TeenScreen - Front Group for Psycho-Pharmaceutical Industrial Complex

[Guest guest]

http://www.psychsearch.net/teenscreen.html

 

 

TeenScreen

 

A Front Group for the Psycho-Pharmaceutical Industrial Complex

 

 

Updated: September 21, 2005 10:20 PM ST

TeenScreen is a very controversial so-called " diagnostic psychiatric

service " aka suicide survey; done on children who are then referred to

psychiatric treatment. The evidence suggests that the objective of the

psychiatrists who designed TeenScreen is to place children so selected

on psychotropic drugs.

 

" It's just a way to put more people on prescription drugs, " said

Marcia Angell, a medical ethics lecturer at Harvard Medical School and

author of " The Truth About Drug Companies. " She said such programs

will boost the sale of antidepressants even after the FDA in September

ordered a " black box " label warning that the pills might spur suicidal

thoughts or actions in minors. (The New York Post, December 5, 2004)

 

Procedure on Young Children

Step One

 

TeenScreen lures kids as young as 9 years old into doing the suicide

survey by offering them free movie passes, food coupons, " I completed

TeenScreen " stress balls and pizza parties, if they consent to the

procedure.

 

One tactic TeenScreen officials use is to sell the child on the

suicide survey first and after they have the child's agreement, they

later contact parents.

 

TeenScreen Project Coordinator, Kathleen Cigich, was quoted as saying:

" We found early on, though, that sending out letters directly to

parents is prohibitively time consuming and gets a low response rate.

We thought, why not go to students themselves and offer a $5 video

store coupon to anyone who brings back a parental consent form within

a two-day turnaround period. It works. Our response rate is extremely

high. "

 

TeenScreen also utilizes a " passive consent " form which requires no

written parental approval. The passive consent form is sent home to

parents and if they don't return it TeenScreen considers that the

parents approve. TeenScreen officials favor passive consent because

they say it boosts their chances of screening kids to 95% as opposed

to the written parental consent technique. What if the child forgets

to bring the consent form home? What happens if the parent is too busy

to refuse in writing? They've consented in the eyes of TeenScreen

personnel.

 

Step Two

 

The youngster is sat down and asked introverting questions such as:

 

* Has there been a time when nothing was fun for you and you just

weren't interested in anything?

* Has there been a time when you felt you couldn't do anything

well or that you weren't as good-looking or as smart as other people?

* How often did your parents get annoyed or upset with you because

of the way you were feeling or acting?

* Have you often felt very nervous when you've had to do things in

front of people?

* Have you often worried a lot before you were going to play a

sport or game or do some other activity?

 

 

Step Three

 

Based on the answers the child gives to the above questions he is then

shuffled off to a " clinician " , who ponders the bogus label to use.

 

Social Phobia?

 

Panic Disorder?

 

Anxiety?

 

Obsessive Compulsive Disorder?

 

Active Suicide Ideation?

 

Passive Suicide Ideation?

 

You can find the checklist used to label the child here: labeling

checklist

 

IMPORTANT NOTE TO PARENTS:

 

Parents are being mislead by a multi billion-dollar a year child

drugging industry that a diagnoses of " mental disorder " (ADHD,

Bi-Polar, Social Anxiety Disorder) are medical diseases or illnesses.

This is a fraud. No child has a brain scan, blood test, X-Ray or any

evidence of physical abnormality to verify they are " ill " or " diseased. "

 

Yet psychiatrists continue to pound the public with misleading and

fraudulent statements that these so called mental disorders are

biochemical or neurological conditions. That is false. They are simply

a list of behaviors that psychiatrists vote into existence and insert

into their billing bible, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of

Mental Disorders.

 

This has led to over 8 million children in the U.S. taking

mind-altering psychiatric drugs.

 

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, 4th

Edition (DSM-IV), published by the American Psychiatric Association

(APA), is psychiatry's billing bible of " disorders " from which

psychiatric screening, diagnoses and their treatment are derived. The

current edition lists 374 psychiatric conditions that have been

identified as mental disorders.

 

Yet, the disorders contained in the DSM-IV are arrived at by

consensus, not by scientific criteria. There are no blood tests, brain

scans, X-Rays, MRIs or " chemical imbalance " tests that can

scientifically validate any mental " disorder " as a disease or illness.

Canadian psychologist Tana Dineen reports, " Unlike medical diagnoses

that convey a probable cause, appropriate treatment and likely

prognosis, the disorders listed in DSM-IV are terms arrived at through

peer consensus " - literally, a vote by APA committee members.

 

Step Four

 

The " clinician " summarizes his report and comes up with an " impairment

score " .

 

Step Five

 

Based on how the child answered the " suicide survey " , and which label

the clinician conjured up and how the child did on his " impairment

score " the child is then sent off for " treatment " .

 

What treatment?

 

Drugs. A survey of recently trained child psychiatrists found the

treatment for 9 out of 10 children consisted of drugging. (Journal of

the American Academy of Child Adolescent Psychiatry 2002)

 

The " treatment " used on children with these bogus labels can be found

here: Medication Guidelines

 

" Treatment " is the long term goal for TeenScreen according to their

director, Laurie Flynn.

 

What does the Food and Drug Administration say about these drugs? See

here: Black Box Warning

 

TeenScreen — no evidence of workability

As to studies on TeenScreen itself, the U.S. Preventive Services Task

Force (top U.S. Government Research outfit) report of May of 2004 states:

 

A. There is no evidence that screening for suicide risk reduces

suicide attempts or mortality.

 

B. There is limited evidence on the accuracy of screening tools to

identify suicide risk.

 

C. There is insufficient evidence that treatment of those at high risk

reduces suicide attempts or mortality.

 

D. No studies were found that directly address the harms of screening

and treatment for suicide risk.

 

TeenScreen has no proof that their survey reduces suicide rates. The

co-director of TeenScreen Rob Caruano, says that suicides are so rare

that you'd have to screen the whole country to see a difference in

mortality between screened and unscreened students.

 

TeenScreen was established in Tulsa, Oklahoma in 1997 . According to a

2003 Tulsa World newspaper article, Mike Brose, executive director of

the Mental Health Association in Tulsa, stated: " To the best of my

knowledge, this is the highest number of youth suicides we've ever had

during the school year -- a number we find very frightening. "

 

Psychiatrists are even coming forth saying TeenScreen is unworkable.

Nathaniel Lehrman says: " The claim by the director of Columbia

University's TeenScreen Program that her program would significantly

reduce suicides is unsupported by the data. Indeed, such screenings

would probably cause more harm than good. It is impossible, on cursory

examination, or on the basis of the Program's brief written screening

test, to detect suicidality or " mental illness, " however we define it. "

 

So much for the workability of TeenScreen.

 

Suicides on decline, despite TeenScreen/media hysteria

TeenScreen attempts to create in the media, a suicide hysteria, when

in fact suicides are on the decline. The suicide rate for ages 10 to

19 fell from 6.2 deaths per 100,000 people in 1992 to 4.6 per 100,000

in 2001, according to the Center for Disease Control. In 1991, 10 of

100,000 people in Florida ages 10-24 committed suicide. By 1999, that

number had dropped to six out of 100,000.

 

The Visible Players

 

Origin of TeenScreen? A drug company paid psychiatrist!

David Shaffer

TeenScreen was developed by psychiatrist David Shaffer of Columbia

University and New York State Psychiatric Institute's Division of

Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. Shaffer is a consultant (see page 21 of

this Executive Summary report) and apologist of pharmaceutical

companies. Shaffer has served as an expert witness for various drug

companies and a consultant on various psychotropic drugs.

 

The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention sent out a press

release on May 8, 2000, that said Shaffer was their president and they

had just released a national survey they had done on suicide. The

funder of the survey? A pharmaceutical company. Shaffer's American

Foundation for Suicide Prevention has also received $1,250,000 from

yet another drug company.

 

Shaffer attempted to block negative British findings

In December of 2003 British drug regulators recommended against the

use of antidepressants in the treatment of depressed children under 18

because some of the drugs had been linked to suicidal thoughts and

self-harm. According to a December 11, 2003, New York Times article,

Shaffer at the request of a maker of psychotropic drugs attempted to

block the British findings, sending a letter to the British drug

agency saying that there was insufficient data to restrict the use of

the drugs in adolescents.

 

TeenScreen's Director: Laurie Flynn

Laurie Flynn, TeenScreen's director, searches out teens who have

committed suicide and then writes letters to the editors throughout

the country, promoting TeenScreen as the " solution " . Flynn is no

stranger to the pharmaceutical industry. She formally served as the

head of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill which received

millions of dollars from pharmaceutical companies. Flynn has a tough

time selling TeenScreen. TeenScreen has resorted to luring kids with

movie rental coupons and food and drink coupons, simply for the return

of a release form, whether or not the student agrees to be screened.

 

Flynn perjured herself in a Capitol Hill Hearing on March 2, 2004, in

front of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on

Bill H.R. 3063, when she testified: " In partnership with the

University of South Florida we are piloting district wide mental

health screening of 9th graders in Hillsborough and Pinellas

counties " . But in fact, the day before Flynn's testimony, the

Hillsborough County School District said they were not partnering with

TeenScreen, did not feel comfortable with the information provided by

TeenScreen and had serious concerns about TeenScreen including

liability and risk issues. In Pinellas County, TeenScreen is

prohibited from doing their suicide survey because Board policy

protects the identity of students when surveys are done. In addition,

the Pinellas County School Board Superintendent, Dr. Clayton Wilcox,

has serious reservations about partnering with such an organization.

 

E-mails are public record in Florida if sent to a government agency.

Here is one example of Flynn's " confidential " e-mails. She says she

needs a horse to ride and she needs those kids screened!

 

Flynn should learn to just say no to drugs .

 

TeenScreen's Co-Director: Leslie McGuire

 

Mcguire's presentation at the national NAMI convention June 2005:

 

" Getting the kids to buy in is such an essential thing because for the

most part, you're distributing the consent forms to the kids to bring

home to their parents and bring them back. So you have to get their

buy in, you have to get them interested in it. " When asked about

" incentives " , McGuire replied: " Hollywood Video coupons, you get that

regardless. Even if the form says no, you still get the reward. "

 

" I've been talking a bit about this campaign of mis-information that's

going on. And we do need your help, so what I'm going to do is I'm

going to pass around a blank notebook here. And if anyone in this room

would be willing to be contacted if umm there if, if there was a sort

of a uprising against screening in your community we have lots of

people throughout the country who - ya' know - there might already be

screening going on in your community, we may ask you to write a letter

to the editor in support of screening. We could possibly ask you to go

to a school board meeting, umm something like that. Obviously this

would be your choice, but, we are starting to create really a response

network and an e-mail list sorta' kinda thing, to keep people in the

loop on this, ummm, so I'll pass it around and if you're interested

please sign up. "

 

William J. Ruane

Investment Advisor

Although the name TeenScreen was not mentioned, the New York Times,

reported, on December 17, 1998 that William J. Ruane, an investment

advisor put $8 million into the screening research of Shaffer, the

TeenScreen psychiatrist.

 

As far back as 1995, Ruane already had a " longstanding relationship "

(see bottom of reference) with Shaffer. In June of 1995 the Ruanes

funded a professorship of Pediatric Psychopharmacology at Columbia

University which " supported training and research into the

effectiveness of psychopharmacological agents in treating childhood

psychiatric disorders " .

 

The Psychiatric Times reported in March of 1998 that Ruane and wife

Joy, gave 1.5 million to study the effects of psychiatric drugs in

children to the New York State Psychiatric Institute, Shaffer's home base.

 

According to a New York Post article in 1999, the New York State

Psychiatric Institute conducted experiments on kids, some as young as

6, with a powerful mood-altering drug and failed to tell the children

or their parents about the most serious risks. While testing the drug

on 30 severely depressed patients ages 12 to 18, researcher's notes

indicated " Some patients have been reported to have an increase in

suicidal thoughts and/or violent behavior " . Records showed that at

least four experiments used this drug on young children including one

funded by a large pharmaceutical company.

 

 

 

TeenScreen Sales Duo, (Florida Region)

David Shern and Justin Doan

In Florida, David Shern and his sidekick, Justin Doan, both of the

Florida Mental Health Institute attempted to lobby the Pinellas County

School Board to change it's policy on anonymous surveys of children.

Shern wanted the school board policy changed so that he could obtain

the names of children after the suicide survey was done on them. He

did not want student surveys to be anonymous, as they are now under

existing regulations.

 

Shern, Doan and company received $180,000 from Columbia University to

sell TeenScreen to the local school boards. Shern and his FMHI have

also raked in cash from pharmaceutical companies to study

anti-psychotic drugs: $381,664 from a major pharmaceutical company and

$130,416 from another.

 

The Tampa Tribune posed some good questions on March 7, 2004: " What if

someone at risk is identified, but there's no one who can help? What

if the test misses someone at risk? What if the test falsely

identifies someone who isn't at risk? "

 

" Liability comes up immediately, " Shern said.

 

On March 22, 2004, Laurie Flynn, TeenScreen's Director, said in a

" confidential e-mail " that she had concerns about Shern and his

inability to get TeenScreen going in Florida. She said that Doan was a

concern, that he's young, full of himself and not very politically

savvy. She said that he had never screened a kid or run a project and

that when he goes into meetings with local school officials he gets

into deep water.

 

Foster Care report warns of adverse side effects of drugs on children

A report entitled " Psychotropic Drug Use in Foster Care " , by the

Florida Statewide Advocacy Council, discovered that of the 1,180

children reviewed 652 were on one or more psychotropic drugs. The

report warned of the side effects of these drugs including suicidal

tendencies. The report concluded that unnecessary dispensing of

psychotropic drugs remains a threat to the children. They recommended

that their findings be incorporated into an agenda in order to

preserve and protect the health, safety, welfare and rights of children.

 

Study links suicide to psychotropic drugs and psych treatment

In Florida, an ongoing research project has already established that a

large majority of teens who committed suicide were on psychotropic

drugs or had received psychiatric treatment. In the years 2002 and

2003, 81% of the suicides in Pinellas County were either on

psychotropic drugs or had received psychiatric treatment. This

percentage may rise as the research continues. During a 5 year period,

2000-2004, 100% of the child suicides in Pasco County were either on

psychotropic drugs or had received psychiatric treatment.

 

Pharmaceutical Industry Front Group

TeenScreen and Columbia University refuse to divulge the source of

their funding. Their website says they are funded by private family

foundations, corporations and individuals without naming them. One

corner of the Internet did give a clue to their funding: A large

pharmaceutical company funded the TeenScreen program in Tennessee.

(See page 4, left, mid-page).

 

Simple Math

 

According to their 10 year strategy, TeenScreen wants to make the

suicide survey available to all American children. Their long term

goal is psychiatric " treatment " of our children.

 

Since 1991, the Columbia University Division of Child and Adolescent

Psychiatry has invested nearly $19 million in the " research " and

development of the Columbia TeenScreen program. Who will reap the returns?

 

There are 47.7 million (47,700,000) public school students.

 

There are 5 million (5,000,000) private school students.

 

17% of the kids screened by TeenScreen accept counseling.(8,959,000)

17% may be a low percentage. (We're only taking numbers supplied by

TeenScreen.)

 

9.9% of the kids screened are drugged, (5,217,300) TeenScreen says

less than ten percent are prescribed some type of drug. Note: This

means that a whopping 60% of kids who accept counseling as a result of

the suicide survey wind up on drugs. Keep in mind these are

TeenScreen's own numbers, actual figures may be much higher.

 

One example prescription for a common psychotropic drug is $15.56 per day.

 

5,217,300 students (customers) x $15.56 per day = $81,181,188 per day.

 

$81,181,188 x 365 days a year = $29,631,133,620 annually.

 

That's nearly 30 billion dollars per year in pharmaceutical sales

courtesy of the TeenScreen program.

 

Multiply that by a lifetime of addiction.

 

No wonder drug companies are tripping over themselves wanting to

sponsor Screening.

 

In Colorado over 350 youths were suicide screened using TeenScreen's

survey. They found that over 50% were at risk of suicide and 71%

screened positive for psychiatric disorders at a youth homeless

shelter. That's not science! That's a dream come true for

pharmaceutical company marketing types and bean counters.

 

TeenScreen Sales Reps

 

PR Firm, Rabin Strategic Partners

In Florida, e-mails to public agencies such as school boards are

public record. Hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of e-mails poured

into the Pinellas County School Board AGAINST TeenScreen. They were

obtained under Florida public records law. One was found in favor of

TeenScreen.. It was from Steve Rabin. It turns out Rabin is from Rabin

Strategic Partners, a public relations firm in New York City. Rabin

complained about a certain website that was " using misinformation to

scare the board into inaction " . Some of Mr. Rabin's clients include

Columbia University (the homebase for TeenScreen), The Carmel Hill

Center for the Early Diagnosis & Treatment of Mental Illness (oversees

the TeenScreen program), and the maker of a psychotropic drug. That

pharmaceutical company admitted hiding from the public that their

psychotropic drug increases the risk of potentially fatal illnesses.

The Miami Herald reported that the drug was commonly used on childen

in state care. Child-welfare advocates said the drug was being used by

foster care providers as a " chemical restraint " on children.

 

Check out Mr. Rabin's 10 year plan to implement TeenScreen so that

" every teen in the United States has access to this free mental health

check-up " .

 

According to Brandweek, April 11, 2005, Rabin Strategic Partners had

just hired Charles A. Borgognoni, partner, from Bristol-Myers Squibb

and Rebecca S. Hoppy, communications associate, from Columbia

University's Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

 

PR Firm, Widmeyer Communications

 

PR Firm, Roberts Communications & Marketing, Inc.

According to David Shern of the Florida Mental Health Institute a

focused effort needed to be placed upon increasing the likelihood that

children and families consented to participate in screening. Shern

hired Roberts Communications who detailed in their " communications

plan " how to sell TeenScreen in the Tampa Bay area. Roberts

Communications opined that school clinicians were primarily concerned

with potential liability, staffing/workload issues and funding for

mental health follow-ups. Roberts Communications' goal was to increase

the percentage of parents that sign consent forms for screenings.

Their plan targeted elected officials, school district administrators,

community leaders, teachers, parents and others. Their plan was to

utilize " communication tactics " to achieve the goal of written

parental consent. Their " Phase I tactics " were to get the Tampa

Tribune to do an editorial series, to brief the editorial board of the

St. Petersburg Times, to make a web page with a petition that people

can " sign " to demonstrate their support, a press conference at Raymond

James stadium, (although they did not anticipate a crowd), to get

appearances on the Kathy Fountain show and to identify sources of funding.

 

Luckily, Shern and Roberts Communications failed to make TeenScreen

palatable in the Tampa Bay area.

 

Lobbyist, Cavarocchi Ruscio Dennis Associates, LLC

According to the Center for Public Integrity, the Washington D.C.

based lobbying firm Cavarocchi Ruscio Dennis Associates, LLC has

received $122,500 to lobby for the Columbia University TeenScreen program.

 

THE DOMINOS START TO FALL

 

Hillsborough County, Florida

School officials did not feel comfortable with the information

provided by TeenScreen to implement it anywhere in the district and

did not have all their questions answered by the organization. They

stated that TeenScreen continued to say to others that Hillsborough

County had " partnered " with them when, in fact, they were only

exploring. Officials in Hillsborough County had serious concerns about

TeenScreen including confidentiality, the " capacity " in the community

for follow up mental services for identified students, the lack of

information from other school districts, the lack of written

agreements with community mental health providers, " ill defined "

levels of " at risk " concerns as a result of the screenings, the lack

of a well defined " continuity of care " and liability for the school

district.

 

Pinellas County Florida

On January 25, 2005, the Pinellas County School Board decided in front

of many concerned citizens that TeenScreen should not be implemented

there. School Board member Jane Gallucci said that she was angry that

Laurie Flynn, of Columbia University, told a U.S. Senate committee on

health and education matters 10 months ago that pilot TeenScreen

programs were operating in Hillsborough and Pinellas counties. Board

Chairwoman Nancy Bostock called the program " an intrusion for our

students.'' False labels could embarrass students and cause turmoil at

home. " We could seriously do more harm than good, " she said.

 

According to the St. Petersburg Times, February 6, 2005, Ken Kramer

spearheaded opposition to TeenScreen in Pinellas County. Kramer saw

the program as a thinly veiled attempt to get more kids into the

psychiatric system and on psychotropic drugs. That, he said, is the

real cause of high rates of teen suicide. Kramer encouraged friends to

e-mail the School Board and argue against TeenScreen. Bombarded with

more than 700 e-mails, the board voted 6-1 not to go with TeenScreen.

The lone school board member said that she believed most of the

e-mails came from people who believe that psychiatrists are drug

pushers, abusive and cause suicide.

 

Mishawaka, Indiana

Teresa and Michael Rhoades, parents in Osceola, Indiana became aware

that their daughter was " suicide screened " without any parental

consent whatsoever. TeenScreen used what they call passive consent, a

skimpy form with no warnings. Parents who did not sign the form and

return it were considered to have given permission. The trouble is

Teresa and Michael did not receive the passive consent form. Teresa

Rhoades became active in informing citizens in her area that

TeenScreen had infiltrated their school system. Local TV and newspaper

covered Teresa's story. One newspaper reported about a half-page ad

that ran in the paper there against TeenScreen: " The ad says diagnosis

of psychological problems is entirely subjective and there is no

evidence that screening for suicide risk reduces suicide attempts. "

 

On February 28th, 2005, the Superintendent recommended in front of

concerned parents that TeenScreen be suspended pending a thorough

study and also recommended that " passive consent " be abolished.

 

On June 9, 2005, the South Bend Tribune reported that Teresa and

Michael filed papers to sue the Madison Center and also

Penn-Harris-Madison School Corporation. They claim their daughter took

the test, was improperly diagnosed with obsessive compulsive disorder

and social anxiety disorder. The family intends to seek the " maximum

amount of damages. "

 

YOUR SCHOOL'S INFORMATION HERE

Just contact us with your story on TeenScreen and we will include it here.

 

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT

 

1. Does the Columbia University TeenScreen Program endorse mental

health screening for all teens?

The goal of TeenScreen is to screen every child in the United States

by the time they're out of high school. According to TeenScreen's, Laurie Flynn, their long term goal is " treatment " for " those

in need. "

 

2. Does TeenScreen recommend treatment?

TeenScreen materials say they make no treatment recommendations.

However, let's pose this question: If you have a child who's been

asked a battery of potentially upsetting questions, has been labeled

with a bogus " mental disorder " , has been assigned a certain

" impairment score " and then referred to a psychiatrist, what do you

think the treatment will be? When TeenScreen says they do not

recommend treatment it's like the gallows builder saying he didn't

hang that man!

 

3. Is TeenScreen free?

TeenScreen's promotional materials claim their suicide survey is free.

article, Gwen Luney, assistant superintendent for supportive services

and federal programs at Hillsborough County (Florida) Schools, says

TeenScreen would cost the school district roughly $200,000 a year --

$200K they don't have. " We're hesitant to commit to a new program if

there's a strong possibility we'll be seeing some [money] shortfalls.

Also, are we going to find a place for this [diagnosed] child to go?

If so, what if the child doesn't have insurance? Who picks up the

cost? Does it get passed on to the county? It can't be passed on to

the school district. And the liability factor is greater now that

you've identified [the at-risk student]. "

 

Even at a very small high school like Brimfield High School, in the

Peoria, Illinois area, the cost is not cheap. According to a Peoria

Journal Star article dated July 11, 2004 " organizing the system and

employing a part-time counselor specifically for the program is

estimated to cost about $100 per student... The Brimfield High School

program alone will cost around $20,000 for the first semester. "

 

4. Where are all the TeenScreen Sites?

It's all a big secret. TeenScreen refuses to divulge their locations

and has a canned e-mail message they send out: " We get a lot of

requests from people who are interested in locating and speaking

directly with local TeenScreen sites and this can become a burden on

them. We are not authorized to give out our sites contact information

unless we have requested their permission to do so. "

 

5. What is " passive consent " ? What does this really mean?

Passive Consent is way to get around written parental consent and an

effective method to get more children screened. Passive consent

requires parents to return a form only if they do not want their child

to participate in the screening.

 

According to an e-mail sent by a school official concerning

implementation of TeenSceen, " The interest would be to screen as many

as possible, beginning in 9th grade. The Passive acceptance style was

mostly discussed to increase the numbers from 50% for Consent to near

95% for Passive "

 

This means if a parent does not open the mail or was too busy to study

the form and return it or if a child as young as 9 years old loses the

form on the way home, then TeenScreen will accept that as " parental

consent " .

 

A federal law known as the Protection of Pupil Rights Act, requires

written parental consent before a child undergoes a survey, analysis

or evaluation. A TeenScreen newsletter (see page 3) discusses making

screening a matter of the schools curriculum as a method to bypass

this law and use passive consent instead.

 

According to TeenScreen, 15% of their programs use passive consent.

TeenScreen says they screened 39,080 kids in 2004 . Based on the

numbers they provided, 5,862 children were screened in 2004 without

written parental consent.

 

Passive consent is controversial and has already upset parents. Teresa

Rhoades is one parent who found out about " passive consent " but only

after it was too late.

 

Has your child received a mental health screening without your written

permission? Contact us.

 

 

6. Are the results of the screening confidential?

No. TeenScreen officials require that all screening results be shared

with them.

 

 

7. What can I do?

E-mail your school district superintendent and ask if TeenScreen has

been implemented or if there are any plans to implement it. Keep

things in writing. If the answer is yes, alert other parents and voice

your opposition. Let us know what you find out and what you are doing

about it. File a " parental informed consent notice " with your child's

school. Click here for a sample.

 

No Child Left Unmedicated

Grateful acknowledgement is made to Phyllis Schlafly for permission to

reproduce the following 2 paragraphs from her article No Child Left

Unmedicated, March 1, 2005. Phyllis is a columnist, commentator,

author, and founder of the Eagle Forum.

 

Parental rights are unclear or nonexistent under these mental health

screening programs. What are the rights of youth and parents to refuse

or opt out of such screening? Will they face coercion and threats of

removal from school, or child neglect charges, if they refuse

privacy-invading interrogations or unproved medications? How will a

child remove a stigmatizing label from his records?

 

A Columbia University pilot project for screening students, called

TeenScreen, resulted in one-third of the subjects being flagged as

" positive " for mental health problems. Half of those were turned over

for mental health treatment. If that is a preview of what would happen

when 52 million public school students are screened, it would mean

hanging a libelous label on 17 million American children and forcibly

putting 8 million children into the hands of the

psychiatric/pharmaceutical industry.

 

It is time the American public squarely confronts TeenScreen's

insidious assault on our children.

 

Researchers Ken Kramer records and Sue Weibert

info are collaborating on this ongoing TeenScreen

investigation.