FYI and ACTION

In the U.S. Senate, majority leader Harry Reid (D - NV) has slipped a

controversial bill called The MOTHERS Act into an omnibus package called

"Advancing America's Priorities Act" (S. 3297). The legislation, first

enacted in New Jersey would require pregnant and new mothers across the U.S.

to be screened and treated because they are deemed to be at risk for mental

disorders.

Aside from the intrusion into women's right to privacy, the distinguishing

feature of mental screens is their extraordinary high rate of

false-positive. These entirely subjective screens falsely designate healthy

people as depressed-- for which they are predictably prescribed

antidepressants -- despite the fact these drugs carry a suicide warning.

In the House, preschool children are the target of mental health legislative

initiatives: HR 3289 "Providing Resources Early for Kids" and HR 2343

"Education Begins at Home" target preschool children and their families.

Below is a post by AHRP board member, Dr. Karen Effrem, a pediatrician,

researcher, and conference speaker, who has been closely following covert

legislative efforts that would expand the number of ever younger children

as "mentally ill" thereby justifying government-mandated intrusion into

their lives.

US House Democrats Work to Mentally Screen Babies & Toddlers

Nanny State Bills Expand Government Control Over Families

By Dr. Karen Effrem

July 17, 2008

Two bills which recently passed the U.S. House Education and Labor Committee and are headed for floor debate clearly illustrate the insatiable appetite that the radicals in charge of Congress have for control over the

hearts and minds of our nation's youngest children. HR 3289, the Providing Resources Early for Kids Act of 2008 (PRE-K Act), puts the federal government in charge of what children will learn in preschool programs. HR 2343, the Education Begins at Home Act, sets up invasive home visiting programs.

These bills put the government in control as both parent and educator for children from birth to age 5. Both focus on poor families who have the least wherewithal to resist this government intrusion, but they also extend to military families. The home visiting bill calls for developmental screening, which includes mental screening, and the Pre-K Act promotes mental screening of all the children and their families in these programs. And of course, parental consent, choice, and control are never mentioned for any aspect of these bills.

The Pre-K Act and its focus on the mental screening of young children is ironic from at least two standpoints. First, despite claims of its proponents, early childhood programs are not effective and several studies have shown evidence of academic and or emotional harm. For instance, illiteracy rates have actually increased in New Jersey where preschool for

poor children was court ordered. And, data from several national studies and surveys performed by the federal government have shown very significant increases in defiant, disobedient, and aggressive behavior, as well as impaired social skills in children who are attend preschool and child care compared to children raised at home.

So, it appears that rather than improving academic and social skills, preschool programs are actually creating the problems they purport to be fixing. These programs don't help children, but instead create permanent employment for mental health professionals and increased profits for the pharmaceutical industry for the myriad harmful and ineffective psychotropic drugs that are being prescribed to children at alarmingly younger ages.

Now, as is happening in Minnesota and states around the nation, these subjective screening results are going into children's records, falsely labeling them as academically, socially, or mentally defective even before they begin their academic careers. This has the potential of affecting college, military service and employment and expanding the rolls of the overburdened special education system and government control in the schools.

The second irony is that while Congress is promoting increased mental screening of young children, at least one member of New Freedom Commission, the group that first started publicly promoting the unscientific and dangerous idea of mentally screening young children, is having second thoughts. Dr. Daniel Fisher stated in a letter to the Boston Globe dated 10/3/07:

However, screening Medicaid-covered children for mental illness is not the answer. In fact, this approach has been rejected by Congress. A superficial screening by overworked pediatricians would likely result in many false positives with devastating consequences for the children and their families. These quick-fix screening tests invariably end up with quick

Finally, this bill also gives grants to "train" (i.e. indoctrinate) new parents in the hospital with the government's view of proper parenting. These includes getting babies into government early childhood programs as soon as possible. The attitudes, values, and beliefs of the children can then be shaped by the government's view of issues such as feminism, gender and gender identity, multiculturalism, environmentalism and careers and as discussed above, may actually lead to emotional and academic problems.

Parents, even low-income parents, and certainly not our military families, do not need the government to visit their homes to tell them how to raise their children or to tell them what their children should be taught before entering kindergarten. Government should limit itself to promoting two parent families which is the greatest, most effective mental health and

social program available. Taxing families less would allow families to afford to have one parent at home to raise the children. Increasing the domestic supplies of oil would keep food and fuel affordable for families.

HR 3289 and HR 2343 are two examples among many as to why congressional approval ratings have dropped to single digits in the last two years.

Dr. Karen Effrem, is a pediatrician, researcher, and conference
speaker. Dr. Effrem's medical degree is from Johns Hopkins University and
her pediatric training from the University of Minnesota. She has provided
testimony for Congress, as well as in-depth analysis of numerous pieces of
major federal education, health, and early childhood legislation for
congressional staff and many organizations. Dr. Effrem serves on the boards
of four national organizations: EdWatch, the Alliance for Human Research
Protection, ICSPP, and the National Physicians Center.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ironically, The MOTHERS Act is named for Melanie Stokes, who committed

suicide in 2001, following postpartum psychiatric treatment including four

separate drug cocktails and electroshock therapy.