Is it really 90? Cuz that’d be awesome if it was lol, but sounds just like a rumor/ fake statistic.
Here is something that has not been in the news but, I think is an important issue. Our current president has formed what he calls the Freedom Commission. This commission is charged with the task of solving the problems of people with mental Illness. As a result of the commissions findings Bush plans to among other things:
-
Screen every child in America for mental Illness. This may well result in thousands of children being forced on medication regardless of their parents wishes. Parents who don’t want their kids on medication could be charged with child neglect.
-
Screen every adult in America though, he has not figured out how to do that yet. Lookout, next time you go to the DMV to renew your drivers licence you might have to submit to a psyc eval first.
-
Forced medication on adults.
-
One of his buddies that works with the drug companies has developed a device about the size of a quarter that can be implanted under a persons skin and deliver doses of Haldol. This is one of the most antiquated medications on the market. It has the most side effects and can cause irreversible damage to people.
And that is just for starters. Freedom Commission???
8 Days to election day.
You got to be kidding milod!!!
are you serious? where did you here about this?
this is insane, and by what method is one considered mentaly ill?
besides who wants to be , or their child to be on some list saying that they are mentaly ill?
And how convienient it is that its one of bush’s buddy’s that has developt this drug.
you see this is what i am always saying, this is just another form of control, first an implant fthat control’s your mind with hadol, next an implant that just completely takes over your mind…
It does seem a litttle far fetched… But if its real, man. Reminds of this short story we had to read, SQ. SQ like IQ but its sanity and at the end most of the world are in assylums and the rest of the world are working at them…
it does sound far fetched huh?
but alot of things in life sound far fetched at first…
Parents who wont give thier children medication that will help them should be charged with child neglect. If a person can function normally in society, then I wouldn’t be for forcing them to do anything. If you can’t, then you should get help. Nothing far fetched about that.
your missing the point here…
Does anybody have a theory on why Pat Robertson strongly supports bush…
I don’t have a theory buuuut i have a suggestion! try using other punctuation points instead of “…” trailing off every now and then 
here we go again…
I wish I were kidding. The DMV coment was a joke I should have put a smile there to make that clear, though you never know.
This is something that advocacy groups have known about for some time. Groups all over the country are fighting this. I’ll try to find some links for you. Aside from the obvious invasion of privacy can you imagine the cost!!!
Good question.
Isn’t it. Yes all of this president’s policies tend to favor the big corporations. In this case the drug companies.
First, that should be the parents decision. There are many other treatments for things like depression other than medication. Also, this type of quick screening will lead to many children becoming wrongly diagnosed and medicated.
Second, Until recently doctors were prescribing anti-depressant medications for children and telling parents that said medication was safe. We now know that is not true. Most of the anti-depressant medications (usually SSRI) have proven to cause more problems than they helped for many children. The bottom line is there is no proof that such medications will ever be safe or effective for children. The drug companies only research their drugs safety for adults.
Konnart already addressed the other issues so I don’t need to repeat them here.
Anyway, I have not watched any news today yet so, I do not know how the race goes yet. I did here something last night though. I don’t know if this is correct or not. But I it was reported on fox news that Bush is ahead in New Mexico and Kerry is ahead in Colorado. I would have predicted it to be the other way around.
Not quite on topic, but this could get into a whole “seperation of church and state” thing. Some people might have religous or spiritual beliefs or concerns about medications, especially ones that affect your thoughts/mood/attitude etc. Doesn’t it seem just a little too… “big evil controlling government”-y to have the government decide what is the standard for appropriate life, and force pills down peoples throats who arn’t the same?
Well you didn’t give much information on it. You said they would screen every child. With just that I would consider it a good thing. In no way can knowing there is a problem with your child be bad. The question that comes in is, what are they looking for, and what will they do when they find it.
If your insane and going to kill someone, then yea the government has the right to force you to take medication. If you see things that are not there, then the government could tell you to take medication or you can’t drive. Which is why I said, if you can’t function normally. There are a lot of things you can have, where you can still live normally. In that case there is no reason to make people take anything for it. You should still know you have it though, and I see no problem with someone telling you.
You see arlic, the thing is, that whats normal for you, might not be normal for someone else, and vice versa.
And there is no problem with someone telling you your insane, as long as you ask them their opinion on your mental status.
wouldnt you want to try and teach your child things that ppl say he cant do and help him over come this handicap (if one realy does exist), instead of excluding him by the government legaly by puting him on some insane blacklist?
When did Bush take his IQ test? What is the name of the psychologist who performed it? And why on earth would Bush make the result public if it was below average? Or did his shrink break the law?
The thing is it might not be normal, for anyone. If you have some kind of imbalance in your brain that causes problems for you, its not normal. I did not see anyone say anything about excluding people with a blacklist. I saw him say they want to help the person by giving them medication.
I think most of the people here are jumping to conclusion. It sounded like they just wanted to help. I dont see any problems.
ok arlic, we will leave it at that, (your point of view) and we’ll not toss this subject around anymore, because your failing to see the big picture here, but its ok, im not saying there’s anything wrong with it.(YOUR OP.)
but they’re those who look beyond what is written, and look more towards, “what is”, what is written implying…
or moreso, what would be the outcome of what is written…
their are more implacation’s here in what is bieng said…
but it’s dropt,
Milod i would still like to know more about this…
You could make a “what if” for just about anything. My problem is you all jumped to the negitive part. What about the people who could be cured? What about the people who could live normally with medication? You ignore that it could save lives and went straight towards saying its one of the worse things they could ever do.
Screenning by itself is in no way bad. A lot of problems can be fixed but you have to know about them first. If you think there is something wrong with it, some where, where there might be a problems created, thats ok. You cant dismiss the entire idea because of one possible problem though. Especially when you know nothing of the plan. There could be things to prevent that stuff.
I see what your saying now, your absolutly right.
What was i thinking…
We are not making a what if… We are talking from experience and things we have personally seen. Instead of taking this opportunity to reform these failing systems all this administration is doing is expanding on the failing parts of the system. If they took the advice of social workers, advocacy groups and consumers (of the system) the administration could move toward some real reforms that will lead people who suffer from mental illness to recovery. Instead, the only voice this administration listens to is the drug companies.
Well screening people without consent is the issue here. If bush came out with a plan to forcibly screen people for say cancer, diabetes or how about all “disorders”for that matter think you would then have a different opinion. Instead of relying on force. How about spending money to increase peoples awareness of mental illness. If people become more knowledgeable about “mental illness” it that would eliminate many of the barriers and fears that prevent people from getting voluntarily screened and treated in the first place.
I have seen children yanked from loving and stable homes for no other reason then the fact that one or both of the parents are diagnosed with a mental illness. In these cases there was no evidence of neglect or abuse. Just the allegation that one or more of the parents was “mentally ill”.
Another case I worked on was a women who contacted the police and a local child protective service because, the father was physically abusing the son and sexually abusing the daughter. When the authorities arrived the father told them that the mother was crazy and made it all up. Now the mother was hospitalized in a local hospital for a mild case of depression (5 years prior)but that is all. She was in no way delusional, however, once the authorities were informed that she was “labeled” as mentally ill their investigation stopped. Now, that is not the worst of it. They actually made the mother leave and left the children in the care of their abuser and made no effort to monitor the situation from that point on. Anyway, several months went by and the police were again summoned to that residence because the father had hand cuffed the son to a telephone pool and was beating him with a pool cue. As a result of this they found several guns in the house (which were not their when the mother was in the house). It was also then discovered that the father was convicted on 2 prior felonies which was something the mother did not know. Oh, but the story still does not stop there. The authorities were going to release the father after only 30 days in jail and still allow the father to retain custody of the children. Fortunately we were able to get ATF (alcohol tobacco and firearms) involved to file federal charges. Fortunately, it is a federal offence for a convicted felon to posses firearms of any kind.
Well that was a bit of a long story but, I do have a reason for telling it. I just wanted to give you a brief glimpse of what it is like to have a label as a person with a mental illness so you can understand why people may be reluctant to get help. I assure you these stories are not exceptions but, the rule. People with mental illness have committed no crime yet are often treated worse than criminals. Loss of liberties and forced treatment is just the beginning. The loss of credibility is probably the worst. Over 90% of people with mental illness are not violent and in reality, are more likely to be the victims of crime rather than the perpetrators. Even if they complain noone will believe them. I mean their just crazy right, and therefore make the perfect victims.
Anyway, we have gone way off topic here.
[color=red] This is a split topic - Part 2 can be found here Link [/color]