Depression Medications - Universal Mental Health Screening Of Children In The Schools

Author

Universal Mental Health Screening Of Children In The Schools

Psi

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

http://groups.msn.com/psychbusters
Decoding Psychiatric Propaganda

--

A Declaration Of Refusal To Comply With Any New Freedom Commission
Mandate For Universal Mental Health Screening Of Children In The
Schools

Our declaration of refusal is a vigorous response to and rejection of
the recommendations of the President's New Freedom Commission on
mental health policy in the United States, a health policy that would
mandate virtually universal mental health screening, including the 52
million children and 6 million adults in the public schools. We prefer
to call it the "New Intrusion Commission." Its recommendations are a
direct assault on child and family privacy, and a real threat to our
children's well-being. Already, about 9 million school age children
are on very dangerous psychotropic drugs, all for alleged "mental
illnesses" like so-called ADHD, none of which have been validated as
real diseases by scientific medicine. The New Freedom Commission wants
to even more vigorously pursue the labeling and drugging of our
children, by screening ALL children and adults in the public schools
(and elsewhere) for signs of possible "mental illness." This really
means they are actively pursuing an expansion of the child market for
psychiatric pharmaceuticals.

This declaration will be used in our effort to halt the policy
recommendations of the New Freedom Commission. We invite all concerned
citizens to sign on to this declaration and defend our space to allow
our children to grow and learn without labels and drugs, and to make
parenting decisions without pressure from various governmental agents.

The New Freedom Commission report states that "Schools are in a key
position to identify mental health problems early, and to provide a
link to appropriate services." We know that many of the New Freedom
commissioners are linked directly or indirectly to the Texas Medical
Algorithm Project (TMAP), which provides formulas recommending
specific psychotropic drugs to treat various "mental illnesses."
According to whistleblower reports, TMAP pushes an off-label drug
marketing scheme that appears to skirt federal law. We know,
therefore, that this commission's recommendations are intended to
encourage an expansion of the fact that "appropriate services" in
today's psychiatric world means psychotropic drugs, and that there are
already an estimated 9-million school-age children on psychiatric
drugs. We consider this to represent a tragic situation, and a clear
and present danger to our children.

This extraordinary intrusion of psychiatry into our schools shows a
blatant disregard of the public will, as demonstrated in the first
four years of this millennium by a number of resolutions, education
department statements and state laws, all defending a parent's right
to make treatment decisions for a child without coercion, and a
child's right to education without psychiatric labeling and drugs.
Through 2003, there have been at least 46 state bills or resolutions
supporting parental choice, in 28 states, that have either passed, or
are still pending action, across the United States.

We ask that our legislators and educational leaders discard the New
Freedom Commission recommendations of extraordinary intrusion of
psychiatry into our schools, and refocus on authentic education.

We object to the New Freedom Commission recommendations for many
reasons; these include scientific, legal, and moral or philosophic
objections.

Scientifically, we are aware that the Commission report is based on
the same pseudoscience that has already resulted in the psychiatric
drugging of an estimate 9 million school-age children, over 15% of our
young people. The two most important scientific objections are:

1. No children's behavioral problem routinely seen by a psychiatrist
or other physician has been scientifically demonstrated to be of
biological or genetic causation. There is no objective test, no
confirmatory physical or chemical abnormality, for Attention Deficit
Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD),
Depression, Bipolar Disorder, Schizophrenia, or any of the other
childhood diagnoses popular among psychiatrists. These diagnoses are
wholly subjective, based on judgments of what is and isn't normal
behavior.

2. Psychiatric drugs are dangerous: they are toxic and potentially
lethal. There were 186 Ritalin-related heart deaths reported to the
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) during the 1990s. Because the
system of reporting is voluntary, experts believe that this figure
represents only 1-10 percent of the actual number of deaths. In other
words, from this one drug alone, during a ten-year period, there were
1,800 to 18,000 deaths. In addition, because of evidence indicating
their potential for inducing suicidal thinking and behavior in
children, the United Kingdom has banned, for children, the use of all
but one of the antidepressants known as Selective Serotonin Reuptake
Inhibitors (SSRI's such as Paxil, Zoloft, Celexa, Effexor and
Remeron). The FDA is investigating the matter.

Legally, we strongly insist on two revered concepts in United States
law, the doctrines of informed consent and the right to privacy. The
doctrine of informed consent must be interpreted to mean that parents
have a legal right to sufficient information necessary to make a fully
informed choice on behalf of their children. Any mandatory mental
health screening is a gross violation. The right to privacy is a
fundamental American value; we see mandatory mental health screening
as direct violation of a liberty interest under Fourteenth Amendment
due process rights.

We consider New Freedom recommendations to be a serious threat not
only to our educational system, but most importantly to the
development and well-being of our children. Therefore, we insist that
any New Freedom Commission policy recommendations that put our
children at risk for unwarranted intrusion, labeling and psychiatric
drugging be immediately discarded.

The Declaration of Refusal may be viewed at
http://www.ablechild.org/declaratio...20refusal.aspx. Please join
us as we solemnly declare that we will not allow our children to be
the subjects of any form of implementation of New Freedom Commission
recommendations to screen our children for signs of "mental illness."

Contact Information
John Breeding
http://www.wildestcolts.com/
512-799-3610

--

http://groups.msn.com/psychbusters
Decoding Psychiatric Propaganda

For more information see http://groups.msn.com/psychbusters

"Psychiatry must now decide what is to be the immediate future of the
human race. No one else can." G. Brock Chisolm, Psychiatrist,
Co-Founder of the World Federation of Mental Health.

Stressed? Anxious? Depressed? There ARE non-drug solutions!
http://groups.msn.com/psychbusters

M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t-September 11, 2004

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

"Psi" <usenetmike@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e5d7af3f.0409130741.f178f0b@posting.google.com...
> http://groups.msn.com/$cientologyKills
> Decoding Psychiatric Propaganda

WARNING:

This poster wil lrefer you to sites which follow the Kriminal Kult of
$cientology party line.

Tim

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

Hey Mark,

When did John Breeding turn into a Scientologist ?

Or are you just another druggie that doesn't want to hear the truth
about your precious poisons ?

Tim

"M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t-September 11, 2004" <M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t 09-11-04@lambercartel.com> wrote in message news:<Iej1d.2233$G03.1538125@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>...
> "Psi" <usenetmike@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:e5d7af3f.0409130741.f178f0b@posting.google.com...
>
> WARNING:
>
> This poster wil lrefer you to sites which follow the Kriminal Kult of
> $cientology party line.

Donna Metler

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

My question on this is:

How will the screening be performed? If it's a one-test, one shot deal, I
don't want it done, because standardized psychological testing, by itself,
tends to a high false-positive rate. But, I can't imagine much else being
done in a school setting, due to time and cost requirements. Without a
family history, there are a lot of inner city children who could come up
with some pretty scary sounding things on some of the projective tests-they
do on school assignments, even, but have had life experiences which more
than explain them. If a child has to sleep on the floor every night because
of gun fire in the neighborhood (happens, in areas with high levels of drug
dealing and gang violence), I'd be shocked if they didn't test more anxious,
or even paranoid, than an average suburban kid!

That's the reason for taking a case history, and for a GAF including
external factors-because sometimes it isn't the person who is sick-but the
situation the person is in.

Psi

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<ci5ch1$22a@library2.airnews.net>...
> "Psi" <usenetmike@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:e5d7af3f.0409130741.f178f0b@posting.google.com...
>
> Incorrect. Scientific studies have conclusively shown that the brains of
> people with ADHD are different than the brains of people without ADHD.
> Ditto for depression, Schizophrenia and other conditions.
>

If you asked a person to simply recall a happy experience his brain
patterns would change. Evidence from scans do not show anything other
than emotional influence on brain chemistry, and that is why they are
not classed as valid diagnostic tools for "mental illnesses" by
medical science.

The problems with neuroimaging research and the manipulation of
results into ADHD has been well documented. For more information see
http://groups.msn.com/psychbusters/addadhd.msnw

Psi

--
http://groups.msn.com/psychbusters
Decoding Psychiatric Propaganda

M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t-September 14, 2004

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

Hey, Timmy:

Did you actually read the words that I wrote? If so, you did not understand
them.

And, Breeding is as anti-med as they come.

Sorry that you reject appropriate trreatment.

"Tim" <prozackills2002@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:49eaf026.0409131718.121a73a3@posting.google.com...
> Hey Mark,
>
> When did John Breeding turn into a Scientologist ?
>
> Or are you just another druggie that doesn't want to hear the truth
> about your precious poisons ?
>
>
> Tim
>
>
>
> "M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t-September 11, 2004" <M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t
09-11-04@lambercartel.com> wrote in message
news:<Iej1d.2233$G03.1538125@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>...[vbcol=seagreen]

tcomeau

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

Sounds like an attempt to increase sales for big pharma.

TC

usenetmike@yahoo.com (Psi) wrote in message news:<e5d7af3f.0409130741.f178f0b@posting.google.com>...
> http://groups.msn.com/psychbusters
> Decoding Psychiatric Propaganda
>
> --
>
> A Declaration Of Refusal To Comply With Any New Freedom Commission
> Mandate For Universal Mental Health Screening Of Children In The
> Schools
>
> Our declaration of refusal is a vigorous response to and rejection of
> the recommendations of the President's New Freedom Commission on
> mental health policy in the United States, a health policy that would
> mandate virtually universal mental health screening, including the 52
> million children and 6 million adults in the public schools. We prefer
> to call it the "New Intrusion Commission." Its recommendations are a
> direct assault on child and family privacy, and a real threat to our
> children's well-being. Already, about 9 million school age children
> are on very dangerous psychotropic drugs, all for alleged "mental
> illnesses" like so-called ADHD, none of which have been validated as
> real diseases by scientific medicine. The New Freedom Commission wants
> to even more vigorously pursue the labeling and drugging of our
> children, by screening ALL children and adults in the public schools
> (and elsewhere) for signs of possible "mental illness." This really
> means they are actively pursuing an expansion of the child market for
> psychiatric pharmaceuticals.
>
> This declaration will be used in our effort to halt the policy
> recommendations of the New Freedom Commission. We invite all concerned
> citizens to sign on to this declaration and defend our space to allow
> our children to grow and learn without labels and drugs, and to make
> parenting decisions without pressure from various governmental agents.
>
> The New Freedom Commission report states that "Schools are in a key
> position to identify mental health problems early, and to provide a
> link to appropriate services." We know that many of the New Freedom
> commissioners are linked directly or indirectly to the Texas Medical
> Algorithm Project (TMAP), which provides formulas recommending
> specific psychotropic drugs to treat various "mental illnesses."
> According to whistleblower reports, TMAP pushes an off-label drug
> marketing scheme that appears to skirt federal law. We know,
> therefore, that this commission's recommendations are intended to
> encourage an expansion of the fact that "appropriate services" in
> today's psychiatric world means psychotropic drugs, and that there are
> already an estimated 9-million school-age children on psychiatric
> drugs. We consider this to represent a tragic situation, and a clear
> and present danger to our children.
>
> This extraordinary intrusion of psychiatry into our schools shows a
> blatant disregard of the public will, as demonstrated in the first
> four years of this millennium by a number of resolutions, education
> department statements and state laws, all defending a parent's right
> to make treatment decisions for a child without coercion, and a
> child's right to education without psychiatric labeling and drugs.
> Through 2003, there have been at least 46 state bills or resolutions
> supporting parental choice, in 28 states, that have either passed, or
> are still pending action, across the United States.
>
> We ask that our legislators and educational leaders discard the New
> Freedom Commission recommendations of extraordinary intrusion of
> psychiatry into our schools, and refocus on authentic education.
>
> We object to the New Freedom Commission recommendations for many
> reasons; these include scientific, legal, and moral or philosophic
> objections.
>
> Scientifically, we are aware that the Commission report is based on
> the same pseudoscience that has already resulted in the psychiatric
> drugging of an estimate 9 million school-age children, over 15% of our
> young people. The two most important scientific objections are:
>
> 1. No children's behavioral problem routinely seen by a psychiatrist
> or other physician has been scientifically demonstrated to be of
> biological or genetic causation. There is no objective test, no
> confirmatory physical or chemical abnormality, for Attention Deficit
> Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD),
> Depression, Bipolar Disorder, Schizophrenia, or any of the other
> childhood diagnoses popular among psychiatrists. These diagnoses are
> wholly subjective, based on judgments of what is and isn't normal
> behavior.
>
> 2. Psychiatric drugs are dangerous: they are toxic and potentially
> lethal. There were 186 Ritalin-related heart deaths reported to the
> Food and Drug Administration (FDA) during the 1990s. Because the
> system of reporting is voluntary, experts believe that this figure
> represents only 1-10 percent of the actual number of deaths. In other
> words, from this one drug alone, during a ten-year period, there were
> 1,800 to 18,000 deaths. In addition, because of evidence indicating
> their potential for inducing suicidal thinking and behavior in
> children, the United Kingdom has banned, for children, the use of all
> but one of the antidepressants known as Selective Serotonin Reuptake
> Inhibitors (SSRI's such as Paxil, Zoloft, Celexa, Effexor and
> Remeron). The FDA is investigating the matter.
>
> Legally, we strongly insist on two revered concepts in United States
> law, the doctrines of informed consent and the right to privacy. The
> doctrine of informed consent must be interpreted to mean that parents
> have a legal right to sufficient information necessary to make a fully
> informed choice on behalf of their children. Any mandatory mental
> health screening is a gross violation. The right to privacy is a
> fundamental American value; we see mandatory mental health screening
> as direct violation of a liberty interest under Fourteenth Amendment
> due process rights.
>
> We consider New Freedom recommendations to be a serious threat not
> only to our educational system, but most importantly to the
> development and well-being of our children. Therefore, we insist that
> any New Freedom Commission policy recommendations that put our
> children at risk for unwarranted intrusion, labeling and psychiatric
> drugging be immediately discarded.
>
> The Declaration of Refusal may be viewed at
> http://www.ablechild.org/declaratio...20refusal.aspx. Please join
> us as we solemnly declare that we will not allow our children to be
> the subjects of any form of implementation of New Freedom Commission
> recommendations to screen our children for signs of "mental illness."
>
> Contact Information
> John Breeding
> http://www.wildestcolts.com/
> 512-799-3610
>
> --
>
> http://groups.msn.com/psychbusters
> Decoding Psychiatric Propaganda
>
> For more information see http://groups.msn.com/psychbusters
>
> "Psychiatry must now decide what is to be the immediate future of the
> human race. No one else can." G. Brock Chisolm, Psychiatrist,
> Co-Founder of the World Federation of Mental Health.
>
> Stressed? Anxious? Depressed? There ARE non-drug solutions!
> http://groups.msn.com/psychbusters

Peter V'ylliki

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

prozackills2002@yahoo.ca (Tim) wrote in
news:49eaf026.0409131718.121a73a3@posting.google.com:

> Hey Mark,
>
> When did John Breeding turn into a Scientologist ?
>
> Or are you just another druggie that doesn't want to hear the truth
> about your precious poisons ?
>
>
> Tim

The truth is your wife got better with meds and left you so instead of
looking in the mirror, chickenshit that you are, you blame meds. Blame
your wife. Blame anything but yourself, XXXXing coward.

Herman Rubin

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

In article <ci5ch1$22a@library2.airnews.net>,
Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote:

>"Psi" <usenetmike@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:e5d7af3f.0409130741.f178f0b@posting.google.com...

[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
>Incorrect. Scientific studies have conclusively shown that the brains of
>people with ADHD are different than the brains of people without ADHD.
>Ditto for depression, Schizophrenia and other conditions.

And even if they are, does that give the government the
right to decide how to treat the conditions? In fact,
is ADHD a mental illness to be treated, or a disability,
which may or may not affect the ability to learn, which
should be accommodated? How often is boredom confused
with it?

As far as brains being different, there is now ample
evidence that there is a difference in the brains of
dyslexics, and that the difference is different in those
of various languages. We have not checked the brains
of the gifted as children, and these will be found to
be different. It is not a good idea to try to make
all the same, which the educational system sees as its
major goal.

.....................
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

Peter V'ylliki

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:ci5ch1$22a@library2.airnews.net:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> "Psi" <usenetmike@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:e5d7af3f.0409130741.f178f0b@posting.google.com...
>
> Incorrect. Scientific studies have conclusively shown that the brains
> of people with ADHD are different than the brains of people without
> ADHD. Ditto for depression, Schizophrenia and other conditions.
>
>
> Or wants to make sure that all families know about possible ways
> their kids can be helped.
>
>
> Key word: Recommend. Physicians are required to use their best
> judgement based on the needs of the individual patient.
>
>
> You mean you conjecture that this commissions are intended to
> encourage.... Unless you can do mind reading.
>
>
> Or a way to help kids.
>
>
> None of these seem to be overidden by the new commission. It will be
> up to parents to decide how best to help their kids. They will be
> better informed now.
>
>
> That is exactly what treatments for ADHD do for children with ADHD.
>
>
> Bullshit. ADHD has been shown to have genetic components; kids with
> ADHD have brains with biological differences with brains of kids who
> don't have ADHD.
>
>
> There is no objective test for Alzhiemer's disease, either. But it
> does not mean that it doesn't exist.
>
> There are clear guidelines from the American Psychiatric Assoc. on the
> diagnosis of these disorders.
>
>
> No, they are not. The diagnoses are based on objective observations
> with specific criteria. No observation is 100% objective, but the
> diagnosis of ADHD and these other conditions is well established.
>
>
> This is true of water and every other substance known to man.
>
>
> A Ritalin-related death only means that the death could possibly be
> related to Ritalin.
>
>
> All of which might really be unrelated to Ritalin.
>
>
> Yet all of these deaths might not be related to Ritalin.
>
>
> Good. Science in action.
>
>
> I totally agree with these as well as empowerment of families by
> knowing how they can help people.
>
>
> Parents have the right to agree or disagree with the results of
> physicians and other people from the school.
>
>
> What what are talking about? Schools have no right to treat kids
> without permission of their parents, except in emergency situations.
>
>
> Heaven forbid that we try to offer parents options for children who
> may
> benefit various treatments.
>
> Jeff
>

Good post.

Robert

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

"tcomeau" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b550f406.0409140545.24565354@posting.google.com...
> Sounds like an attempt to increase sales for big pharma.
>
> TC

Sounds like only a small step on behalf of government to expand it's scope.
When you have universal health care then the pharm companies have to deal
directly with governments like in Canada and the people have no choice at
all.
Let's see, government in charge of the schools and government in charge of
the health care so why the outrage at such consolidation?
It comes in quite handy as they can then handout condoms and birth control
pills at school as it will be free. They can get pharm companies into the
schools with the morning after pill for birth control.
The government can also declare who is mentally ill based on inappropriate
anti-government criteria. Anyone opposed to mental health screening must be
mentally ill themselves.
>
> usenetmike@yahoo.com (Psi) wrote in message
news:<e5d7af3f.0409130741.f178f0b@posting.google.com>...[vbcol=seagreen]

Peter V'ylliki

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

"Robert" <RobertJ@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:10ked3eq7mbg0b1@corp.supernews.com:

>
> "tcomeau" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:b550f406.0409140545.24565354@posting.google.com...
>
> Sounds like only a small step on behalf of government to expand it's
> scope. When you have universal health care then the pharm companies
> have to deal directly with governments like in Canada and the people
> have no choice at all.
> Let's see, government in charge of the schools and government in
> charge of the health care so why the outrage at such consolidation?
> It comes in quite handy as they can then handout condoms and birth
> control pills at school as it will be free. They can get pharm
> companies into the schools with the morning after pill for birth
> control. The government can also declare who is mentally ill based on
> inappropriate anti-government criteria. Anyone opposed to mental
> health screening must be mentally ill themselves.

The rantings of usenet paranoids are always entertaining.

Robert

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

"Peter V'ylliki" <villiki@remove.mail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns956497B597602121212@216.196.97.131...
> "Robert" <RobertJ@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:10ked3eq7mbg0b1@corp.supernews.com:
>
>
> The rantings of usenet paranoids are always entertaining.
>
Some ranting are not always entertaining.
"The truth is your wife got better with meds and left you so instead of
looking in the mirror, chickenshit that you are, you blame meds. Blame your
wife. Blame anything but yourself, XXXXing coward."

I just try harder.

Reeducation Camp

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

I am a firm believer in pharmaceutical treatment of major mental illnesses.
However, I do not believe that the schools should be conducting "universal
mental health screenings of children." I agree that is probably being pushed by
big drug companies ultimately.

When I was a kid, we didnt even think of mental health stuff unless someone was
totally crazy. Most kids didnt take meds and did fine. Im glad I didnt have to
deal with the mental health profession as a child or teenager. Its bad enough
to have to deal with as an adult. What a way to worsen one's childhood or
teenage years but to have to deal with dickhead child psychiatrists and take
psychiatry drugs.

Unless a child is severely mentally ill and hallucinating, hearing voices,
super severely depressed and attempts suicide or has similar severe type
symptoms, children should not be bothered with the mental health profession.

If it aint broken, dont fix it. And they shouldnt go looking for things to
break.

Eric

"My job is to reeducate the masses about severe mental illness. They must be
made to learn, whether they want to or not."

LostBoyinNC

M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t-September 14, 2004

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

"Peter V'ylliki" <villiki@remove.mail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns956497B597602121212@216.196.97.131...
> "Robert" <RobertJ@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:10ked3eq7mbg0b1@corp.supernews.com:
>
>
> The rantings of usenet paranoids are always entertaining.

I, too, find some humorous. However, have younoticed the deterioration of
the amusement value over the past few years? These guys have got to come up
with new material.

Peter V'ylliki

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

"Robert" <RobertJ@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:10kekif2o8pame9@corp.supernews.com:

>
> "Peter V'ylliki" <villiki@remove.mail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns956497B597602121212@216.196.97.131...
> Some ranting are not always entertaining.
> "The truth is your wife got better with meds and left you so instead
> of looking in the mirror, chickenshit that you are, you blame meds.
> Blame your wife. Blame anything but yourself, XXXXing coward."
>
> I just try harder.

No, you're just nuttier. It's not a surprise you can't tell the
difference between dressing down a group troll and your own kook-like
big-brotherisms.

Jeff

2004-09-21, 3:07 am

"Herman Rubin" <hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:ci778a$4ahe@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
> In article <ci5ch1$22a@library2.airnews.net>,
> Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> And even if they are, does that give the government the
> right to decide how to treat the conditions?

Not at all. Helping make sure that parents get information that can help
their kids is not the same thing as treating the kids or making descisions
for the parents.

> In fact,
> is ADHD a mental illness to be treated, or a disability,
> which may or may not affect the ability to learn, which
> should be accommodated? How often is boredom confused
> with it?

I don't know. That is why the children must be evaluated by a physician
prior to the diagnosis and all involved parties consulted. In addition,
other conditions that can cause attnetion problems have to be ruled out, as
well.

> As far as brains being different, there is now ample
> evidence that there is a difference in the brains of
> dyslexics, and that the difference is different in those
> of various languages. We have not checked the brains
> of the gifted as children, and these will be found to
> be different. It is not a good idea to try to make
> all the same, which the educational system sees as its
> major goal.

I don't see it that way. I see as the educational system is trying to allow
each child to reach his or her potential.

Jeff

>
> .....................
> --
> This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
> are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
> Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
> hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

Reeducation Camp

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

<< Subject: Re: Universal Mental Health Screening Of Children In The Schools
From: "Jeff" kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com
Date: Tue, Sep 14, 2004 5:54 PM
Message-id: <ci7p9a$dnq@library2.airnews.net>[vbcol=seagreen]

<< I don't know. That is why the children must be evaluated by a physician
prior to the diagnosis and all involved parties consulted >>

Exactly. School teachers, school psychologists and school social workers cannot
make these diagnoses and recommend drugging. It must be done strictly between a
Medical Doctor and the child's parents.

Otherwise you run into the problem of school officials wanting various children
drugged just for "behavioral control" (just put'em on ritalin to get'em to shut
up!) instead of treating them for bona fide mental illness.

Drugging someone for bona fide mental illness and drugging someone for
behavioral control or for punishment are two entirely different things. The
second should be curtailed as much as possible.

Eric

"My job is to reeducate the masses about severe mental illness. They must be
made to learn, whether they want to or not."

LostBoyinNC

Subnbelle

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

>> "tcomeau" <tunderbar@hotmail.com> wrote in message

[vbcol=seagreen]
>Anyone opposed to mental

yes... and anyone opposed to drug screening must be a drug addict themselves..

YOU ARE THE WEAKEST LINK, TC !!!! GOODBYE !

tcomeau

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

subnbelle@aol.com (Subnbelle) wrote in message news:<20040914234708.25357.00000326@mb-m22.aol.com>...
>
>
>
> yes... and anyone opposed to drug screening must be a drug addict themselves..
>
> YOU ARE THE WEAKEST LINK, TC !!!! GOODBYE !

That is pretty convoluted logic there buddy. In both of the above
statements. And you call others weak links!!!! Idiot.

TC

M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t-September 11, 2004

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t-September 14, 2004

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

Good post. You made the excellent points I would have.

"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ci7p9a$dnq@library2.airnews.net...
>
> "Herman Rubin" <hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
> news:ci778a$4ahe@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
prefer[vbcol=seagreen]
of[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>
> Not at all. Helping make sure that parents get information that can help
> their kids is not the same thing as treating the kids or making descisions
> for the parents.
>
>
> I don't know. That is why the children must be evaluated by a physician
> prior to the diagnosis and all involved parties consulted. In addition,
> other conditions that can cause attnetion problems have to be ruled out,
as
> well.
>
>
> I don't see it that way. I see as the educational system is trying to
allow
> each child to reach his or her potential.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>

Herman Rubin

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

In article <ci7p9a$dnq@library2.airnews.net>,
Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote:

>"Herman Rubin" <hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
>news:ci778a$4ahe@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
[vbcol=seagreen]

...............
[vbcol=seagreen]

[vbcol=seagreen]
>Not at all. Helping make sure that parents get information that can help
>their kids is not the same thing as treating the kids or making descisions
>for the parents.

The government is going to help anyone get honest
information on something which the politically powerful
educational establishment and the politically powerful
moralists both have opinions?

[vbcol=seagreen]
>I don't know. That is why the children must be evaluated by a physician
>prior to the diagnosis and all involved parties consulted. In addition,
>other conditions that can cause attnetion problems have to be ruled out, as
>well.

Are "attention problems" necessarily bad? Do you want to
hypnotize the children so they are not using their brains
for the duration of the meaningless lecture?

[vbcol=seagreen]
>I don't see it that way. I see as the educational system is trying to allow
>each child to reach his or her potential.

If it wanted to do anything in that direction, it would
have to abolish the idea of placing children in classes
according to age, and also provide educational guides
who are themselves more than just bright, and who will
not accept the dumbed-down ideas of the educationists.

Keeping someone with mathematical ability in the current
elementary school junk at age 10, instead of strong
rigorous high school and college material, taught as
concepts and structure, is deliberate hindrance with
allowing children to reach any kind of potential. I
am inclined to think that anyone who can intelligently
use mathematics could do the above; this excludes most
of the current teachers.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

Jeff

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

"Herman Rubin" <hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:cia3c6$4rlk@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
(...)

descisions[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> The government is going to help anyone get honest
> information on something which the politically powerful
> educational establishment and the politically powerful
> moralists both have opinions?

That is up to the mental health or other professionals who will be screening
the children.

>
as[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Are "attention problems" necessarily bad?

Other things that can cause attention problems include stresses in the
family life (illness, illness in a family member, difficult home situations,
like poverty), depression, being bullied at school and medical problems.

So the attention problems can be a symptom of a problem.

> Do you want to
> hypnotize the children so they are not using their brains
> for the duration of the meaningless lecture?

No, I would rather the teacher lead his class in such a way that each child
wants to pay attention and participate.
(...)

Jeff

M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t-September 14, 2004

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

Herman Rubin

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

Herman Rubin

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

In article <cial4r$8ek@library1.airnews.net>,
Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote:

>"Herman Rubin" <hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
>news:cia3c6$4rlk@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
(...)

....................

[vbcol=seagreen]
>Other things that can cause attention problems include stresses in the
>family life (illness, illness in a family member, difficult home situations,
>like poverty), depression, being bullied at school and medical problems.

>So the attention problems can be a symptom of a problem.

[vbcol=seagreen]
>No, I would rather the teacher lead his class in such a way that each child
>wants to pay attention and participate.
(...)

This can only be the case if those in the class are of roughly
comparable abilities and backgrounds. This Procrustean "goal"
is fortunately not the case.

--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

tcomeau

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

Tim

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

Donna Metler

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

Robert

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

M,a,r,k P,r,o,b,e,r,t-September 14, 2004

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

"Peter V'ylliki" <villiki@remove.mail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns956497B597602121212@216.196.97.131...
> "Robert" <RobertJ@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:10ked3eq7mbg0b1@corp.supernews.com:
>
>
> The rantings of usenet paranoids are always entertaining.

I, too, find some humorous. However, have younoticed the deterioration of
the amusement value over the past few years? These guys have got to come up
with new material.

Peter V'ylliki

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

Peter V'ylliki

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

Robert

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

Reeducation Camp

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

Reeducation Camp

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

Herman Rubin

2004-09-21, 3:08 am

Subnbelle

2004-09-21, 3:08 am