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.