Diverd4777 wrote:

In article rH8Cc.2857$HS3.2767@edtnps84, m II
writes:


In a few years 'deficient' will mean someone who didn't vote for you.


mike


- Don't laugh..

In the 20's in the south, the Government
diagnosed Malnutrition as a
genetic disorder,
put the men on farms ( & I believe ) sterilized many of them


The provincial government of Alberta, Canada and many other places in
the commonwealth regularly practiced forced sterilization of people they
thought were off balance. It was all medically approved, with NO
recourse to the courts. Legislation was changed in the early nineteen
seventies.

Around that time some elderly people disappeared and when their
neighbours started to question their whereabouts it was found that the
government had institutionalized them for their own good. NO public
announcement OR court appearances needed. The Royal Canadian Mounted
Police were used to round up these 'undesirables., Note the similarities
to secret arrest.

The sterilization was done in the name of bettering the species.
Eugenics. When the Nazis do it, it's evil. When WE do it, it's healthy.
Hypocrisy at it's finest.

http://www.google.ca/search?q=albert...e+Search&meta=

For the URL wrap impaired:

http://tinyurl.com/3gp92

= = = David wrote in message
= = = . ..
As long as they start on people who work for the government first...

David - Thats a Good Idea and Good News !

The Bad News Is David... You have just be Drafted ) ~ RHF

..

= = = "Mark S. Holden" wrote in message
= = = ...

- - - - - S N I P - - - - -


Hi Frank

I think this is getting blown out of proportion by critics.

I am concerned it could develop into a bloated program, but there is already a federal mental health program in place based on block grants. While it's a limited system, it does what it's supposed to do pretty well.

Mental health is already a growing industry - getting people who need help treatment sooner will make it more efficient.

I expect the mandatory part of this to be offering the tests to everyone. (Making them them available)

One benefit of this will be people will start to realize mental health is part of the big picture of health.

Depression screening might be included in schools much like hearing and vision tests are.

Here's an on line depression screening test:

http://www.depression-screening.org/screeningtest/screeningtest.htm

A google search will bring up others.

Depression is the most common form of mental illness, and while they're still learning, (as they are about just about every branch of medicine) they've got treatments that work pretty well. Part of the problem is many people who are depressed don't
realize they could be treated, or they're afraid the stigma of being treated would hurt them in the future. Consider what happened to Thomas Eagleton.

As for Ritalin, I'm not sure what the deal is in your neck of the woods, but around here, you can say "Thanks but no thanks" if they suggest Ritalin - and the consequences are if Finster is disruptive in class, you need to find an alternative treatment,
or they'll put him in a special class so he won't keep other students from learning, or you'll need to find a new school. Seems pretty reasonable to me.

MSH,

If like the AIDS Funding for Africa Bush Administration increases
the US {Federal} funding by several times with better spending
controls then this can be a good thing for the Mentally Ill.
Especially early childhood Mental Illness. But there are always
some who see anything that "The Government" does as some Evil Plot
to 'harm them' or to 'take away their rights'.

~ RHF

..

"RHF" wrote in message
m...


I thought that the 'primary focus' of this program was "Children".
Identifying Childhood Mental Illness early and then treating
it so that the child could have an opportunity at a 'normal' life;
before most of their Learning Years are 'wasted' due to the illness.

We may not Test them all...

We may not Help them all...

We may not Cure them all...

BUT - Can we at least "TRY To Do Some Good", and attempt to make
a potentially better life for those who simply have a childhood
illness through: early detection, help, prevention and medication.

God Bless the Children - Keep them Safe from Harm ~ RHF
[ Safe from Disease and Illness. ]


Did you bother to read this part?

"a sweeping mental health
initiative that recommends screening for every citizen and promotes
the use of expensive antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs"

The kid part is a smokescreen. The people putting forth this thing figure
nobody's going to gripe about something that 'helps the children'. Try to
have open eyes. If this is true, it's something we should ALL be against,
since it has a 100% chance of being abused/misused.

Brenda Ann Dyer wrote:


Did you bother to read this part?

"a sweeping mental health
initiative that recommends screening for every citizen and promotes
the use of expensive antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs"

The kid part is a smokescreen. The people putting forth this thing figure
nobody's going to gripe about something that 'helps the children'. Try to
have open eyes. If this is true, it's something we should ALL be against,
since it has a 100% chance of being abused/misused.




If you'd like to read the final report of the New Freedom Commission the
article at the beginning of this thread was criticizing, it's available at:

http://www.nami.org/Content/ContentGroups/Home4/Home_Page_Spotlights/Spotlight_4/FinalReport.pdf

It is rather long - but this is the actual report.

If nothing else, reading the executive summary will put you in a better
position to understand what they recommend and why.

My feeling is the article at the start of the thread was a smoke screen
- intended to gin up protests before an actual proposal is even made.

Naturally, it will be important to make sure any legislation derived
from this report follows the spirit and intent of the commission's
report before deciding if it's a good bill.

"Mark S. Holden" wrote in message
...

If you'd like to read the final report of the New Freedom Commission the
article at the beginning of this thread was criticizing, it's available
at:


http://www.nami.org/Content/ContentG...tlights/Spotli
ght_4/FinalReport.pdf

It is rather long - but this is the actual report.

If nothing else, reading the executive summary will put you in a better
position to understand what they recommend and why.

My feeling is the article at the start of the thread was a smoke screen
- intended to gin up protests before an actual proposal is even made.

Naturally, it will be important to make sure any legislation derived
from this report follows the spirit and intent of the commission's
report before deciding if it's a good bill.


I couldn't see any justification for the use of the original article's term
"manditory" beyond this sentence from the New Freedom Commission's report:

"In a transformed mental health system, the
early detection of mental health problems in
children and adults - through routine and
comprehensive testing and screening - will
be an expected and typical occurrence. "

Still, the phrase "routine and comprehensive testing and screening" deserves
some attention. I really doubt routine and comprehensive testing and
screening is a good idea for people with no symptoms and no risk factors.
Consider testing for cancer. Testing healthy people who have no symptoms
and no risk factors will result in a number of false positives. A number of
people will suffer needless anxiety and some of those will get inapproiate
treatment.

Frank Dresser

Frank Dresser wrote:

"Mark S. Holden" wrote in message
...

If you'd like to read the final report of the New Freedom Commission the
article at the beginning of this thread was criticizing, it's available
at:


http://www.nami.org/Content/ContentG...tlights/Spotli
ght_4/FinalReport.pdf

It is rather long - but this is the actual report.

If nothing else, reading the executive summary will put you in a better
position to understand what they recommend and why.

My feeling is the article at the start of the thread was a smoke screen
- intended to gin up protests before an actual proposal is even made.

Naturally, it will be important to make sure any legislation derived
from this report follows the spirit and intent of the commission's
report before deciding if it's a good bill.


I couldn't see any justification for the use of the original article's term
"manditory" beyond this sentence from the New Freedom Commission's report:

"In a transformed mental health system, the
early detection of mental health problems in
children and adults - through routine and
comprehensive testing and screening - will
be an expected and typical occurrence. "

Still, the phrase "routine and comprehensive testing and screening" deserves
some attention. I really doubt routine and comprehensive testing and
screening is a good idea for people with no symptoms and no risk factors.
Consider testing for cancer. Testing healthy people who have no symptoms
and no risk factors will result in a number of false positives. A number of
people will suffer needless anxiety and some of those will get inapproiate
treatment.

Frank Dresser


My best guess is the word "mandatory" was used by someone who doesn't like GWB, or a Scientologist. (They don't like psychiatry.) It was intended to get you to react negatively.

I expect the routine screening will be a computer program - similar to the one I provided a link for earlier, but it'll include a few questions designed to screen for problems other than depression too.

Most folks will get boring results and that will be the end of it. Folks with a score indicating a possible problem will probably get sent home with a note suggesting furthur testing, and letting them know where they can get it.

= = = "Brenda Ann Dyer" wrote in message
= = = ...
"RHF" wrote in message
m...


I thought that the 'primary focus' of this program was "Children".
Identifying Childhood Mental Illness early and then treating
it so that the child could have an opportunity at a 'normal' life;
before most of their Learning Years are 'wasted' due to the illness.

We may not Test them all...

We may not Help them all...

We may not Cure them all...

BUT - Can we at least "TRY To Do Some Good", and attempt to make
a potentially better life for those who simply have a childhood
illness through: early detection, help, prevention and medication.

God Bless the Children - Keep them Safe from Harm ~ RHF
[ Safe from Disease and Illness. ]


Did you bother to read this part?

"a sweeping mental health
initiative that recommends screening for every citizen and promotes
the use of expensive antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs"

The kid part is a smokescreen. The people putting forth this thing figure
nobody's going to gripe about something that 'helps the children'. Try to
have open eyes. If this is true, it's something we should ALL be against,
since it has a 100% chance of being abused/misused.


BAD,

My "EYES ARE OPEN" - But I do not see 'evil government'
behind every good idea to help people in need of help.

If people are 'clinically' "Ill" and need help should they not
provoded some help if they want it ? ? ? {Personal Wellbeing}

More importantly, if people are beyond clinical Illness and
are in-fact Disfunctional and Acting-in-a-Manner that is Harmful
to themselves or others, should they not be provided Help if
they want it or not ? ? ? {Public Health and Human Safety}

Should not the Homeless be provided a Home and a Safer Environment
to Live-in; vice left to slowly deteriorate and die in the streets ?
Note: I say this because the majority of the Homeless are people
who suffer from both Mental Illness and Substance Abuse Problems.

In the Spirit of Loving Kindness:
Should we not be 'our' Brother & Sisters Keepers ?

~ RHF

..

"Mark S. Holden" wrote in message ...

Early diagnosis and treatment is cost effective. Everybody wins.


I read once that nine out of ten kids with a mental disorder receive
no treatment whatsoever.

Be wary of misuse; i.e, to misdiagnose one's opponents and lock them
up. Then you end up with a Soviet-style system.

If that can be avoided, the proposal has merit.

RHF wrote:

In the Spirit of Loving Kindness:
Should we not be 'our' Brother & Sisters Keepers ?


As in Guantanamo and Abu Graib? I think the world has seen enough of
Washington's compassion for their fellow human beings.



mike