Get on the Bus

By Bill Simpson

November 24, 2005 11:01 AM | Link to this

The letter by teen screen queen, Leslie Mcguire is sooo misleading I don’t know where to start! How could she possibly know that “90 percent of youth who die by suicide suffer from a diagnosable mental illness at the time of their deaths”. Either she and her team are communicating with the dead or the kids who died were under some sort of treatment when they died. Okay, let’s drop the first one since it is somewhat unlikely, that leaves the second choice. So that means that 90 percent of the kids that committed suicide were ALREADY being treated when they died. Is that supposed to be a good statistic? She obviously wants kids “at risk”(whatever that means) to be receiving some psychiatric treatment to help them with their problem. It sounds like to me that it’s safer to be in the 10 percent who aren’t getting treatment. Your chance of NOT committing suicide is 9 times better! How can we believe someone who obviously slants her story so blatantly and seems more interested in the success of teen screen than the survival of our children. Bill Simpson Father

By Joe Wisdom

November 22, 2005 6:32 PM | Link to this

Dear Mr. Scott Elliott, Very well done to you sir for writing this hot story and sparking the questions which have gone unasked, and thus unanswered, for far too long. There are many comments on this article, all of which are thoroughly enlightening. Kudos to Ken Kramer. I see he has done his homework and can stand his ground in so many cross-currents of half-truths and altered facts. For these are exactly how the mental health industry as a whole has gotten such a stronghold in our schools. But, then again, I once heard from a prominent psychiatrist from earlier days (Dr. BROCK CHISHOLM is his name) that education and religion would be the easiest fields to influence for the psychopolitical agenda. As for Debbie McGuire, it appears as though you have been caught in many arbitraries and lies. I would really like to know who funds Teenscreen, for I would like to know what their agenda is. Because I have yet to figure out how the idea that powerful psychotropic drugs have done anything but further reduce our younger generation into crime, stupidity and death. Split a Ritalin tablet in half, give it to two adults and they are high for the night. Put the tablet back together and give it to a child… you must be kidding me! With the heat coming down on all of this and the comments posted indicating as such, you have much to answer for. I hope it is all worth every penny this crime ridden industry has bought you off with. And, I hope you have subscribed to and firmly believe in the “man is an animal” theory from which such ridiculous psychiatric solutions such as widespread drugging of our children have been spawned. I really hope you FIRMLY DO BELIEVE THIS. For you KNOW deep down, this is all wrong. And you will stand bare with nothing left to face your own judgment. AND YOU WILL BE JUDGED!!!!!!!

By karen kettner

November 20, 2005 1:49 PM | Link to this

My friend did a similiar test for depression. She was married to a great guy, was an illustrator and was 20 pounds over weight. After the test she was found to be” depressed”. The counselor talked her into committing herself into a mental institution section of overweight people. She was put onto psychiatric drugs. It was suggested she get divorced and get shock treatments.She did. She was beautiful She is now ugly, very fat, taking about three drugs and counsels dying people in a hospice instead of being an artist. She surrounds herself with death as she is dead.

By Karen Kettner

November 20, 2005 1:35 PM | Link to this

I can’t believe this director of Teen Screen project could think the public is that stupid. When a kid goes home and shows his parents the test and says he’s got opositional defiance disorder - that is a diagnosis. 20% or more of the nations youth are on drugs for barious labels. This woman is a total complete liar and with that I would say she is nuts. Do we want people who are nuts running programs evaluating our kids. These people are the modern day Inquisitors.Instead of burning people they are drugging them into stupors. They need to be stopped.

By Darrell Sumner

November 17, 2005 12:03 AM | Link to this

The only problem with these screening programs is that they provide targets for the drug industry and psychiatrists who do not necessarily have the best interests of the children in mind. Nor do they really know how to find out or handle why the the child is having problems in the first place. There are a lot of reasons and handlings the have nothing to do with drugs or any other such barbarous treatment. How about providing a way so that a child can be productive and exchange and interact with his parents and friends and the rest of society? There is so much to life and so little lived in it. The opportunities are boundless. Let’s put the attention on improving ability and more than likely the other problems will fall away.

By John P

November 16, 2005 11:24 PM | Link to this

I don’t trust the opinion of this person or anyone connected to psychiatry. It’s time everyone woke up to the dangers of the pseudoscience of psychiatry. TeenScreen is bound to be a failure just like all their false programs have failed, costing taxpayer dollars and broken lives.

By Terry Smith

November 16, 2005 8:27 PM | Link to this

I think Miss Mcguire misse,s the point! the reason so many kids have commited or tried suiscide is because of the anti depresive drugs an the poor poor help of the Mental Health field.

By Chris Lucas

November 16, 2005 12:08 PM | Link to this

“It’s just a way to put more people on prescription drugs,” said Marcia Angell, a medical ethics lecturer at Harvard Medical School and author of “The Truth About Drug Companies.” She said such programs will boost the sale of antidepressants even after the FDA in September ordered a “black box” label warning that the pills might spur suicidal thoughts or actions in minors. (The New York Post, December 5, 2004)

By Sharon Hillestad

November 16, 2005 11:52 AM | Link to this

I find it interesting that Columbia University is sponsoring “Teen Screen”. It was Columbia University that eliminated the teaching of phonics and forcing it out of classrooms across the whole U.S. This started in 1920 and took a few decades to accomplish, but we have nearly 100 million functionally illiterate adults to prove that it was accomplished. The stated purpose at the time was to improve the level of literacy in the U.S. Columbia University should examine themselves and determine just what contribution to the depression of teens they have made by promoting faulty teaching techniques in both math and reading. As one young girl said to me “you mean they made us stupid on purpose?” Yes it appears to be the case. Now this group is going to “help” the teenager! They wouldn’t want to make them crazy on purpose! Would they?

By Gloria Wright

November 16, 2005 11:43 AM | Link to this

“Mental health” probing, categorizing and labeling in still developing personalities stops just short of mind control! Once a youth has been labeled as mentally ill via unscientific “screening” process and told they have shortcomings since they have not been adjudged as “perfect” then hope is taken from them, personalities are affected, and an undermining of developing self-confidence and self-esteem is inevitable. TeenScreen and other psych evaluations never disclose who the “Perfect Person(ality)” is. What is the standard by which individuals are measured and who has declared that particular standard or individual as the “perfect” specimen that all mankind must be measured up to?? And what makes this “Perfect” standard correct? Again I stress this subjective “screening/labeling”, while violating individual self esteem along with privacy, is the first step in mind control by altering an individual’s self-perception. This is no different than what Hitler did to the Jews when they were compelled to wear yellow Stars of David, and ultimately to be tatooed with numerical identification. The end result of the so-called “screening” is the same — the labeling of an individual which will follow them all the rest of their lives, which will impact their lives immeasurably!

By Claudia Perez

November 16, 2005 6:12 AM | Link to this

Dear Mis McGuire, I don’t know if you are actually unaware that your program infact “does” diagnose teens or are conveniently forgetting.(Maybe this the whole, left hand doesn’t know what the right is doing, trick?) I have in my hands. A lawsuit pending regarding your program; the unauthorized “screening” of a teen, WITHOUT parental consent. That was imediately- after the screen- evaluated, and were the couselor/therapist, etc. proceeded- again WITHBOUT parental consent to evalutate the child, tell her what was “wrong” with her. Explaing to her she had “Bi-polar” disorder and proceeded to suggest treatment, including psychotropic, drugs! You must know this lawsuit is pending. I’ll be happy to send you a copy. And by the by, in case you forgot about this case, not only was the psych unit, and program administrator for that school sued, so where the Pricipal, Vice Principal,Dean,Scool Nurse, Student Couselor, and the School District. I suggest all parents of similar abuses on their parental rights starts suing, as obviously you honestly believe, that parents should have no say-so in their childrens future sanity! Sincerely, Claudia Perez

By soulblueyed

November 15, 2005 11:45 PM | Link to this

if you had a car,would you take it to a mechanic that hada reputation for never fixing one,and even “Worse” would you let him put water in your oil? Probably not! so why would you allow these psychology “witch Doctors” to diagnose a kid especially when they have a reputation for not “curing”anyone and will admit that! And worst of all put DRUGSin your kid! I say forget “Teen” screen” and let them diagnose themselves!

By John Ryan

November 15, 2005 4:45 PM | Link to this

Mental illnesses are diagnosable? Which laboratory tests do you use, Ms. McGuire? Blood, urine, saliva, bile, glucose, CAT scan, MRI scan, PET scan? None. You use a list of symptoms. I could list the symptoms of Obnoxious Personality Disorder, and declare that anyone exhibiting those symptoms is mentally ill. That is similar to what psychiatrists do. Those loaded questions that TeenScreen asks, “Have you ever felt like you are unattractive to the opposite sex?” “Have you ever felt like you are unpopular?” “Do you sometimes fight with your parents?” are so general that practically all adolescents have felt those emotions at one time or other. The overwhelming choice of any doctor who has a patient referred to him/her for “mental disorders” is drugs, drugs, and more drugs. Those private organizations that you refer to, such as CHADD, and NAMI, you know that they are heavily funded by the pharmaceutical industry. Michael Hogan was the chairman of the New Freedom Commission that recommended screening all 52 million American school children. Hogan is the director of the Ohio Mental Health Department, which was one of the first to adopt TMAP (Texas Medication Algorithm Project), and is one of its most aggressive promoters who has traveled across the country— all expenses picked up by drug manufacturers. Hogan also served on an “Advisory Committeeâ€? of Janssen Pharmacia, manufacturer of the neuroleptic Risperdal (risperidone) a TMAP recommended first line treatment. The drugs recommended by Hogan and TMAP are the SSRI antidepressants. These drugs cause dependency—as demonstrated by the severity of withdrawal symptoms in more than 25% of patients—and they increase the risk of suicide and suicidality (i.e., suicide attempts). The other TMAP recommended first line treatments are the new neuroleptics — such as Risperdal and Zyprexa. These drugs induce diabetes mellitus at an alarming rate, and they have been linked to cardiac arrest, blood clots, stroke, and generally increase morbidity and chronic disability. Mike Hogan has proven to be so useful that Eli Lilly has given him a “Lifetime Achievement Award.” In granting the award it was noted that Hogan had given over 75 presentations at conferences since he accepted the position on Bush’s New Freedom Commission. According to ace records researcher, Sue Weibert, every conference that she was able to track down that featured Hogan, was sponsored by drug companies, and the group that organized the conference solicited money from pharmaceutical companies to pay the keynote speaker. Hogan is also on TeenScreen’s Advisory Board. In “The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry,” Vol 60, 1999 Supplement 11: under Expert Consensus Guideline Series: Treatment of Schizophrenia 1999, we have none other than TeenScreen Executive Director Laurie Flynn listed as an “expert” who took part in creating the list of drugs to be used in treatment. Another “expert” who took part in this “expert consensus” process was Mike Hogan. On its web site, TeenScreen claims that it does not endorse any specific drugs. Well the author obviously did not check with its Executive Director because she certainly does. “Experts” Flynn and Hogan recommended the most expensive drugs on the market for the treatment of schizophrenia: Risperdal, Seroquel, and Zyprexa. No affiliation with drug companies either? According to the report, “This project was supported by unrestricted educational grants from Eli Lilly and Co; Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation; Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical; Pfizer, Inc; Zeneca Pharmaceuticals.”

By steve

November 15, 2005 3:52 PM | Link to this

One big problem with this “Teen Screen” concept is that there is no indication that we know the slightest thing about what to do to prevent teen suicide. So 90% of teen suicides qualify for a mental health diagnosis - so what? There is no treatment known that is proven to consistently prevent suicide. Each child is different and each one has different reasons for their suicidal thinking or behavior. Sure, asking kids about how they are feeling can start a conversation so that someone might be able to help solve whatever problem the teen is struggling with, but a computer-generated symptom list isn’t going to do that. Many kids are “depressed” because they are being bullied, or because they don’t see the point in school, or their parents fight, or their girlfriend broke up with them, or their boyfriend is abusive, or a hundred reasons. Developing a relationship with a teen and getting to know what is going on in their lives is what will help them. The one consistent factor in studies on resilience of children under stress is that the presence of a caring adult who believes in this child and supports them relates to the child’s ability to cope. Instead of computerized tests that provide no information on how to help, we should be developing close relationships with teens and getting them to share their lives with us. Teen Screen will do nothing to reduce the suicide rate, because mental health diagnosis does nothing to reduce suicide. Developing real relationships with real people will be a better investment of our time and money. But then, how can you make a profit from a good relationship?

By Rick

November 15, 2005 1:57 PM | Link to this

Teen Screen is a SCAM to get more dangerous drugs sold to line the pockets of big Pharma. The lady lies. By actual research statistics, such drugs INCREASE suicide rates. Actual statistics in Florida show there is NO epidemic of teen suicides (except when given psych drugs), Teen screen programs HAVE been funded by pharma companies. Indeed a person purjured themselves before Congress about this. As far as mental “illness” - the APA was so detested for their activities they had a conference and INVENTED a bunch of so called illnesses that are nothing but a list of behaviours. It is entirely and completely based on opinion. There is no blood test to detect ANY so called mental illness, including ADHD. Ms. McGuire is obviously herself mentally ill - Diagnosis is PBSD, Psychiatric BS disorder, characterized by delusions of competence, chronic lieing, inability to face or identify truth, and a complete lack of moral compass resulting in damaging and antisocial actions with no reality on their consequences and completely hidden from themselves by self delusion and justification. Take a pill for THAT!

By constance kosuda

November 15, 2005 1:40 PM | Link to this

there are many assumptions and false premises in the teen screen scenario - 1. we are assuming that MEDICATION will “fix” whatever it is that has so many of our young people contemplating suicide; 2. we are assuming that MEDICATION does not in and of itself foster suicide/ or, at least, a life not worth living; 3. how come we are so “anti-drug” in the commercials we air on tv, yet want to drug up our suicidal teens? 4. does being drugged up by psychiatric medications result in a healthy life for our young adults? 5. does therapy provide relief, without drugs? with drugs? 6. what are the CAUSES of the suicidal ideation which is so prevalent amongst our young people? 7. what are they so upset about? 8. life in the good ol’ USA has some serious problems, eh? 9. anyone interested in looking at those problems? 10. I guess knowing that there is no meaningful employment in one’s future is not such an inducement to live a happy and fulfilled life, is it? 11. does our present immoral, selfish, greed-filled government, part of the larger problem -? YES>

By Jane

November 15, 2005 12:15 PM | Link to this

Does TeenScreen prevent suicides in teens? Is there any evidence that it has? I would think that in spending government money on ANY “treatment” designed to save lives, there would need to be evidence that the treatment is effective and HAS saved lives. What evidence is there that TeenScreen has saved lives? Any?

By Eileen Dannemann

November 15, 2005 12:12 PM | Link to this

Comments and conclusions on Teen Screen Survey by Eileen Dannemann, director of the National Coalition of Organized Women (NCOW) ncowmail@aol.com 917 804-0786 www.ProgressiveConvergence.com “In our research and initial evaluation of the Teen screen questionnaire we find a very interesting omission: School children are being questioned extensively about their use of street drugs but no questions are being asked about the use of prescription drugs. Since it has been determined that more than 8 million children are on prescription drugs and since these drugs such as the S.S.R.I. (Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors) have recently been linked to suicide and homicide, in our opinion, its omission is gravely telling of who is behind these initiatives�. You can review excerpts from a Teen Screen survey and add your comments to our research project: http://www.progressiveconvergence.com/teen-screen.htm

By Mary

November 15, 2005 11:05 AM | Link to this

TeenScreen is a fraud whose main purpose is to line the pockets of the psychs. Why else would they need to offer ‘incentives’ to the kids to get them screened? When I was a kid, anyone who offered a child ‘bribes’ (“Here little girl want some candy?”) was carted off to jail. Where is the outrage?

By Sandie Ripson

November 15, 2005 10:56 AM | Link to this

This is a warning to all students and exposure to more lies from TeenScreen. On the assent form that TeenScreen has the kids fill out before being screened, TeenScreen states: “d) Participation in this program is voluntary and I may refuse to answer any and all questions.” Firstly, through inquiries to schools around the nation it has been discovered that the computer test is set up so that you CAN NOT skip any questions, you MUST answer them ALL. Second, if you refuse to answer TeenScreen says that is an indication, in and of itself, and you are then carted off to the clinician immediately! Seems to me this isn’t as benign as an eye check-up or scoliosis screen as TeenScreen would have you believe. When are we, as parents, willing to say, “Enough is enough?” and then DO something about this? Contact your schools, find out “Are you screening?” If the answer is yes, then SCREAM TO HIGH HEAVEN! This is YOUR child we’re talking about here!

By Stanley Gainsforth

November 15, 2005 10:50 AM | Link to this

The huge contradiction in the idea that Teenscreen is to prevent teen suicide is that most teen suicides occur with teens that are already getting psychological or psychiatric handling and in most cases are on psychiatric drugs. If these methods helped, why do they always commit suicide AFTER they get Teenscreen-style “help”? I think it’s the cause, not the cure.

By Colleen House

November 15, 2005 10:37 AM | Link to this

All of these programs, all screening that is Psych based and related is all about MONEY. As a parent, I am doing everything I can to help stop TeenScreen. Especially from the viewpoint that all they want is MONEY and are making that MORE IMPORTANT than the welfare of our children. Who in their right mind would support that? Leslie McGuire and everyone else supporting and involved with TeenScreen are criminals. Period.

By Ariella Kapelner

November 15, 2005 9:51 AM | Link to this

Ms. McGuire: I have a few questions please: (1) You stated that TeenScreen is not a diagnostic tool. This is very strange. How can you screen anyone for ‘risk factors’ without deciding what those ‘risk factors’ are? (2) You stated “TeenScreen Program is funded by private philanthropic individuals and organizations…” Would you kindly e-mail me, or better yet, post the list of your donors here? (3) Do you feel that questions on the survey really can tell who is considering suicide? The following are most of the TeenScreen survey: “12. In the last three months….have you often felt very nervous and uncomfortable when you have been with a group of children…say, in the lunchroom at school or at a party? 13. Have you often felt very nervous when you had to do things in front of people? SECTION B 14. For this question, I want to know if you have ever had a sudden attack of feeling very afraid. In the kind of attack, I mean someone becomes very afraid even though there is nothing around them to frighten them. Sometimes they feel they can’t breathe…sometimes their heart beats very fast. The attacks come on very suddenly, then go away, but they get afraid that the attacks might come back. In the last three months have you had an attack when all of a sudden you felt you were very afraid or strange? 15. Have you had a time when you were suddenly feeling like you were suffocating or you couldn’t breathe? 16. Do you have asthma? 17. The only time you felt afraid or couldn’t breathe was when you were having an asthma attack? SECTION C 18. In the last three months….Have often worried a lot before you were going to play a sport or game or some other activity Have you had a lot of headaches? 19. In the last three months have you had other aches and pains? 20. Are you the kind of person who is often very tense, or finds it very hard to relax? SECTION D 21. Some young people have times when one thought comes into the mind over and over again. When people have these thoughts they usually get upset, because the thoughts are strange. No matter how hard they try the thoughts keep on coming back. Now I am going to ask you if you have had thoughts like these in the last three months. Have you had to count things over and over again? Or make yourself do things a certain number of times? 22. In the last three months… was there a time when you washed your hands or body over and over again or changed your clothes many times each day because you thought they were dirty? 23. Have you often felt you should check on things over and over again? For example: checking that the front door is locked… or the stove is turned off or that something else was done, though you knew it had been done? 24. In the last three months… have you often worried that things you touch are dirty or have germs? 25. Have you had any other thoughts that kept coming into your mind over and over again that you couldn’t get rid of? 26. In the last three months… Have you done things like counting, checking, washing, over and over again because you like to do these things? 27. Have you done these things like counting, checking, washing, over and over again, only because you’ve been told by someone else to make sure that you’ve done them right? 28. In the last three months… Have you wished you could stop yourself doing things like counting, checking or washing over and over again? 29. Have you spent a lot of time each day doing things like counting, checking or washing over and over again…say, for as long as an hour? SECTION E 30. In the last three months… Has there been a time when nothing was fun for you and you just weren’t interested in anything? 31. Has there been a time when you had less energy than you usually do? 32. Has there been a time when you felt you couldn’t do anything well or that you weren’t as good-looking or as smart as other people? 33. In the last three months… Has there been a time when you thought seriously about killing yourself? 34. Have you tried to kill yourself in the last year? 35. Has there been a time when doing even the little things made you feel really tired? 36. In the last three months… Has there been a time when you couldn’t thank as clearly or as fast as usual? I have just asked you about the last three months. Now, I want you to think about the last year. SECTION F 37. The next questions are about you use of alcohol-beer, wine, wine coolers, or hard liquors like vodka, gin or whiskey. Each can or bottle of beer, glass of wine or wine cooler, shot of liquor, or mixed drink with liquor it it counts as one drink. In the last year…Have you had six or more drinks? 38. Did you get in trouble with the police when you were drunk or because you had been drinking? 39. In the last years… Did you get into arguments with your family or friends because of drinking? 40. Did you miss school to go drinking or because you were hungover? SECTION G 41. In the last year… Have you used marijuana six or more times? 42. Did you miss school to use marijuana or because you were too high on marijuana to go to school? 43. In the last year… Did you get into arguments with your friends and family because you were using marijuana? SECTION H 44. Have you used any opiates to get high. This includes things like codeine, Demerol, morphine, percodan, methadone, Darvon, opium, Delaudid, Talwin and so on. In the last year… Have you used any of these to get high? 45. Have you used any kind of hallucinogen? This includes LSD or “acidâ€?, mescaline, peyote, DMT, psilocybin and so on. Have you used one of these? 46. In the last year… Have you used stimulants or amphetamines…like speed, diet pills, Benzedrine, methamphetamine or anything like that to get high? 47. Have you used cocaine or “crackâ€?? 48. In the last year…Have you used heroin? 49. Have you used PCP or “Angel Dustâ€?? 50. In the last year…Have you used ecstasy? 51. Have you used any inhalants…like glue, cleaning fluid, gasoline or paint to get high? 52. How often did your parents feel worried or concerned about the way you were feeling or acting? a. A lot of the time b. Some of the time c. Hardly ever d. Not at all 53. Were they worried or concerned because of: a. You were feeling anxious or worried? b. You were feeling sad or depressed? c. Problems with your behavior? d. Problems with alcohol or drugs? e. Other things you did? 54. How often did you parents get annoyed or upset with you because of the way you were feeling or acting? a. A lot of the time b. Some of the time c. Hardly ever d. Not at all 55. Were they annoyed or upset because of: a. You were feeling anxious or worried? b. You were feeling sad or depressed? c. Problems with your behavior? d. Problems with alcohol or drugs? e. Other things you did? 56. How often were you not able to do things or go places with your family because of the way you felt or acted? a. A lot of the time b. Some of the time c. Hardly ever d. Not at all 57. Were you not able to do things or go places because: a. You were feeling anxious or worried? b. You were feeling sad or depressed? c. Problems with your behavior? d. Problems with alcohol or drugs? e. Other things you did? 58. How often did the way you were feeling or acting make it difficult to do your schoolwork or cause problems with your grades? a. A lot of the time b. Some of the time c. Hardly ever d. Not at all 59. Did you have problems with your schoolwork or grades because of: a. You were feeling anxious or worried? b. You were feeling sad or depressed? c. Problems with your behavior? d. Problems with alcohol or drugs? e. Other things you did? 60. How often were your teachers annoyed or upset with you because of the way you were feeling or acting? a. A lot of the time b. Some of the time c. Hardly ever d. Not at all 61. Were you teachers annoyed or upset because of: a. You were feeling anxious or worried? b. You were feeling sad or depressed? c. Problems with your behavior? d. Problems with alcohol or drugs? e. Other things you did? 62. How often did the way you were feeling or acting make you feel bad or feel upset? a. A lot of the time b. Some of the time c. Hardly ever d. Not at all 63. Did you feel bad or upset because of: a. You were feeling anxious or worried? b. You were feeling sad or depressed? c. Problems with your behavior? d. Problems with alcohol or drugs? e. Other things you did? 64. Have you been to see someone at a hospital, or at a clinic because of the way you were feeling or acting? a. yes b. no 65. Did you go to see someone because of: a. You were feeling anxious or worried? b. You were feeling sad or depressed? c. Problems with your behavior? d. Problems with alcohol or drugs? e. Other things you did? END P.S. Question No. 3 asks “Are you Hispanic?” Why is that important?

By Hans Eisenman

November 15, 2005 9:23 AM | Link to this

Ms. McGuire would have us believe we as parents are not concerned about suicide’s or “depression” with kids if we don’t start screening for “risk factors”. This is, of course, complete rubbish. What concerns me more than anything is that a front for pharmaceuticals like Teenscreen would be allowed into our nation’s school system in the first place. Equally disturbing is the proven fact that there is NO science to back up this supposed “screening of risk factors”. The screen is a therefore a complete joke. The whole thing is an invention by pharmaceuticals and psychiatrists working in collusion to create more profits. Don’t believe me? LOOK for yourself. Actually open your eyes, put aside what you think is happening and look. As a parent of three, I dare you. I did and I was stunned by what I found. The fact that this whole Teenscreen thing is built on nothing more than vapor doesn’t stop the pscychobabblers from wrapping it in a nice little marketing package using words like “philanthropic” or “diagnosable”—or one of my personal favorites: “preventableâ€?. Yeah, if there even a shred of science connected to this whole thing. The travesty here is that parents are being PLAYED for fools. Teenscreen looks like this nice, happy group that’s helping poor, depressed children with the latest breakthroughs in science. HELLO! There IS NO LATEST BREAKTHROUGHS IN SCIENCE. Heck, there’s NO science at all behind this program OR the diagnoses (that always follow a flunked Teenscreen questionnaire). Look closely and you see the same pattern as with all these psychiatric “disorders”: they are taking basically normal behaviors and re-classifying them as illnesses (like “Mathematics Disorder”—an actual “illness” according to their manual of mental illnesses). In fact, I can tell you what I have right now: Defiant Parent Disorder! No, wait, that plus this one: Can-See-A-Psych-Scam-A -Mile-Away Disorder. But then I guess the APA won’t be voting those into their manuals like all their other so-called illnesses.

By Niena Byrne

November 15, 2005 8:28 AM | Link to this

Statistics are amazing - give one number and some ‘facts & a picture is made. Actually just a part of sketch! Let’s fill in the rest of the math - 90% of kids (who were being treated by a psychiatrist)(on several violent & mood-altering pyschotropic drugs) commit suicide…hmmmmm picture change?

By Emmett Gaschliesh

November 15, 2005 8:09 AM | Link to this

What a bunch of BUNK! Philanthropic benefactors named Eli Lilly perhaps… There is no science involved in this. The recommendation is always ‘DRUG EM!!!’ I don’t want my kids subjected to this nonsense, and I don’t suggest anyone get their kids close to these drug pushers. (Not to mention the cost of such a “system”!) There is just no replacing spending time with our kids, and TALKING with them. Don’t allow this Teen Screen ‘sytem’ to get started, we will all regret it.

By Mary Hilton

November 15, 2005 6:55 AM | Link to this

Teenscreen. More psychobabble. Nothing more.

By Mary

November 15, 2005 6:16 AM | Link to this

I did not realize so many (as evidenced by the comments) are so wise to the “system”. Good for you and us. Supposedly, pharmaceuticals spend three times as much money on marketing than they spend on scientific research. That, in itself, devalues education, science and knowledge.

By Steve Dockendorf

November 15, 2005 1:36 AM | Link to this

If TeenScreen is not a diagnostic tool or “testâ€? as Ms. McGuire says, how is it that children are informed that they have a mental health “disorder” upon completing the screening? She also states that 90 percent of youth who die by suicide suffer from a diagnosable mental illness at the time of their deaths. Is she not aware that (at least in my home state of Florida) most teen suicides occur when the deceased was already under psychiatric care? She makes no mention that these “diagnosable mental illnesses” are voted into existence by people who have no means to demonstrate any real illness other than a set of what they consider odd behaviors. These behaviors can stem from a variety of causes such as poor diet, food additives, allergies and lack of proper study skills, to name a few. It should be noted here that at one time these same expert disease inventors named homosexuality as a mental disorder and then (under pressure from gay-rights groups) voted it off the list. “Math Disorder” has been decreed as an official disease by our mental health authorities. Now that is odd behavior. Ms McGuire goes on to state that parental consent is required for students to participate in the screening. TeenScreen has an odd definition of parental consent. They call it “passive consent” and it goes like this: the student is given a note to take home to give to the parents. If the child returns without the note filled in by the parents indicating that they do not want their child screened, then it is assumed by TeenScreen that the screening is okay with the parents. What if the child loses the form on the way back to school? What happens if the parents never see the note? Sorry, “passive consent” is not really consent at all. TeenScreen has yet to demonstrate any scientific basis for its existence. If Ms. McGuire really wanted to ensure the mental health of our youth, she would take a closer look into the actual causes of depression and suicides. I invite responsible parents to do the same.

By Dragonfly

November 15, 2005 1:32 AM | Link to this

I am currently assisting a friend to help someone come off of Paxil. No one ever set up a worse torture. The withdrawal symptoms are ghastly and it has to be done under medical supervision. After witnessing the horrors one goes through to become un-addicted to these drugs, the idea of putting a child on such drugs is so unbelievably disgusting to me, that I wouldn’t think twice before demanding that ANYONE who dares put a child on these drugs gets immediately JAILED! I urge parents to get a Class Action Lawsuit formed against Teen Screen. This is a deadly serious situation and your kids lives are in jeapardy in the hands of a psychologist or psychiatrist trying to get them onto medication. It has to STOP!

By Sue Weibert

November 15, 2005 1:25 AM | Link to this

In regards to TeenScreen, you guys in Ohio are sitting on one of the hottest stories to ever come down the pike in a long time. TeenScreen claims: “TeenScreen is not a diagnostic tool or “test.â€? Truth: http://www.nasbhc.org/tat/YouthatriskforMH.htm “Since 1979, Columbia University has worked with the National Institutes of Mental Health (NIMH) to develop reliable, abbreviated, diagnostic instrument(s) and strategies for assessing the most common psychiatric diagnoses of children and adolescents. Most recently, they have developed the TeenScreen® Program.” AND Concerning their DPS (Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children Predictive Scales): “Analysis was done to find out which questions best predicted a full diagnosis.” AND http://chipts.ucla.edu/assessment/pdf/assessments/discforthe_web.pdf Concerning Columbia’s DISC screening ‘tool’ (DISC is short for: Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children): “The DSM-IV algorithms built into the application program will yield diagnoses for both the “past yearâ€? and “current” (past four weeks)…” Sure sounds like alot of ‘diagnosing’ to me! TeenScreen claims: “The TeenScreen Program does not involve treatment and does not recommend or endorse any particular kind of treatment for the youth who are identified as at risk by the screening.” Truth: “…..so our individual projects are designed to identify kids who are at risk of suicide and/or suffering from undiagnosed mental illness and then get them into treatment.” AND At the NAMI 2005 Convention in Texas, TeenScreen also talked about the importance of getting kids to that first appointment and that sometimes that meant calling their (the families) insurance companies to get the information on where to go, what’s covered, and sometimes that means to pick them up and drive them to their first appointment. Sure sounds like alot of ‘treatment’ going on here, too! TeenScreen claims: “Parental consent is required for students to participate in the screening…” Truth: PULEEZE! Concerning their passive (opt-out) consent procedures, since when, as a parent, do I NOT sign something and by that I have given permission? Boy! If this holds water then I’m trying that with my boss…….”Hey boss, I didn’t sign anything, which means I get that big pay raise….right!” TeenScreen claims: “Parents of students considered at risk are informed and given help connecting to a health or mental health provider for a complete evaluation, should they wish to pursue this option.” Truth: “should they wish to pursue this option.”…….Tell that to the parents and kids at Cherry Hill Public Schools in NJ, where the kid can’t get back into school if they screen positive until AFTER an appointment with a psych and obtaining: “A note indicating that the student is able to return to school, is not harmful to him/herself or others, and a plan for follow-up care is required”. What happens if the parents are not cooperative on sending their kid into treatment, which invariably includes drugging? “In cases where the student’s parents or guardian is unavailable or unwilling to cooperate, the Division of Youth and Family Services may be contacted to assist the student and school district.” TeenScreen claims: “The national TeenScreen Program is funded by private philanthropic individuals and organizations…” Truth: Prove it! TeenScreen is secretive and won’t show the funding records…. TeenScreen claims: “The program is not affiliated with or funded by pharmaceutical companies.” Truth: One has only to look at the people involved with TeenScreen to see the pharma affiliations GALORE! Check out their Advisory Council Members in a google search with their individual names and any well known pharmaceutical company and see what comes up! The list is extensive. TeenScreen claims: “In any other area of medicine….we would certainly implement widespread screening for the associated risk factors.” Truth: OK, bring it on, where are the blood tests, the biopsy, the tissue samples, the proof, involved with this “area of medicine”? TeenScreen asks: “Why shouldn’t we do the same to ensure the mental health of our youth?” Truth: TeenScreen has hired big PR companies to tug on the heart strings of parents everywhere in order to capitalize on the tragedy of suicide. Their PR forms have a 10 year plan of “Tactics” and “Strategies”: http://www.widmeyer.com/archives/2004/08/columbiauniver1.php AND http://rabinpartners.com/ Considering that a survey done on psychiatrists revealed that 9 out of 10 of their patients recieved drugs…I say “Follow the money!” Ohio has more TeenScreen sites then any other state in the country due to the fact that Mike Hogan, your Mental Health Director, was the Chair of the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. Wake up Ohio! Sue Weibert

By john

November 14, 2005 11:59 PM | Link to this

leslie, Why don’t you jump off a bridge and take your garbage with you. You are a threat to society, among other things.

By Rebecca Iocca

November 14, 2005 11:52 PM | Link to this

Teenscreen is an inferior product and because it is an inferior product it must use government coercion in order to survive. A real product/service would not need to hide it’s services from the general public. It’s treatment centers would not be shrouded in secrecy. It’s testing procedures and forms would be made available to anyone who asks. Secrecy is a strong indication of someone being disingenuous. In other words, they are phony and only no good can come from this. The schools are to blame because they are allowing these frauds into the schools. All that can happen is a greater loss of integrity by schools. They are failing at their main job of educating and now they want to go into a complex and subjective job of psychiatry. If they can’t do their stated professional purpose, then can you imagine what they will do with Teenscreen. The schools will bankrupt themselves from all the lawsuits and unfortunately, they will bankrupt the communities they are suppose to be serving, because schools are funded by property taxes. So, in the end, it will be the innocent taxpayer, who foots the bill. I believe people used to be hung or at least tared and feathered in the old days for such shenanigans. Liberty always, trust yourselves not government, which is an American value!!!

By Raoul Widman

November 14, 2005 11:49 PM | Link to this

I’d like to comment in regard to the appropriateness of any school’s forwarding a pseudo-survey marketing tool for the Drug industry under the guise of helping to protect anyone. It is neither the schools’ or the government’s role to attempt to shape or modify behavior, and this is purely a development of the last 50 years, also, notably, date-coincident with the decline of literacy of students so ‘educated’. I feel that most sensible adults would be highly offended and provoked to take protective action if the questions in the TeenScreen ‘survey’ were verbally asked of children in their presence by any person. Such questions would prompt those parents or law enforcement to immediately suspect the motives of the individual doing the questioning and take action to shield their kids from any further contact. So why would we allow this to proceed under the shallow guise of ‘science’ or ‘help’?

By Ken Kramer

November 14, 2005 11:43 PM | Link to this

Scott, Don’t feel bad. TeenScreen sends those “correctionâ€? letters to journalists whenever a reporter writes about TeenScreen. For example, here is a column written in the Indianapolis Star, entitled, “Teen privacy concerns spur suit over psych testâ€?, http://tinyurl.com/c7zxk and here is TeenScreen’s correction letter: http://tinyurl.com/8wdem If you take a look, it’s the exact same letter McGuire wrote to your paper. And here’s another story written about TeenScreen in the British Medical Journal entitled “US teenager’s parents sue school over depression screening testâ€? http://tinyurl.com/dr6nk and here is TeenScreen’s inevitable “correctionâ€? letter http://tinyurl.com/9tnuu However in this case, you will find that the British Medical Journal author corrects TeenScreen’s “correctionâ€? letter: http://tinyurl.com/cs9zm I would like to do some correction myself on some falsehoods put forth by McGuire. McGuire says TeenScreen is not a diagnostic tool. That is false. TeenScreen does diagnose. Here’s the proof: http://tinyurl.com/bmhof TeenScreen labels kids with Social Phobia, Panic Disorder, Anxiety, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, etc. etc. and then carts them off to the nearest psychiatrist. McGuire says that “researchâ€? reveals that 90 percent of youth who die by suicide suffer from a diagnosable mental illness. What she doesn’t tell you is that most of those kids were already diagnosed and received psychiatric treatment! And in addition, the majority of these kids were on psychotropic drugs. The same drugs that the FDA has been warning us can cause suicidal ideation. So, in actual fact, TeenScreen will not reduce suicide but will increase it. McGuire says parental consent is required. That is completely false. Anyone can disprove that, by looking up TeenScreen’s “passive consentâ€? method on the net and also checking out the documents in this federal lawsuit: http://tinyurl.com/akahx McGuire says “the TeenScreen Program is funded by private philanthropic individuals and organizationsâ€?. TeenScreen refuses to divulge who is funding their organization which naturally arouses suspicions. It’s all very secretive. Why not open the books for all American parents to see if TeenScreen’s goal is to screen every child in the United States? Why not release the locations of TeenScreen sites? Because TeenScreen is fearful of the uprising against mental health screening that is occurring across the country. Many parents have no clue what is going on because of all the secrecy. McGuire states: “In any other area of medicine, if the cause of 90 percent of the mortality associated with a particular illness were known, we would certainly implement widespread screening for the associated risk factors. Why shouldn’t we do the same to ensure the mental health of our youth? “ The reason we shouldn’t do the same is that “any other area of medicineâ€? relies on strict scientific testing by X-Rays, blood tests, urine tests, Cat Scans, etc and then an appropriate method of treatment can be formulated. McGuire should refrain from even hinting that TeenScreen is a part of any “area of medicineâ€?. It is not. TeenScreen relies on no scientific testing. In addition, these labels of Social Phobia, Panic Disorder, Anxiety, and Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, etc. are all based on opinion. There are no scientific tests that are used to diagnose any of these. The quickest sure-fire way for a parent to prove this is to ask for the chemical imbalance test or any test results that verify the label. Nothing will be forthcoming because these tests do not exist. Even though there are no biological tests for these “disordersâ€?, TeenScreen and their ilk insist on treatment using biological means - Dangerous Psychotropic Drugs! TeenScreen is unproven. According to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force report of May of 2004, there is no evidence that screening for suicide risk reduces suicide attempts or mortality. There is insufficient evidence that treatment of those at high risk reduces suicide attempts or mortality. No studies were found that directly address the harms of screening and treatment for suicide risk. TeenScreen’s former co-director, Rob Caruano, who either was fired or resigned recently, was quoted in the South Bend Tribune that suicides are so rare that you’d have to screen the whole country to see a difference in mortality between screened and unscreened students. Let’s not let TeenScreen experiment on our kids. Scott, don’t you think it’s time you take this subject off the blog page and put it on the front page of the Dayton Daily News? Look up Michael Hogan, the head of Mental Health in Ohio and find that he is an advisor to TeenScreen. Also look up his involvement in the New Freedom Commission. Look up the fact that TeenScreen says Ohio has more sites than any other state. Hogan’s involvement is no coincidence. You’ve got a hot story and it’s only going to get hotter when Hogan’s involvement is revealed.

By Catherine Creel

November 14, 2005 11:04 PM | Link to this

Ms. McGuire has no choice but to defend TeenScreen, the screening tool developed at Columbia University. Her paycheck depends upon it. This same institution received money last year from the FDA to review the data from clinical studies reviewed by Dr. Andrew Mosholder (epidemiologist in the FDA’s Office of Drug Safety whose data was withheld from hearings on the safety of SSRI drugs)that showed SSRIs as increasing suicidal ideation and attempts in children. To no one’s surprise, the Columbia review reported no evidence of SSRIs increasing suicidal ideation in children. Any other finding would have effectively hindered the financially lucrative TeenScreen program. McGuire stated, “The national TeenScreen Program is funded by private philanthropic individuals and organizations that are committed to the early identification of mental illness in youth and the prevention of teen suicide. The program is not affiliated with or funded by pharmaceutical companies.” This would have been an accurate statement has she added the word “directly” before the word “funded”. The majority of these organizations listed on the TeenScreen website as being “National Organizations Supporting Screening” are heavily funded by the pharmaceutical industry. Just a few of these are: — American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry — American Psychiatric Association — Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law — CHADD: Children and Adults with Attention-Defi cit/Hyperactivity Disorder — Anxiety Disorders Association of America — Child and Adolescent Bipolar Foundation — National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (NAMI) McGuire further states, ” The TeenScreen Program does not involve treatment and does not recommend or endorse any particular kind of treatment for the youth who are identified as at risk by the screening.” Bush’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health recommended that the screening done by TeenScreen be linked with “treatment and supports,” including “state-of-the-art treatments” using “specific medications for specific conditions.” Further, according to the President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, The Texas Medication Algorithm Project (TMAP) will serves as a model for the initiative. The TMAP medication guidelines were established in 1995 as an “expert consensus” based on the opinions of prescribers, rather than an analysis of scientific studies. The pharmaceutical companies who funded TMAP include Janssen Pharmaceutica, Johnson & Johnson, Eli Lilly, Astrazeneca, Pfizer, Novartis, Janssen-Ortho-McNeil, GlaxoSmithKline, Abbott, Bristol Myers Squibb, Wyeth-Ayerst and Forrest Laboratories. The drugs recommended as “first line treatment”, many of them with potentially deadly side effects, are patented expensive drugs produced by the sponsors of the guidelines: Risperdal, Zyprexa, Seroqual, Geodone, Depakote, Paxil, Zoloft, Celexa, Wellbutron, Zyban, Remeron, Serzone, Effexor, Buspar, Adderall and Prozac. Unfortunately, Ms. McGuire’s obfuscatory rhetoric will be reassuring to those Americans who have not been following the machinations of drug industry. But those of us who have scrutinized this for years are not fooled for a moment by Ms. McGuire or others who function as shills for the pharmaceutical industry. We will continue to monitor the propaganda of the drug companies and will do all we can to expose those who promote their agenda, including Columbia University’s TeenScreen Program.

By Garrison Clarke

November 14, 2005 10:45 PM | Link to this

TeenScreen trolls school yards pushing drugs for the pharmaceutical companies that paid the have the computer survey done. Once the child completes the survey there are check boxes that are a diagnosis. See http://www.psychsearch.net/teenscreen.html for the evidence of this. I noticed McGuire didn’t have much beyond the usual “talking points� provided by the PR people that create the ongoing lies. Pharmaceutical companies are paying for web sites that do screening on the net. Here is the money trail on this last comment: https://www.mentalhealthscreening.org/ https://www.mentalhealthscreening.org/community/cr_sponsors.aspx SMH Founding Sponsors: American Psychiatric Association National Mental Health Association National Institute of Mental Health McLean Hospital National Association of Psychiatric Health Systems National Alliance for the Mentally Ill Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance Funding Sponsors: Major support provided by a charitable contribution from: Eli Lilly and Company Additional funding provided by educational grants from: Forest Laboratories, Inc. GlaxoSmithKline Pfizer Inc. Wyeth Pharmaceuticals The Columbia University crowd does not tell us the truth. It looks like they’ve taken Flynn off of public commenting. I think that’s because her story is never quit the same twice. These folks would have no idea how to prevent a suicide. The psychiatrist takes classes to prepare him for the ultimate truth that he will have patients take their own lives. They have not yet added up one plus one to find out that suicides are committed by children on psychotropic drugs. The same is true for the school shooters; they’re on psychotropic drugs too. See this months People magazine to get a broader picture on how the psychiatrist works. These people are the wolves that walk among us unnoticed. They hide behind lies. The truth speaks for itself.

By Aldan

November 14, 2005 10:36 PM | Link to this

Anything that has to do with Psychiatry,and drugging children should be thrown out with the dirty dishwater. Parental rights are being taken away and children are being subjected to tests that have no basis of reality. Teenscreen is one of those tests. You are taking normal teenage behavior and telling them that they have a mental disorder. Even the President of the APA admitted that these types of tests are not valid. Big Pharma is trying to get another method of selling drugs to children

By Tom Beattie

November 14, 2005 10:20 PM | Link to this

Ms. McGuire is grasping at straws at this point of their masked “crusade” to help our kids who supposedly have “mental disorders”. Ms. Rhoades’ daughter certainly was “diagnosed” without parental consent and the federal agency (SAMSHA) that was backing TeenScreen headed by Charles Currie recently “unbacked” TeenScreen as the good people of America are standing up to this continuation of lies by the mental health “experts” who have been bamboozling, and killing innocent people for decades under the name of “Psychiatry”. The jig is up Ms. McGuire. I have met the victims of your covert help and they were too many to have met in such a short amount of time. Teen suicides are as a result of the drugs. The FDA website spellS it out clear enough. Get out of Dodge. You are not welcome here.

By JOHN DAVIS

November 14, 2005 9:36 PM | Link to this

Leslie, your question sounds very reasonable - “Why shouldn’t we do the same to ensure the mental health of our youth?” The only thing missing from this is that you don’t have any means to effectively help those who need it. You may be able with TeenScreen to detect kids with problems but the stock answer is to drug them. And PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS ARE OFTEN THE CAUSE OF TEEN SUICIDE. There is no point indicating a possible problem if you can’t DO anything about it. John Davis

By L. G. Williams

November 14, 2005 9:09 PM | Link to this

The most interesting point in all this is the idea that there are bonafide, scientific diagnostic methods to evaluate “mental illness” and cures or effective treatments for them. Ms. McGuire seems to have the idea that once these troubled teens are isolated, that psychiatric methods exist that can do something about them to alleviate their conditions. Unfortunately, to date I know of no scientific studies that validate any diagnostic or treatment method for any mental “disease”. It’s interesting to note that almost every teen involved in the recent school massacres was already under psychiatric care and on drugs. If psychiatrists had an effective, scientific technology that had predictable results, this kind of thing should NOT be happening. However, pharmaceutical drugs, including psychiatric psychotropic drugs, have many negative “side-effects” which have been known by the drug companies for years and which are now being made known to the general public. I ran into a recent quote in an article on drug side effects: ’ “I think there is an overall unreasonable expectation right now that there is such a thing as a risk-free drug,” said Sidney Taurel, chief executive of Eli Lilly & Company’. It seems it’s OK for Eli Lilly to foist drugs with potentially deadly side-effects on the U.S. public. I think it’s high time that U.S. citizens started raising a fuss over the attempt at psychiatric domination of our children by such programs as TeenScreen.

By Kathy Framarini

November 14, 2005 9:05 PM | Link to this

I would like to comment on the issue of Teen Screen, and the implementation of this “screening method” in our schools Although I agree that our children are in distress in our schools, and in our communities,I would like to offer some food for thought. Statistics indicate that 30 percent (a very conservative estimate, much higher depending on location) of our children who attend school are bullied, harassed, slapped, hit,kicked,ostracized threatened, or called names. This happens at school, on the bus, at recess, and through the computer when they get home(cyberbullying) Imagine, as adults,being forced to attend work under these circumstances while your boss turns the other way, or handles it so poorly that the harassment is worse. Perhaps you’d be depressed and thinking about suicide too. This is what our children endure on a daily basis. Yet,the majority of our kids calls for help go unanswered, and too many kids take their own life because they are hopeless and helpless to solve these problems on their own. Some turn to drugs to kill their pain, others become depressed or agitated. The majority of our states do NOT have anti-bullying laws..and our President turns a blind eye. Growing up in simpler times was hard enough…imagine going through our schools today. Someone should take responsibility and fix this problem, AND provide the means in which to do so. Kathy Framarini www.BullyPolice.org

By Doris Bentz

November 14, 2005 8:57 PM | Link to this

I can’t believe that the questionaire you developed for Teen- Screen is a “scientific” one. It sure brings memories of when I was in elementary school. I wonder how many people would fall for that garbage. And yes I believe the drug companies are working together with Columbia U. on teen screen. The temptation is too great and it’s sooo easy with Columbia U. name behind it.

By Andrew Workman

November 14, 2005 8:55 PM | Link to this

In refrence to the comment made by Ms. Mcguire - Surly you know you are supposed to back any facts up you use. I would think somebody of your statue would know of that. I would like to point out that statistics are soley that: a number. You need to STUDY and WATCH the kids, not work on a bunch of numbers and hope you’re going in the right direction. That’s the main flaw with TeenScreen. It is a test. Yes, it is a diagnostic. Diagnostic is defined as: “distinctive, as of a distinguishing characteristic serving to identify or determine the presence of a disease or other condition” (Google Search: define:diagnostic). Yes, TeenScreen is one of the key tools in presrcibing drugs. Why do most people I hear of who have taken TeenScreen been prescribed a drug? Coincidence? I don’t think so. So, Ms. Mcguire, I advise you and the rest of the TeenScreen “family” to get your facts right and start over from scratch.

By Mike Williams

November 14, 2005 8:48 PM | Link to this

How can you say that TeenScreen is, “not a diagnostic tool or “test.â€?? The offical name of the screening tool is DISC (Diagnostic Interview Scheduale for Children). In an article entitled, Before Their Time: Preventing Teen Suicide, TeenScreen Director, Laurie Flynn writes “The long-term goal of TeenScreen is not just identification, but treatment for those in need.â€?

By Kathy

November 14, 2005 8:37 PM | Link to this

Teenscreen gets parental consent? What a laugh. If a parent does not send a signed consent form, most sites will do it anyway, it is called passive consent. I just wish more parents read everything that comes home from their kid’s school like I do. Or let their school officials know that under NO CIRCUMSTANCES should their child/children participate in this insulting screening. Our children, and their minds on suicide, crime inducing drugs, are a terrible thing to waste. Would you let your child be labeled with having a mental illness Leslie? I don’t think so, let alone let your child be put on drugs. What about the areas that will take a child away from a parent for not letting this screening happen? It is a crime to think that kids are separated because their parents CARE about them.

By Jim Olson

November 14, 2005 8:05 PM | Link to this

She fails to notice that indeed “Teen Screen” was funded by two major pharmaceutical companies. In fact if as she states above all of the funds came from nice individuals, well won’t “Teen Screen” open up its account books for all to see. I am certain these private philanthropic individuals and organizations are very proud of their cause and would not mind that becoming public knowledge. Maybe nobody told her. Also, she fails to mention that the suicide rate in minors is down except for one group - those on psych drugs - where the suicide rate is way up and the FDA has had to have all of these psych drugs labeled with the true data that these drugs can cause depression and suicidal tendancies. Who needs “Teen Screen” - follow the money line.

By Mary Anne

November 14, 2005 7:34 PM | Link to this

I find it interesting that Leslie McGuire failed to mention the fact that the Rutherford Institute filed a lawsuit on behalf a an Indiana family for “Teen Screen” practices in their area. The following is taken from a Press Release from the Rutherford Institute: “Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute have filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana on behalf of an Indiana family whose 15-year-old daughter, Chelsea Rhoades, was subjected to a mental health screening examination at school without her parents’ knowledge or consent. Institute attorneys charge that school officials violated Michael and Teresa Rhoades’ constitutional right, as parents, to control the care, custody and upbringing of their daughter when Chelsea was subjected to the mental health exam without their knowledge or consent. Mental health screening exams like TeenScreen have increasingly been adopted by schools in 43 states, reportedly as part of an effort to identify students with mental health problems or at-risk tendencies for suicide that cannot be seen outwardly. However, while federal and state law generally requires that parents grant written consent in order for their children to take mental health screenin g exams, an increasing number of schools have begun relying on “passive consentâ€? forms in order to administer the exams. Passive consent requires parents to return a form only if they do not want their child to participate in the screening” Not to mention the fact that there is no scientific evidence or test for “mental illness”. The people who promote these ‘screenings’ are only front groups for those who will gain the most from such programs — psychiatry. Every year, psychiatrists sit in conference at their annual conventions and vote on which ‘mental illnesses’ the insurance companies will pay for next. These are then inserted into their ‘bible’ of ‘diseases’ just so they are operating on the same page. Just this last year, the FDA has altered its position with regard to anti-depressants, with Black Box labels on the SSRI’s that they cause suicidal ideation and actions among children under age 18. Our children have enough to address without having to fend off the adverse affects of some chemical concoction designed to alter their thought processes and cause them to act in an abberrated fashion — Eric Harris, Kip Kinkel and other teens who terrorized the students of their schools were in the hands of psychiatry and on psychiatric drugs at the time of their violent acts. If I had children in any school at this time (mine are now grown) I would definitley look for alternative education if the local schools decided to adopt the “Teen Screen” pseudo-scientific program. Even Teen Screen’s own people know that they have to do something to get the kids to “buy in” to the program: TeenScreen Project Coordinator, Kathleen Cigich, was quoted as saying: “We found early on, though, that sending out letters directly to parents is prohibitively time consuming and gets a low response rate. We thought, why not go to students themselves and offer a $5 video store coupon to anyone who brings back a parental consent form within a two-day turnaround period. It works. Our response rate is extremely high.” If the kids don’t bring back the consent form — many schools take that as ‘tacit consent’ from the parents and put the kids through their brand of psychological branding of teens, leaving the parents to find out later and try to help clean up the mess of their children being ‘diagnosed’ with a ‘mental disorder’ and branded by the Teen Screen program. Don’t allow this group into your schools. Rather, encourage your children to talk to you and get them involved in helping others. There is no better therapy than to help someone who is less fortunate.

By Teresa Rhoades

November 14, 2005 7:23 PM | Link to this

In regards to Ms. Leslie McGuire’s response to the TeenScreen survey. I must correct her on her comments that children are not given diagnosis. I know first hand that children are being told they have mental disorders. Ms. McGuire’s statement that the program screens for the risk factors that are associated with depression and other mental illnesses but it does not make a diagnosis. I would like her meet all the children in PHM school including my child and tell them they were not diagnosed. Ms Mc Guire statement that the TeenScreen Program does not involve treatment and does not recommend or endorse any particular kind of treatment for the youth who are identified as at risk by the screening. Maybe she should check with the director of TeenScreen Laurie Flynn’s article “ Preventing Teen Suicide Before Their Time� http://www.communityvoices.org/Article.aspx?ID=202, Ms. Flynn’s own statement reads and I quote, “The long-term goal of TeenScreen is not just identification, but treatment for those in need.� Also included in her own statements she adds, “ In step four a licensed mental health professional reviews the Voice DISC information and conducts a brief interview with children or teens who show signs of mental disorder or suicide risk. In the final step, a case manager meets with high-risk teens and makes referrals for further evaluation and treatment. Which is it- they do or they don’t ? The story keeps changing. If this program is so straight forward and has nothing to hide then share with the concerned parents whose children have been exposed to or may be exposed to the survey all of the funding information and try returning our calls. Teresa Rhoades Indiana Parent You Doesn’t Buy It.

By Oscar Wegner

November 14, 2005 6:44 PM | Link to this

Dear Leslie McGuire (Director Columbia University TeenScreen Program). Suicide screening of the youth may be totally unnecessary. The cause of suicide in youth has been precisely identified. Here in Pinellas county, where this subject was surveyed, close to 90% of the teens suicide that committed suicide were on and was caused by psychiatric drugs. And bear in mind that the original psychiatric diagnosis and why they were put on those drugs was ADHD, and not suicidal thoughts or the like. So, please research from this aspect and tell the truth, for once.

By TMH

November 14, 2005 6:40 PM | Link to this

In response to: “Parental consent is required for students to participate in the screening and the results of the screen are confidential. ” The parental consent was obviously not required for those that were screened using “passive consent”. Please get your facts straight Leslie McGuire.

By Doyle Mills

November 14, 2005 6:34 PM | Link to this

Leslie, The jig is up. You are lying and everyone knows it. TeenSreen IS tied to drug companies and the connections are obvious. See http://www.psychsearch.net/teenscreen.html Even worse, you claim that parental consent is required for screening. Many TeenScreen sites use passive screening, which means if the parents don’t object, or if they don’t know about it, you screen their children. That’s disgusting and you should be in jail for such an egregious violation of parental rights. TeenScreen is nothing but another slick marketing scheme to find more customers for psychiatric drugs.

By Diana Burnham

November 14, 2005 6:27 PM | Link to this

Hi, I am from Chaminade-Julienne Catholic High School and I just want to say how wonderful you talk was today. (November 14th 2005) I used to want to be a vet but thinking these last few days I am not sure if that is what I want to do. Your talk helped me to realize that writing would be something I would like to do and I just want to thank you so much for letting me see that light. I am not sure what exactly I want to write about or where I would want to write. But, again though your talk really inspired me!!! So thank you!

By Mary

November 14, 2005 7:47 AM | Link to this

One of the reasons education is so important is to better understand and reason about our world including the brain and mental health. There is so much knowledge that is not assimilated properly on mental health issues such as the role of diet, genetics and for example, the role of head trauma from car crashes and sports, on learning and behavior. Do childhood vaccinations really cause autism for some children? There is so much to be learned about the human brain and why people have issues. Why don’t we already understand these issues better?