Fwd: Nevada Travesty--Foster Children Subjected to Brain CT Scans, Then Drugged

[Guest guest]

ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION Promoting Openness, Full Disclosure, and Accountability http://www.ahrp.org and http://ahrp.blogspot.com FYILas Vegas Now reports (below) that Dr. Mark Collins, director of theMontevista Hospital and contracts with several residential treatment centersis ordering brain scans for foster children prior to their being prescribedhighly toxic psychotropic drugs. According to a legal complaint by Children's Attorneys Project, submitted onSept. 5, to the Nevada Department of Health and Human Services, fosterchildren in Nevada are being overdiagnosed with bipolar disorder, on thebasis of a dangerous brain scan.http://www2.lasvegasnow.com/docs/spect_complaint.pdf Prior to the brain scan children are injected with radioactive material "toilluminate blood flow in their brain."  Medical cowboys in Nevada are evidently undeterred by the risk ofradiation-induced cancer--when they order investigational brain scans forchildren in foster care. The use of these investigational scans to justifythe prescribing of highly toxic drugs for children is an example of themisuse of experimental scientific tools. Their use as a diagnostic tool isbogus.Even The American Psychiatric Association does not accept the use of brainimaging for the clinical diagnosis of children, in part, according to itsliterature, because of children's sensitivity to radiation and to risk ofradiation-induced cancer.Medicaid does not cover investigational procedures, like brain specs.However these claims slipped through to the tune of more than $33,000. Thestate has not yet decided whether to seek repayment and has issued a memoreiterating its policy.Nevada does not have a psychiatric care provider for children, so the statecontracts out with a Florida for-profit mental health provider.   TheChildren's Attorneys complaint includes case histories of young children whowere bounced around from Montevista Hospital to Willow Springs ResidentialTreatment Center as well as other residential treatment agencies.The complaint indicates "there appear to be conflicts of interest amongservice providers and hospitals..."  For example, in addition to hisposition as director of Montevista Hospital, Dr. Collins has contracts withfor-profit residential treatment facilities to which Nevada foster childrenare being placed--so there is an obvious (to us) conflict of interest.See: http://www2.lasvegasnow.com/docs/spect_complaint.pdfContact: Vera Hassner Sharavveracare212-595-8974http://www.klas-tv.com/global/story.asp?s=9354731 & ClientType=PrintableColleen McCarty, Investigative ReporterI-Team: Lawyers Question Medical Tests on Foster KidsNov 15, 2008 This is a story about an eight-year-old boy in foster care. A boy we'venever met. He exists for us only as a name on a letter questioning hismental health treatment. But his lawyer Janice Wolf wants us to rememberNathaniel is real."Some of the things our kids have gone through, you and I could only imaginein our dreams, or nightmares."Nathaniel described vivid nightmares according psychiatric records obtainedby the I-Team. During his first of two hospitalizations at Montevista, Dr.Mark Collins ordered a procedure called a brain spect. It requires theinjection of radioactive material to illuminate blood flow in the brain.Read the legal complaint:http://www2.lasvegasnow.com/docs/spect_complaint.pdfIn a report to the family court, Collins writes the scan confirms Nathanielhas "severe bipolar disorder.""I think my concern is that our foster kids are getting not just the bestpsychiatric care, but proper psychiatric care -- that they're not beingmistreated, or experimented on, or used as investigational tools," saidWolf.The American Psychiatric Association does not accept the use of brainimaging for the clinical diagnosis of children, in part, according to itsliterature, because of children's sensitivity to radiation and to risk ofradiation-induced cancer.Read a statement from the county about the procedures:http://www2.lasvegasnow.com/docs/county_spect_statement.docDr. Collins likens the exposure to a common CT scan, "To not look at achild's brain who's had multiple treatments and is not getting better, itwould be like if you had a heart attack and I'm saying, 'you know what,you've had a heart attack before. We know you have a bad heart. I'm notgoing to do an electrocardiogram on you.'"Collins argues the scans are a valuable tool to aid in the diagnosis of hissickest patients and insists not everybody gets a spec scan.A recent Medicaid review by the Nevada State Department of Health and HumanServices identified 96 Montevista patients who underwent brain imaging. Themajority, according to the state, were kids in the juvenile justice or childwelfare systems."I've been doing enough of them I see the utility in this. I see howimportant it is to take a look at these kid's brains. If I was not seeingthe benefit, I would not continue to do it," said Dr. Collins.Wolf however questions the benefit and again points to Nathaniel. Acourt-ordered psychiatric evaluation of the eight-year-old challengedCollins' diagnosis and noted, "Spect scanning is not yet an accepteddiagnostic method. Although it is interesting, it is not yet reliable."Read a statement from Nevada Medicaid:http://www2.lasvegasnow.com/docs/memo%20spect.pdf"We are hoping that at least by raising the concern and raising the issuethat others will look also, that people responsible for our kids will take alook at what it is and hopefully support us," said Wolf.And support kids like Nathaniel whose stories come to life from the pages ofa foster care case file.Only a caseworker stands between a child and a controversial procedure.Collins insists he receives no payment related to the scans. He insistsbrain imaging will soon be accepted by the psychiatric community. There iscertainly evidence he may be right but for now, it remains investigational.Medicaid does not cover investigational procedures, like brain specs.However these claims slipped through to the tune of more than $33,000. Thestate has not yet decided whether to seek repayment and has issued a memoreiterating its policy.All content C Copyright 2000 -FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted (C ) material the use of whichhas not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Suchmaterial is made available for educational purposes, to advanceunderstanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, andsocial justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fairuse' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C.section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed withoutprofit. _____________Infomail1 mailing listto send a message to Infomail1-leave =====In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.