SPEAK UP FOR KIDS Child Mental Health Legislation | ![]() |
Reprinted with permission from: Maple River Education Coalition PAC(MREdCoPAC) 1402 Concordia Avenue St. Paul, MN 55104 651-646-0646 MREdCoPAC.org -> It is critical that individuals comment on the bill both personally and as organizations to provide a foundation of needed balance and opposition to a bill that does nothing to prevent more children being labeled and drugged next year. It is not necessary to have your
comments in by the date of the hearing. It is important for the public to be part of the process of shaping this legislation. PART ONE - June 26, 2002 "Mental and emotional disorders were added to IDEA in 1991. Since that time, the rates of diagnosis and drugging of school-aged children has increased dramatically." "...the rate [in Minnesota] of emotionally and behaviorally disturbed (EBD) children has increased 136%, and 'other health impairment,' which includes ADD, has gone up 930%. The EBD category is used especially frequently to label minority children. Minnesota is usually number one or two in the nation for use of that label on African and Native American students." Coming to a Classroom Near You - Child Mental Health Legislation Karen R. Effrem, M.D. ICSPP Advisory Board Maple River Education Coalition Board of Directors National Physician's Center for Family Resources Executive Board REAUTHORIZATION OF INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (IDEA) Background - This "special education" legislation was passed in 1975 to allow all children with disabilities access to public education. Congress promised to pay forty percent of the expenses to allow that access, but has never paid more than about seventeen percent. This has resulted in a huge un-funded mandate for the states. IDEA started with payments to schools for children with physical disabilities, such as blindness, cerebral palsy, and orthopedic problems. In 1991, the criteria were changed to include children with mental and emotional disorders. The definition of a child with a disability in the law, particularly regarding mental and emotional problems is terribly vague: "a child with mental retardation, hearing impairments (including deafness), speech or language impairments, visual impairments (including blindness), serious emotional disturbance (hereinafter referred to as 'emotional disturbance'), orthopedic impairments, autism, traumatic brain injury, other health impairments or specific learning disabilities;…" Attention Deficit Disorder, the most common mental disorder in children, is in the "other health impairment" category. The definition is even more vague for young children aged 3 to 9 years old, because "at the discretion of the state and the local educational agency," a child may be included that is: "…experiencing developmental delays, AS DEFINED BY THE STATE and as measured by appropriate diagnostic instruments and procedures, in one or more of the following areas: physical development, communication development, social or emotional development, or adaptive development;…" (Emphasis added.) The Problems
(1) Because states have a strong desire to recoup any fraction of the onerous tax burden sent to Washington, letting them decide when a child is developmentally delayed or has a mental/emotional disorder is like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse. The states and school districts have a large incentive to label children with one or more disabilities. The more disability labels a child receives, the greater the likelihood he will end up on psychotropic drugs. It is very difficult for parents to fight the labels when told by the 'experts' that their children are having problems in school, especially because there is such a broad range of interpretation of normal development and the diagnosis of mental and emotional disorders. (2) Another very important contributor to the problems in special education and the rapid rise in the number of children labeled and drugged is the so called 'education reform' mandates by the federal government. Since the Goals 2000 Educate America Act and the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994, states wishing to receive federal education funds have been required to implement a set of uniform curricular standards and aligned assessments that have very little to do with academics and much to do with minimum competencies, attitudes, values, beliefs and entry level job skills. The curriculum has become so psychologized that, those who do not succeed in or those who do not comply with the new system are much more likely to be deemed needing special education services for mental and emotional disorders or "academic" remediation. (Please see ALERT: HR1 & S1 cement curriculum, tests, and control of education at federal level!!! Click here for more information on this system). The Cornell Review and Fox News documented in January of this year a stunning example of grading based on attitudes, which could easily lead to labeling for special education: "School officials in Ithaca, N.Y., are requiring that first- and second-graders there be graded on their tolerance, reports the Cornell Review. The kids will get grades based on how well they 'respect others of varying cultures, genders, experiences, and abilities.' The grade will appear on report cards under the heading 'Lifelong Learning Skills.' It appears well before social studies, science, reading, or writing." Lifelong Learning is part of the School to Work program, which also passed in 1994. STW tracks children into jobs chosen by big business and the government. Success in this system depends not on what one knows, but rather what one thinks and believes. (3) Since mental and emotional disorders were added to IDEA in 1991, the rates of diagnosis and drugging of school-aged children has increased dramatically. Using Minnesota as an example, the rate of emotionally and behaviorally disturbed (EBD) children has increased 136%, and other health impairment, which includes ADD, has gone up 930%. The EBD category is used especially frequently to label minority children. Minnesota is usually number one or two in the nation for use of that label on African and Native American students. Data on "'drug mentions' that occur during a hospital or office visit when a doctor provides or prescribes a medication, or orders it refilled" was analyzed by the National Center for Health Statistics for a Sacramento Bee story published on June 23, 2002. According to that data, stimulants such as Ritalin were mentioned 5.3 million times in the year 2000, which was nearly twice as often as they were mentioned in 1995-1996. Antidepressant mentions doubled in that same period, after already increasing four fold from 1990 to 1995. What to Do - If IDEA is fully funded, the already frightening level of child psychiatric labeling and drugging will increase exponentially. There are three ways to stop that from happening. Part 2 will identify these ways.
"Mental and emotional disorders were added to IDEA in 1991. Since that time, the rates of diagnosis and drugging of school-aged children has increased dramatically."
"...the rate [in Minnesota] of emotionally and behaviorally disturbed (EBD) children has increased 136%, and 'other health impairment,' which includes ADD, has gone up 930%. The EBD category is used especially frequently to label minority children. Minnesota is usually number one or two in the nation for use of that label on African and Native American students." What to Do - If IDEA is fully funded, the already frightening level of child psychiatric labeling and drugging will increase exponentially. There are three ways to stop that from happening: (1) No more federal IDEA funding. Obviously, the schools and states have been put in a position that makes this option impossible. They are required by federal law to do something they do not have the finances to accomplish. Stopping the finances without pulling back the mandate is a losing proposition. That leaves us one of the next two options. (2) Support a roll back to pre-1991 language to remove mental and emotional disorders from special education funding. A very logical case could be made that the federal government is getting what it is subsidizing. The nation is raising a generation of children weaned on psychiatric drugs. Very few of these drugs are approved for young children or for the indications used in children. Although this makes the most sense from ICSPP's standpoint, this too will be difficult politically. Accusations of "turning back the clock" have already come from congressional staff. There are some Members that will support this, but probably not enough to turn the tide. Once a subsidy or tax has been put in place, it is nearly impossible to remove. (3) Support full funding of IDEA, but put a large disincentive in the law to discourage the psychiatric labeling and drugging of children. I believe that this is the most workable of the three options. It would support what has already happened in several states. Connecticut and Virginia have passed laws prohibiting school personnel from recommending psychotropic medications to students and Minnesota has passed legislation preventing parents from being penalized if they refuse these drugs for their children. Some type of anti-coercion legislation is also being considered in California, New York, Florida, Arizona, and New Jersey. (Model legislation may be viewed at http://mredcopac.org/update46.htm). In part that legislation says: School administrators, teachers, counselors, psychologists, and social workers without a medical degree shall not provide medical diagnoses or give a clinical test to any student. Non-medical school staff may not present lessons or activities that could be defined as medical or psychological therapy, nor shall any parent or legal guardian be coerced to seek medication or intimidated into pursuing specific medical or psychological diagnoses, psychotherapies, or other treatments for his/ her child. The school nurse shall be the sole point of contact with respect to any recommendations to the parent or legal guardian regarding a child's medical needs and may not administer medication unless authorized in writing by the parent or legal guardian through written recommendations of his/her private physician. Transportation of any student to a medical facility for any purpose without the consent of the parent or legal guardian is prohibited, except in immediately life-threatening situations, such as an accident involving physical injury. All in-school physical or mental examinations are prohibited. Decisions of the parent or legal guardian shall take precedence over the directives of school staff and school administrators with respect to application of designations such as "educationally handicapped" and "learning disabled." The penalties in the model legislation are very good and necessary, but are specific to individual schools. Since the federal government is not supposed to set policies for individual schools, districts, or states, these penalties could be changed to total loss of federal IDEA funds for the district or even the entire state. Other disincentives could be considered. Presidential Commission - A presidential commission is due to report their findings and suggestions regarding IDEA in July. Congressional staff will draft a bill in August and it will likely be debated in the U.S. House of Representatives in September. Because of other appropriations bills, IDEA may not get through the House, the Senate and a conference committee before adjournment in October. However, it is critical that individuals comment on the bill both personally and as organizations to provide a foundation of needed balance and opposition to a bill that does nothing to prevent more children being labeled and drugged next year. The U.S. House of Representatives Committee in Education and the Workforce has a website in order to submit comments at http://edworkforce.house.gov/issues/107th/education/idea/ideacomments/ideaform.htm. It is important to comment on the form as well as to chairman John Boehner, Representative Tom Tancredo and your own U.S. Representative and Senator. Background - The Foundations for Learning Act, sponsored by Senator Edward Kennedy and Congressman Patrick Kennedy was amended into the massive federal education bill called No Child Left Behind, which was signed into law in January of this year by President Bush. What is the purpose of this legislation? It seeks "to provide mental health services to eligible children [0-7] and, when necessary to promote the child's healthy development, their families, provided that such services cannot be paid for by other sources."
"Mental and emotional disorders were added to IDEA in 1991. Since that time, the rates of diagnosis and drugging of school-aged children has increased dramatically." "...the rate [in Minnesota] of emotionally and behaviorally disturbed (EBD) children has increased 136%, and 'other health impairment,' which includes ADD, has gone up 930%. The EBD category is used especially frequently to label minority children. Minnesota is usually number one or two in the nation for use of that label on African and Native American students." What does this legislation do? It provides federal funds in the form of grants to states and other agencies to provide preschool screening, parent education, social services, home visits, transportation and curriculum to support "social and emotional development." What children are eligible for these services? A child may receive services if "the child has been removed from child care, Head Start, or preschool for behavioral reasons or is at risk of being so removed" or if "the child has been exposed to parental depression or other mental illness." (Emphasis added). Problems - 1) The criteria for diagnosing mental disorders are very vague in general, but are extremely vague and inaccurate for children. The 1999 Surgeon General's Report on Mental Health says, "The science is challenging because of the ongoing process of development. The normally developing child hardly stays the same long enough to make stable measurements. Adult criteria for illness can be difficult to apply to children and adolescents, when the signs and symptoms of mental disorders are often also the characteristics of normal development." The 2001 World Health Report by the World Health Organization reports essentially the same thing when it says, "Childhood and adolescence being developmental phases, it is difficult to draw clear boundaries between phenomena that are part of normal development and others that are abnormal." 2) These grants will further subsidize the labeling and drugging of an alarmingly large population of young children with potent medications that have not been studied in that age group. The same Sacramento Bee article quoted above also mentioned 5000 stimulant prescriptions for children under five in Sacramento County, California alone, as tabulated by the State Department of Justice, and 258 of those were for two year olds. This is in addition to the JAMA study from February of 2000 showing a 300% increase in the use of psychotropics in 2 to 4 year olds and 3000 prescriptions for Prozac in infants less than one year old. 3) The federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved in mental health and early childhood issues and the record of success of these types of programs is abysmal. Head Start is the nation's oldest and largest preschool program. It has a mental health component and home visitation just as the Foundations for Learning Act does. Despite 37 years, more than $44 billion, at least 17 million children, and more than 600 studies, there is no evidence that Head Start works. According to the GAO, the Dept. of Health and Human Services and even one of the program's co-founders, any benefits are gone by the time the child reaches second grade and these programs do not prevent later juvenile delinquency. (See Let Our Mothers Go). The home visitation component of Head Start is not only ineffective, but invasive as well. Dianna Lightfoot and the National Physician's Center in Birmingham, Alabama did a study on home visiting. Their review of six control group studies showed no decrease in child abuse rates. Comprehensive services can cost up to $47,000 per family and still show no improvement in cognitive development of the child. Other problems include the review of medical records without consent, lack of informed and voluntary consent for participation, only as little as five days of training for the home visitors, unscientific or biased information presented to families, the collection of massive amounts of private family data, and families may unknowingly be giving up their right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. What to do - This bill was amended into the conference report of a very large education bill at the very last moment. It is in the Secretary of Education's discretionary fund and there must be money appropriated for it by Congress. It is imperative to speak to members of the US House of Representatives and particularly the Members on the Education and Workforce Committee before the appropriation bill for the Departments of Education, Labor, and Health and Human Services is brought out of committee. The House is the body where all appropriations bills must begin. This is a statist bill that Republicans who control the House generally do not support. Aside from the problems listed above, there are significant budget issues and concern about the war on terror that should preclude the funding of this wasteful and dangerous program. Calls and emails should go to Congressman John Boehner, Congressman Mike Castle, Congressman Tom Tancredo, and Lisa Bos at the Republican Study Committee. If it is still in the appropriations bill by the time the bill reaches the House floor or the Senate, then I recommend contacting your own Representative and both US Senators |