nut ([info]nut) wrote,
@ 2004-12-03 20:19:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Here's the plan... fuck America's youth up to the point of no return!!!
I found this article at baynews9.com... I don't know if other counties are contemplating this, but if you want to fuck up our youth even more, this is the way to do it. There are already so many ridiculous fucking "mental illnesses" being diagnosed to kids out there. There are also way too many overmedicated children who are being stuffed with drugs, of which the long term effects are unknown (and while their bodies are still developing, no less). Education has already been reduced to shit and now it's just being smeared on the faces of parents and their children. If you feel like I do, send an email to Board@pcsb.org letting them know how you feel. This is the school board's email. Let them know that this is fucked. But (and I hate to say it) write the email in a somewhat civil manner, please. Thanks.


Suicide screenings a possibility in Pinellas schools
Thursday, November 11, 2004

Shern wants to help students who may be suicidal.
When seven Pinellas County students committed suicide in a span of eight months two years ago, the school district produced a video to educate teachers about the warning signs.

USF professor David Shern says he wants to help students who may be suicidal and is asking the Pinellas County School Board for permission to screen high school students for mental health problems.

"Suicidal behavior is the third most frequent killer of children and adolescents," said Shern.

Across the U.S. last year, more than 6,500 teenagers committed suicide. A recent survey showed that 22 percent of sixth- and eighth-graders in Pinellas County seriously considered killing themselves.

Linda Jones with Pinellas County's Safe and Drug Free Schools Department says a pilot program is being developed for ninth-graders at Northeast High School in St. Petersburg and could be expanded countywide.

"If the youngster showed positive signs through the screening, then they would also be seen by a clinician and there would be contact with the parents at that point and attempts would be made to get that youngster immediate help," said Jones.

Before these screenings can be given, both the parent and student must give permission.
School board members will consider the program.


Some school board members have some serious questions about diving into such a delicate subject.

"You are planting seeds and ideas into kids' heads that were not there to begin with," said board member Nancy Bostock.

Bostock says mental health should be left to doctors, not educators.

"It's a concern of the public that the school is perceived as stepping into a medical area where they don't belong and it's very, very controversial," said Bostock.

However, other board members think being proactive could save a life.

"Suicide is preventable," said the board's Linda Lerner. "It's caused by depression and it's a treatable disease and by doing this in one program, it's going to go well beyond that."

If school board members sign off on the policy, the mental health screenings could begin as soon as next year.



(45 comments) - (Post a new comment)

with a little help from my friends
[info]jackjackal
2004-12-04 07:24 am UTC (link)
http://www.cchr.org/


P.S.

investigate you lazy bastard!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: with a little help from my friends
[info]nut
2004-12-07 11:44 pm UTC (link)
????

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]my_fancypantslj
2004-12-05 03:16 pm UTC (link)
hey josh!
i did some research on all those meds a couple months ago and they dont really know what they do to the body or brain at all, besides the fact they pump horomones into you. and if you read the side effects its really grossy.
so down with drugs up with hugs!

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]nut
2004-12-07 11:45 pm UTC (link)
kalli!
yes, yes and YES! happy holidays!

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]in_the_poppies
2004-12-05 08:51 pm UTC (link)
not trying to be rude, but come do my job for a week and then tell me that ritalin and adderol and the rest of it don't work for kids. i have multitudinous students who can't sit still, much less do their work without their medicine. as much as medicating kids sounds bad, sometimes it is a necessary thing so that the child can get an education. no one should be passing judgement on adhd and the like without first setting foot in a classroom.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]callmemrpurpose
2004-12-05 11:23 pm UTC (link)
You are a fucking moron and I urge you to shut the fuck up. Go Join old russia you fucking waste of american smegma on the bottom of my shoe fake liberal arrogant "angry at the world" moron. Your job is gay and you and all your communist brothers can kiss my gay dick and swallow a huge load of my semen.

Read the side effects on the second page of any of those damn drugs and unless you are fucking "rain man" you could see there is something wrong with that kind of so called science. Psudo-science rather. But your brain is obviously beyond damage from the drugs you've taken so I dont expect much from your chemically lobotomized cabeza. The drugs are for irresponsible parents who cant deal with there kids and the money only goes towards lobotomizing the rest of the nation.

But I will say please stop posting on my friends journal your position is entirely deconstructive, unwanted and resented. Go away you sorry little thing. You are unwelcome.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]in_the_poppies
2004-12-05 11:52 pm UTC (link)
this is so absurd, i'm not even going to give you a retort.

for your information, i've never done a drug in my life and if you ever want to spar with me intellectually, i'll be happy to go at it with you.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]callmemrpurpose
2004-12-06 06:06 am UTC (link)
you are absurd but you cant even see it. there is no point in "going at it" with you because you dont go nowhere. Its just stop stop stop so whatever smart guy. think whatever you want but I know that no one wants your stupid opinions. Josh probably wasnt very impressed with you view either.

You didn't even acknowledge what I said before so fuck off. You don't even try to see anyone else perspective on things. EAT A BOWL OF FUCK YOU CYNICAL PIECE OF SHIT!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]in_the_poppies
2004-12-06 12:33 pm UTC (link)
josh hasn't even responded yet. how can you assume his opinion? seriously, you people are the ridiculous ones. talk about no respect for your "friend." how am i cynical? you're the one saying that i'm "arrogant" and "angry at the world"? where's your evidence for that? you don't even know me. you're just misjudging me. you have no clue who i am.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]callmemrpurpose
2004-12-06 03:12 pm UTC (link)
I know you only by the way you represent yourself in argument. You are right I don't know you that well but you were very, almost, insultingly disagreeable from the beginning. Thats the part that got me beefed up and I think would upset anyone who posted something they felt was valid and was shot down so directly with no hint of understanding.

I apologize though for the most part about my immature insults.

I'm sorry josh for being this way.




(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]in_the_poppies
2004-12-06 10:25 pm UTC (link)
apology accepted and i apologize if my opening post was a bit brash.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]callmemrpurpose
2004-12-06 06:25 am UTC (link)
you just retorted

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]in_the_poppies
2004-12-06 12:34 pm UTC (link)
no, i didn't. that would require me responding to your "points," most of which were insults my students would consider unoriginal, if not downright lame.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]callmemrpurpose
2004-12-06 02:56 pm UTC (link)
Def 1: To make a reply

American Heritage baby. It was a retort wether you like it or not. There are more specific definitions but I wasn't being specific.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]in_the_poppies
2004-12-05 11:56 pm UTC (link)
oh and josh is a friend of mine, so you can take it up with him if you want me to stop posting here.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]callmemrpurpose
2004-12-06 06:28 am UTC (link)
Good for you! Take it up with yourself, I recon you need to.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

?
[info]bun_e
2004-12-06 02:49 am UTC (link)
I can't believe the remarks you decided on making obviously without knowing what you were talking about. I urge you to head on over to www.cchr.org and find out for yourself. The "practices" of Psychology and Psychiatry are based on unproven ideas that don't work and never will. Also I would encourage you to look up friend in the dictionary and see for yourself , Josh isn't your friend and neither am I, at least till you work on your awareness of this world and the state it's in. Remember that the social veneer makes it seem mild.

so remember to head on over to www.cchr.org and while your at it http://www.scientology.org/html/en_US/religion/index.html

see for yourself ,
Yosi Sonnenberg

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: ?
[info]in_the_poppies
2004-12-06 03:10 am UTC (link)
ok first off, josh is my friend and who the hell are you to say otherwise? let's leave that decision to him, shall we?

now about that cchr.org site: that site is run by the church of scientology. i don't want to get into a religious debate here, but sending me to that site for fair and balanced reporting is like sending me to the christian coalition's website for information on abortion. find a non-partisan, scientifically based website and then i'll take a gander.

about medicating children: now granted, our country (and indeed, the world) has a major problem with over-prescribing and misdiagnosing kids. that does not mean, however, that some children are not immensely helped by drugs such as adderol and ritalin. equating medication with child abuse (which is precisely what that site does) ignores many fundamental facts of psychiatry, one of which is that mental issues are often due to physical ailments. for instance, clinical depression (ostensibly a "mental" afflication) can be due to a chemical imbalance and can be rectified by prescription drugs. such is often the case with adhd cases, which, by your philosophy, we should not treat medically.

take for instance, one of my students: harry. harry is a textbook case of adhd. he cannot sit still, he has difficulty sustaining his concentration and is often frustrated when he cannot grasp the material. harry has been diagnosed with adhd by a doctor, but his family cannot afford his medicine on a consistent basis. this is unfortunate, because i can immediately tell if harry has taken his medication the minute he enters my classroom. if he has, he sits quietly, listens intently to the lesson, does his work, and even answers my questions by raising his hand. without his medication, he is distracted and often disrupts class, resulting in a lack of education for himself and his classmates. you tell me which is a form of child abuse: medicating a child so that he can learn or refusing to medicate him, thereby denying him an education.

if you still consider psychiatry to be a pseudo-science, come on down to my classroom on monday morning and see harry work. we'll see the difference between the days he's taken his medication and the days he has not. then you tell me if medicating children is a form of child abuse.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: ?
[info]bun_e
2004-12-06 05:27 am UTC (link)
when I originated communication to you it was not with the intention of having a rhetorical debate. However my intentions were of help and I understand if you didn't recognize this, I'm sure you have heard some amazing things about Scientology which I would like to know. I can't imagine why you, someone who obviously challenges the way things are in our modern world for being unjust when at the same time you are contradicting yourself by so openly embracing a "scientific" practice that has the code "for man to be happy, must adjust to his enviroment". So in other words you see per this code I would have to not be cause over the rapid decline of this civilzation, it's downward spiral, Psychology and Psychiatry are solely responsible for creating and that is incredibly suppresive. Now when you go back to the cchr website I know it's scary because it was founded by Scientology, the only entity on this entire agonized planet of ours to be taking some responsibilty and effecting the neccesary change to make this a better place for all instead of Michael Moore'ing it all to hell like you do so well. Oh by the way Josh is one of my best friends and a fellow Scientologist might I add and I will reiterate the fact that Josh is not your friend per this very good definition:

"a person on the same side in a struggle; ally."

now you see I don't have to ask Josh to know that you aren't his friend, Medicating is a form of abuse, period and not just to children. It's obvious that this is Josh's take on it as well so that further points out for you that you are not Josh's friend this is the only definition that applies since it is so important to rid this planet of suppresive and never to be proven "sciences" Now I'm counting on you to take your time in responding since you will be researching CCHR and Scientology without bias and clearing any mis-understood words you come across. This day in age being educated doesn't mean anything unless it enables you to help others in life and many people don't know that. Any questions you have I will be glad to answer.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: ?
[info]callmemrpurpose
2004-12-06 06:22 am UTC (link)
dont bother getting into it with him... you will drive yourself insane

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: ?
[info]in_the_poppies
2004-12-06 12:30 pm UTC (link)
oh please. you people drink don't you? i know josh does - at least, his party's invitation implied it. that's as big a form of medication and drug use as any. and i'm pretty sure the church of scientology is against all drug use. hey, hypocrisy in action.

give me a break with this "i don't want a rhetorical debate...i just want to help you" crap. i'm not here to be converted. i'm here to have a discussion. the point is, all i did was speak my mind and you jumped down my throat and took jibes at me instead of civilly writing a response. i haven't said anything negative about scientology because i realize that something you strongly believe in (and josh, as well). i'm just arguing this black and white view of psychiatric medicine. by the way, this isn't improving my opinion of your religion.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: ?
[info]callmemrpurpose
2004-12-06 03:16 pm UTC (link)
You spoke your mind but it came off as if you completely shot it down.

Now as we begin to discuss it your view becomes more clear.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: ?
[info]in_the_poppies
2004-12-06 12:42 pm UTC (link)
Now when you go back to the cchr website I know it's scary because it was founded by Scientology, the only entity on this entire agonized planet of ours to be taking some responsibilty and effecting the neccesary change to make this a better place for all instead of Michael Moore'ing it all to hell like you do so well.

excuse me? way to jump to conclusions. it's no wonder you all embrace such a black and white view of the world. seriously, meet me and get to know me before assuming so much about me.

It's obvious that this is Josh's take on it as well so that further points out for you that you are not Josh's friend this is the only definition that applies since it is so important to rid this planet of suppresive and never to be proven "sciences"

so what? friends aren't allowed to disagree now? josh likes the new of montreal and i don't think it's that great, so should i stop being his friend? of course not. i have republicans on my friend's list and i don't agree with them, but does that mean that they aren't my friend? of course not. friendship is nothing if it doesn't help us teach each other. you, however, have done nothing to teach me - you didn't even respond to the points i made. you responded instead, with a bit of religious zealotry that does nothing to impress me. i'm not going to judge you, if only to not lower myself to your level, but seriously - don't speak for other people, it's very arrogant.

i'm not assuming anything until i hear it from josh, because he is the person i know here. that is why i replied to his journal. he is my friend. i saw him again recently at the brian wilson concert. i think it's hilarious that this began as a discussion on psychiatry and ended up as me defending my friendship with someone who has yet to even reply to this message.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: ?
[info]bun_e
2004-12-06 02:34 pm UTC (link)
Brian Wilson there's another case of Psychiatric abuse, thanks for pointing it out to me. Go to www.cchr.org for further data.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(Deleted post)
Re: ?
[info]in_the_poppies
2004-12-06 12:48 pm UTC (link)
of course you didn't read it.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: ?
[info]callmemrpurpose
2004-12-06 06:18 am UTC (link)
Jesus john,

I'm living with a teacher of 10 years who teaches K. They are medicating these kids who are just fucking babies because they move around to much. GOD FORBID A CHILD BE ENTHUSIASTIC! She quit one public school because it was so out of hand and is working at another now that is just as bad, so dont act like an authority with some vast experience on the subject.

It's a medical "practice" not a science, buddy, end of story. Every real authority would have to agree.

I actually feel sorry for you.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: ?
[info]in_the_poppies
2004-12-06 12:26 pm UTC (link)
this article is not re: young children. i agree with you that medicating tiny kids is ridiculous. however, medicating 'tweens and teenagers is different. by that time in life, observations can be made, etc. making blanket statements like medicating kids = child abuse is ridiculous, if not absolutely dangers.

i tell you who i feel sorry for - people like yourself who can't have a decent discussion without making personal jibes at the dissenter.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: ?
[info]callmemrpurpose
2004-12-06 06:52 am UTC (link)
by the way, check your sources really deep on the "chemical imbalance" thing.

The reason the commercials say "May Be Caused By Chemical Imbalances" (emphasis on word "MAY") is because they would be falsely advratizing if they claimed it "was" caused by it and drug companies would be hit with impossible amounts of lawsuits. I know it's easy to believe the so called "medical authorities" but they are just trying to make money dude.

Pay attention to the next prozac commercial you see. There, from the makers themselves, is your answer.

How long are you going to try to argue this?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: ?
[info]in_the_poppies
2004-12-06 12:24 pm UTC (link)
i agree with you on a lot of points. drug companies are obviously out for cash and rarely to help people. this does not change the fact that their drugs do sometimes help people, however.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: ?
[info]in_the_poppies
2004-12-06 01:13 pm UTC (link)
i think you all are missing my point: i agree with you in a lot of ways. drug companies spend way more on advertising than on research - that's unethical, if not downright immoral. i agree with you that we are overmedicated in this country. however, you cannot assume that all medications for children and teens are bad. many kids are helped greatly by things like adderol and ritalin. does that mean we should prescribe them left and right? of course not. however, making statements like, "medicating children is child abuse" is just silly. you're setting yourself in a dangerous situation if you believe that is a moral absolute that can never be broken.

i just want to see some more relativity here, is all. i think you're just giving me the talking points of your religious doctrine, instead of taking a look at reality.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: ?
[info]callmemrpurpose
2004-12-06 02:22 pm UTC (link)
I normally neverjump right to insults. In fact I carried on a month long conversation with you on politics and didn't make one jab till the end. Remember? I can be patient as anyone.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: ?
[info]bun_e
2004-12-06 02:23 pm UTC (link)
go to www.cchr.org and afterwards go to http://www.scientology.org/html/en_US/religion/index.html

I understand you feel that it's possible to be converted by a reading a website but check it out I have a 100% non conversion guarantee!!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: ?
[info]callmemrpurpose
2004-12-06 02:24 pm UTC (link)
I never mentioned religion and don't know what you mean.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: ?
[info]callmemrpurpose
2004-12-06 02:50 pm UTC (link)
When you put it that way it's much more constructive though. I see your point and the only place I differ is in belief that the drugs actually do anything for anyone besides cover up symptoms. I guess thats what some people want though. More docile children.

Now there is this little fact that the more psychotropics have been pumped into public schools, over the past 40 years, the worse became americas general educational level. Wether or not there is a correlation, I'm not entirely completely totally 100% sure, but it does say something.

I do think it's given teachers a reason not to be responsible for their students. It says that the "child has this strange insurmountable "disease" and that "drugs may help but we dont know for sure since the causes are unknown."

It's a hit or miss game. Maybe it is better for some but I think we need to find a more reliable solution very very soon because applying drugs generally to anyone "diagnosed" with one of these illusive diseases has, so far, been a failure.

But like I said, it might be good for 1 out of ten with few side-effects but the test of any theory is the test of its workability and it aint working this way.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: ?
[info]in_the_poppies
2004-12-06 10:32 pm UTC (link)
well see, it turns out we agree quite a bit. i do think the whole "it gives teachers a reason not to be responsible" is a bit rash, though. teachers are some of the hardest working individuals i know (although i never realized this until i became one!) and very few are so subpar as to shirk responsibility for a student's education. you may disagree with this, but many teachers go out of their way to help kids that are ese or adhd or whatever. like you say, psychiatry's approach is far too often to simply drug the kids instead of examining everything about the patient, but it's hard to deny that drugs like ritalin and adderol can affect major changes (for the better, generally) when used correctly.

i do agree with you, though, that it's a hit or miss game - and also that parenting is sometimes to blame. there are cases, though, of kids (and adults, for that matter!) who just simply have some sort of disorder that keeps them from concentrating or whatever. and often, there's really no reason other than they were born that way.

for example, i've got one student who is terrible in class - never listens, is belligerent, doesn't respect authority, can't do his work, can't concentrate, etc. this student has a brother in the same grade, however, that does perfectly well and is a straight-a student. they both have the same parents and were raised identically. what changed one of them is anybody's guess. should we jump to medication? i dunno, in that case, but it makes you wonder.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: ?
[info]callmemrpurpose
2004-12-06 11:39 pm UTC (link)
We are probably more alike than either of us would like to admit.

Parenting is very much to blame I agree.

I would say teaching attracts good people but not by a landslide. I know several very smart and good public school teachers who are good people and the main complaint I always hear from them is about other teachers getting mad at their kids and overmedication. It is enough to make them cry.

anyway... I'm tired and I've just eaten meal of bad food.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: ?
[info]in_the_poppies
2004-12-06 11:46 pm UTC (link)
bad food - now that's a universal problem that someone needs to take care of!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: ?
[info]bun_e
2004-12-06 06:33 pm UTC (link)
As I look at this I actually feel good about it. I applaud your stubborness in not even beginning to assimilate what I put in your face. But I do realize this one thing which I'm sure you won't look past, communicating through a Live-Journal is no way to communicate. And your inital comment was rude.

Thanks for your time crayon.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]bun_e
2004-12-06 06:39 pm UTC (link)
being rude doesn't take trying. Rude is rude. This is rude. Do you see that? It's like "not trying to be rude.." but I'm just gonna be rude. Better put it should be said this way "I'm gonna be rude.." And that might stop you from being rude in the future and save you from making redundant time wasting comments.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]nut
2004-12-08 12:32 am UTC (link)
wow. what an interesting discussion. I'm only going to respond to this response... I hope no one is offended.

So, firstly, it did seem a bit rude the way you stated your view on things. Honestly, I have absolutely no problem with you having your own view on things, John. I don't expect everyone to be the same person. I just feel that it could have been stated in a fashion that didn't seem to undermine (i.e. no one should be passing judgement on adhd and the like without first setting foot in a classroom)how I feel about things.

I have been in many classrooms many times (my girlfriend is a kindergarten teacher herself). I see little children constantly (as many of my friends have children, also). My girlfriend also tells me that her kids act up a lot of the time. She often has a hard time getting them to listen. But, in the end, she has just had to exert a lot of patience and making sure that kids understand what they're studying. Those kids are not going to stay like that forever. I know I was like that as a kid, but I grew out of it. As did a lot of my friends.

For one, I don't view drugs as a solution at all (and that includes alcohol). I am not going to sit and say that all drugs have never done any good, though. There are those which I view as potentially helpful and those which I don't.

I think in the case of the overmedication of children (for ADD, etc.), I think there are too many factors which go without any attention paid to them. Such as diet (too much sugar? I don't think I need to say anything about what this can do to kids), too much television, etc. It just seems like they haven't even found the cause of the symptoms (see "May Be Caused By Chemical Imbalances") It's as if they're just working on assumptions which, I'm sure you could see, could be very dangerous. Prescribing without paying any attention to the potential long term effects of something is not only dangerous, but a sign of short-sightedness as well.

In closing, I don't agree that anyone has any right to control the mind of another person. If a person willingly agrees to be medicated, then go right ahead, but if it's forced, then it violates the very concept of human rights. Like you said, "by that time in life (adolescence), observations can be made, etc.", so why not just let them choose if they want the medication?

Take care John,
=)

J.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]in_the_poppies
2004-12-08 01:56 am UTC (link)
you're right in many regards - especially about young kids, kindergarteners especially. however, i thought the discussion here was about pre-teens and teenagers, who i personally feel are old enough to justifiably medicate based on observations, etc. i teach twelve and thirteen year olds, so that's the group that i observe on a day to day basis and the group from which i draw my examples.

that's part of the reason i came on a bit strong - i just felt like some of the blanket statements made during the discussion were a bit presumptive, especially since teens and pre-teens were lumped in with toddlers and young children.

glad to see that we got our points across (mostly) peacefully and sometime, you're going to have to let me hear that new band of yours, josh.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]callmemrpurpose
2004-12-09 07:27 pm UTC (link)
Teenage years are the worst of all times of life.

I have another point to make though. Most teenagers, sadly even some college kids, are still developing and have no responsibility whatsoever except school. Most haven't really experienced life or trying to make it on their own. But, people change dramatically once they have to make it in the world. That is something to look at.

If only based on that factor alone, childhood is not the time (in my opinion) to put them on medication because of the hundreds of short and long term potential effects it has, especially on the brain itself. It likely changes who they could become and a lot of the time these kids with ADD & ADHD are geniuses who aren't being stimulated ENOUGH but their creativity is supressed with drugs because they are too much to deal with. I don't mean every case though of course. All I'm trying to say is that this whole subject is full of wild variables and that drugs should be avoided as best as possible because they are no sure fire solution and could and have been known to pose even larger problems in the long run (dependency, bad liver, shrinkage of the brain in some cases, etc, etc, etc etc etc etc etc I could go on for 2 lifetimes with side effects)


(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]callmemrpurpose
2004-12-06 02:13 pm UTC (link)
I am sorry josh.

(Reply to this)

YES! this is better than arguing with!!... John Crayon?? WTF kinda name is that?
[info]bun_e
2004-12-06 09:25 pm UTC (link)
BREAKING NEWS FROM THIS PAST SATURDAY DECEMBER 3rd!!!!

President Bush Signs Landmark Legislation Prohibiting Forced Psychiatric Drugging of Schoolchildren
Celebrities, Parents, Legislators and Civil Rights Groups Win Victory for Children's Rights with Passage of the "Prohibition on Mandatory Medication Amendment"

For more information on psychiatric screening of schoolchildren, read CCHR's new publication "Harming Youth: Psychiatry Destroys Young Minds," by going over to www.cchr.org

(Reply to this)


[info]kenziefrenzy
2004-12-26 10:53 pm UTC (link)
Josh-

I read some of these comments at the beginning and for a moment wanted to smash and kill because the false data out there really gets under my skin. As you know, I've been through the psych crap and thank god only for a brief period of time. I have first hand data to back me up on the negative effects those drugs and labeling of "disorders" can cause (not that a person can't see it by just looking alone) and it is a wise suggestion to those who did so to lead people to CCHR so they can get some facts on the subject. Just realize that when you get upset about it and charged up over this particular topic, we have for the first time the data on how to handle it and remember, it can be handled and that's the good side of it. By the way, CCHR is looking for volunteers JoshyO : )

(Reply to this)


(45 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…