is just one excerpt from NCLB legislation:

Subpart 14 — Grants to Improve the Mental Health of Children
(a) AUTHORIZATION- The Secretary is authorized to award grants to, or enter into contracts or cooperative agreements with, State educational agencies, local educational agencies, or Indian tribes, for the purpose of increasing student access to quality mental health care by developing innovative programs to link local school systems with the local mental health system. Consider the Surgeon General's report which came out of the Clinton administration in 1999. Foreword and Preface This report says that about 20% (one of five) of Americans younger than 18 has a diagnosable mental disorder, and 10% have serious, impairing mental illnesses. It further states that fewer than 20% of them receive treatment. It says that children are just about as likely as adults to have mental illness, but much less is known about childhood disorders and safe, effective treatments for them. So according to this it means that if we all looked around at 5 children surrounding us, would we say that one of them must have a mental disorder. Chapter 3: Children and Mental Health (Table 3-1), and Conclusions We all know that NCLB includes provisions for expanding school-based mental health programs. This also fits with the report of The New Freedom in Mental Health Commission, which stressed that "schools must be partners in the mental health care of our children." The Commission's vision statement reads as follows: "We envision a future when everyone with a mental illness will recover, a future when mental illnesses can be prevented or cured, a future when mental illnesses are detected early, and a future when everyone with a mental illness at any stage of life has access to effective treatment and supports - essentials for living, working, learning, and participating fully in the community." If you read the New Freedom Commission's goals and recommendations you will see on document pages 57-61 (PDF pages 65-70) that they discuss these key points among others: 1. "Screen for mental disorders in primary health care, across the life span, and connect to treatment and supports." 2. "Schools are in a key position to identify mental health problems early and to provide a link to appropriate services. (because) almost one-fifth of the population passes through the Nation's schools on any given weekday." 3. "Quality screening and early intervention should occur in readily accessible, low-stigma settings such as primary health care facilities and schools." 4. Recommendation of early intervention programs such as the " Nurse-Family Partnership.. a nurse visits the homes of high-risk women when pregnancy begins, and continues for the first year of the child's life." There is also the Columbia University TeenScreen® Program. Teenscreen works by creating partnerships with schools and communities and helping them to implement their own screening programs to identify at-risk teens and pre-teens. The program is now used in high schools and other settings in 26 states. It was developed under the leadership of David Shaffer, M.D., the Director of the Columbia University's Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. The stated goal is to build a coordinated system of prevention, early intervention and treatment for children and their families through schools, communities and health care agencies. As a result many states have plans in the works to implement aspects of this initiative, and Illinois recently signed into law, the bill HB2900 The Children's Mental Health Act. It was passed in the Illinois General Assembly last spring. It was sponsored in the Illinois House by State Representatives Julie Hamos (D-Evanston) and Patricia Bellock (R-Westmont). State Senator Maggie Crotty (D-Oak Forest) and Susan Garrett (D-Highwood) shepherded the legislation through the Senate. The legislation passed the House with a 107 to 5 vote, and the Senate unanimously. The Illinois plan is the first in the nation to have progressed thus far, although even as early as 2001, in Oregon, the legislature passed SB 965 and HB 3659 that was signed by Governor Kitzhaber, allowing for state social workers to go into homes and evaluate all first born children. This was all done under mental health. We cannot stress the importance of keeping tabs on your state legislatures and the legislation that comes out of them because in the case of Oregon, unsuspecting young parents were never told beforehand, that they had the right to refuse any evaluation (More about parental consent below). A report in the Illinois Leader, Mental health plan forums end, parents concerned about findings, states that the mental health legislation will help develop a mental health system for "all children ages 0-18 years," provide for screening to "ensure appropriate and culturally relevant assessment of young children's social and emotional development with the use of standardized tools." Also, all pregnant women will be screened for depression and thereafter following her baby's birth, up to one year. Follow-up treatment services will also be provided. One only has to look at the Illinois Violence Prevention Authority Website to see what is coming with regard to the Mental Health Partnership. and their specific 56 page final task force report and their preliminary plan. In all of this, other states are following suit. You can check if your state is included in the New Freedom Commission on mental health state implementation activities, and you also ought to speak to your local state representative to find out what is on the docket with regard to this important issue. If this sounds a bit Orwellian or to you, consider that you are not alone in your thinking and many people are already protesting this vehemently, and there are lots of articles being written on this subject. NHELD firmly believes that we cannot let mandatory mental health testing happen in any state and we must hope that the people of Illinois can repeal what already has been done there. We need to rally to prevent similar legislation in any state as well as federally. It's not going to be an easy task, but it is a very necessary one. This will affect everyone, including homeschoolers. How does it affect homeschoolers? If first-born and parents are screened, who is to say that the government funded mental health care provider will not determine that the parent is mentally unstable or deficient such that the parent is not competent to homeschool, or that such a parent must comply with government directives in order to homeschool? It is not a stretch to think that this is possible, because some state government regulations already prevent foster parents from homeschooling their children. Regarding opting out - if the government declares that a parent is mentally unstable or deficient, then the government has a ready made reasonable argument that the parent is not competent to opt out of any services for the parent or for the child. Throughout all of this legislation cited, there is one key factor - all of the legislation applies to entities receiving FEDERAL FUNDING. Again, this is yet one more example of how the federal government "regulates" or utilizes its governmental "power" even though the U.S. Constitution grants to the federal government limited "powers". Remember, the Tenth Amendment - those powers not delegated specifically to the United States government by the Constitution are reserved to the States or to the people. The federal government does not have the delegated power to screen the population for mental health. It is doing so through the commerce clause of the Constitution by providing federal money. Even "nonprofit" "private" entities that ACCEPT FEDERAL FUNDS are required to comply with the mandates of the federal legislation. If the screening becomes part of the curriculum of the public schools, and if the public schools, under state law or federal law, are in charge of "approving" the homeschool program for your child, the public school easily could withhold "approval" of the homeschool program unless the homeschool parent complies with the screening. Some other things to consider: -Understand this issue and read all that you can about it. Also understand that this is NOT a partisan issue, and is being supported by both sides of the aisle in Congress and in our state legislatures. -There have been more and more reports about how mental illness is really a problem. However, we should examine it further to see if indeed it really is a problem, or if it is being fabricated. Consider who is to gain by making this a national issue. The American Psychological Association, and their legion of psychologists stand to gain, as do corporations, pharmaceutical companies, testing companies and researchers. -Unqualified persons will be doing testing and reporting and one can readily see this by viewing some of the websites of companies selling the "tools" to do the testing. One such testing tool is the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children - which was developed by the scientists at NIMH (National Institute of Mental Health) With training fees of $300 to $1000 per day per person to learn how to administer this it would seem this would be a big moneymaker, especially if law mandates it. They have a whole laundry list of disorders that they test for. - The bigger issue is what is normal? Is there a normal for everyone? Who defines that "normal" standard? Will it be o.k. to get angry, be sad, have an outburst, be belligerent? Will control of our lives and thoughts be accomplished not just through coercion (as in Hitler's time) but now through mass medication? What right does the state have to decide what is mentally right for any person? As an Illinois resident pointedly and eloquently stated in an Illinois public meeting. "Benevolent programs, done with the best of intentions, are the road to tyranny." Of course the issue at hand is all about the screening, labeling and drugging of ALL 270+ million Americans. Aldous Huxley, author of "Brave New World" was apparently not writing complete fiction. -Some provisions which require parental consent or other opt out procedures may in fact be meaningless and you need to check any legislation for these provisions. In the Illinois Children's Privacy Protection and Parental Empowerment Act, Jan 2004, there is a provision that says any governmental agencies are exempt from information brokering and they may use that as a back door to get around rules governing those activities. Additionally, If your local mental health screening program is approved by the Board of Education as part of the educational program, you are not required to get active parental consent under Protection of Pupil Rights Act (also at: PPRA). If the screening will be given to all students, as opposed to some, it becomes part of the curriculum and no longer requires active parental consent! Meanwhile in the Senate - people like Ted Kennedy have been stalling legislation that would Support the Child Medication Act (SB 1390) This legislation prohibits schools from coercing parents to place their children on psychiatric medications like Ritalin that are on the controlled substances list. It passed the House last year 425-1. The creation of SB1390/HR1170 was prompted by complaints from parents that school officials were threatening to keep their children out of school unless they took behavior-altering medication. About 11 million school children and adolescents took prescription medication intended for their mental health in 2002, and many articles point to the alarming trend that the number is rising. Senator Kennedy, with large support from pharmaceutical companies, has not let this legislation even receive a hearing, saying that it needs more study. Please take the time to read the article, Kennedy ties up drug bill. Sam Blumenfeld also penned an excellent article, Should the government force drugs on kids? We ought to be contacting our Congressional representatives and demand that funding be cut off from the New Freedom Commission that is seeking $20 million in funding for their "State Grants for Transformation" program, which is currently in the House Labor/HHS appropriations bill, HC292. Congressman Ron Paul is also trying to keep the drug companies, politicians and federal bureaucrats from becoming parents to your children. Dr. Paul introduced an amendment to the Labor, HHS, and Education Appropriations Act for FY 2005 that will withhold funds for this new federal mental-health-screening program. He urged his congressional colleagues to support his efforts but unfortunately the amendment was voted down and you might be interested to know how your State Representative voted. We must also contact Congress to fight off legislation proposed by Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) HR3063, Children's Mental Health Screening and Prevention Act of 2003 (Introduced in House) which authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Secretary of Education, and the Attorney General to make 10 grants to demonstration facilities to implement evidence-based preventive-screening tools to detect mental illness and suicidal tendencies in school-age youth at selected facilities. Dr. Karen R. Effrem, is a physician and leading opponent of mandatory screening. She said, "Universal mental health screening and the drugging of children, as recommended by the New Freedom Commission [presidential commission], needs to be stopped so that many thousands if not millions of children will be saved from receiving stigmatizing diagnoses that would follow them for the rest of their lives. America's school children should not be medicated by expensive, ineffective, and dangerous medications based on vague and dubious diagnoses." Talking Points on Mental Health Initiatives – Problems with Screening and Drugging Much has been written about the Federal legislation as well as the Illinois bill. Here is a sampling and we encourage you to read up on this extremely important and freedom threatening issue. Studies state that psychiatric drugs can cause more problems than solve Illinois, eye of national mental health storm IL Children's Mental Health Plan gives legislators headache GUEST OPINION: Homeschoolers beware - children's mental health screening includes you IL Children's Mental Health Act - good intentions gone very wrong - six letters Docs: NYC Dumping Unruly Students In E-R The Millions Of Children Labeled ADD/ADHD Were Normal All Along Testimony before the Australian Parliament Wednesday, June 30, 2004 Pills vs. Talking - When It Comes to Mental Illness, Parents Face Dilemmas Over Medication, Talk Therapy Article in Education News: Proposed Universal Mental Health Screening Drugs for depressed children banned The British equivalent of the FDA banned the use of all of the newer SSRI antidepressant drugs except Prozac in children under 18 after finding that the pharmaceutical companies had withheld data showing an increased risk of suicide in children taking the medications for more than 7 years, as well as not publishing studies showing no improvement for children on the medications. Illinois Leader collection of letters and articles regarding the Children's Mental Health Act: Some doctors weigh in on mental health screening Mental Health Screening and Services in the Schools: A Public Health Approach by Jeanne Poduska and Kimberly T. Kendziora which describes the model for universal school screening. Mental-health screening of children, 9/7/2004 LIFE WITH BIG BROTHER Bush to screen population for mental illness Sweeping initiative links diagnoses to treatment with specific An Historical Perspective on National Child Mental Health Policy Mental Health in Schools from the Training and Technical Assistance Center - catalog resource: Catalogue of Internet Sites Relevant to Mental Health in Schools Psychology guidelines for CT Schools Funds to create Arizona's first Infant Mental Health Training Institute (corporate interests) The Passionate Investments of Irving B. Harris (corporate interests)

AP Wires:FDA Eyes Rules on Child Anti-Depressants

F.D.A. Links Drugs to Being Suicidal

Attorney Deborah Stevenson - Executive Director of National Home Education Legal Defense. - www.nheld.com or email: info@nheld.com Judy Aron - Director of Research, NHELD - email: AronHome at worldnet.att.net [replace "at" with @ and delete spaces]

Hit Counter