Mental Health Screening in Schools Signals the End of Parent

[Anonymous]

Tom is speaking from what his religion taught him to say.

[SHH Anon Classics]

Legal waivers
Recent legal actions involving the Church of Scientology's relationship with its members (see Scientology controversy) have caused the church to publish extensive legal documents that cover the rights granted to its followers. It has become standard practice within the church for members to sign lengthy legal contracts and waivers before engaging in Scientology services, a practice that contrasts greatly with many mainstream religious organizations. Recently in 2003, a series of media reports examined the legal contracts required by Scientology, which state that, among other things, Scientology followers deny any and all psychiatric care that their doctors may prescribe to them:

"?I do not believe in or subscribe to psychiatric labels for individuals. It is my strongly held religious belief that all mental problems are spiritual in nature and that there is no such thing as a mentally incompetent person ? only those suffering from spiritual upset of one kind or another dramatized by an individual. I reject all psychiatric labels and intend for this Contract to clearly memorialize my desire to be helped exclusively through religious, spiritual means and not through any form of psychiatric treatment, specifically including involuntary commitment based on so-called lack of competence. Under no circumstances, at any time, do I wish to be denied my right to care from members of my religion to the exclusion of psychiatric care or psychiatric directed care, regardless of what any psychiatrist, medical person, designated member of the state or family member may assert supposedly on my behalf." ? from the official Scientology release form for the Introspection Rundown, offered by the Church of Scientology to its members, (c) 2001.
See also: Introspection Rundown
[edit]
Church or business?
From 1952 until 1966, the Scientology was administered by a secular organization called the Hubbard Association of Scientologists (HAS), established in Arizona on 10 September 1952. In 1954, the HAS became the HASI (HAS International). The first Church of Scientology was founded in December 1953 in Camden, New Jersey. This, along with two other groups chartered by Hubbard at the same time?the Church of American Science and the Church of Spiritual Engineering?were soon abandoned by Hubbard. The first incorporated Church of Scientology was founded in California on 18 February 1954, changing its name to "The Church of Scientology of California" (CSC) in 1956. In 1966, Hubbard transferred all HASI assets to CSC, thus gathering Scientology under one tax-exempt roof. In 1967, the IRS stripped all US-based Scientology entities of their tax exemption, declaring that Scientology's activities were commercial and that it was being operated for the benefit of Hubbard. The church sued and lost repeatedly for 26 years trying to regain its tax-exempt status. The war was eventually settled in 1993, after the church paid over $12 million to the IRS and the IRS agreed to make the church a tax-exempt nonprofit organization again. According to "Scientologists and IRS settled for $12.5 million" in The Wall Street Journal published on December 30, 1997, exemption was granted after Scientology paid a settlement of $12.5 million to the IRS to cover its outstanding tax liabilities. In addition, Scientology also dropped its more than fifty lawsuits against the IRS when this settlement was reached. Scientology frequently states that its tax exemption is proof that the United States government accepts it as a religion.

In other countries, though, the Church of Scientology is not recognized as a bona fide religion or charitable organization, but is regarded instead as a commercial enterprise. (Sentence of German Labor Court). In early 2003, in Germany, Scientology was granted a tax-exemption for 10% license fees that are sent to the US. This exemption, however, is related to a German-American double-taxation agreement, and has nothing to do with tax-exemption in the context of charities law. In several countries, proselytizing activities of Scientology on public ground undergo the same restrictions as commercial advertising, which is interpreted as religious persecution by the Church of Scientology.

Official reports on Scientology in countries such as Britain, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand have yielded unfavorable observations and conclusions. In Britain, Scientologists were banned from entering the country between 1968 ? 1980; more recently, an application by Scientology for charitable status was rejected after the authorities decided that its activities were not of general public benefit. In Germany and Russia, official views of Scientology are particularly harsh. It is seen as a totalitarian organization, and is or has been under observation by police and national security organizations.

The Church of Scientology claims to be non-denominational and compatible with all faiths; however, a deeper study of Scientology shows that its worldview and teachings do contradict those of religions such as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

The Church of Scientology also claims that in 1994, a joint council of Shinto Buddhist (Yu-itsu Shinto) sects in Japan not only extended official recognition of Scientology, but also undertook to train a number of their monks in its beliefs and practices as an adjunct to their own meditations and worship. This continues, according to Scientology, a long tradition of Eastern faiths of assimilating or adopting elements of other faiths which they find harmonious with their own. This may be a reflection of the fact that Hubbard acknowledged a strong Eastern, and specifically Buddhist influence in forming his own personal philosophy. However, academic researchers have noted that Hubbard's grasp of eastern religions was shallow and often inaccurate (see Prof. Stephen A. Kent, Scientology's Relationship With Eastern Religious Traditions).

In Israel, the Church of Scientology does not use the term "Church" as part of its name, possibly because of the Christian connotation of the term in Jewish culture. When asked, most Israeli Scientologists deny that Scientology is a religion, and low-level adherents appear genuinely surprised when they are confronted with English-language Scientology material in which the word "Church" is used. Scientology is also somewhat restricted by Israel's anti-missionary laws. There are many active Jewish religious organizations that confront Scientology like Lev L'Achim. They provide hotlines and other services to warn citizens of the many seemingly legitimate fronts that Scientology hides behind in Israel. Something similar happens in Scotland, where Scientology operates as the "Hubbard Academy of Personal Independence"; it is believed that Scottish law does not permit Scientology to call itself a religion.

Unlike many other well-established religious organizations, the Church of Scientology maintains very strict control over its names, symbols, religious works and other published writings. The word Scientology (and many related terms, including L. Ron Hubbard) is a registered trademark. The Church takes a hard line on people and groups who attempt to use it in organizations and practices that are not affiliated with the official Church of Scientology (see Scientology and the legal system).

[Deborah]

I s'pose he is. As Brooke is speaking what her shrink taught her. Two people, two opinions, representing millions of other experts/ people/opinions.

If you think the only anti-psych voice comes out of his church, you are ill informed.

Can you offer anything other than "Cruise is saying what his church taught him"?

Sooooo what? Let's look at the issue that is pertinent to the discussion.

Say for instance, can you provide proof that anything he said is false?

Do you have any shred of evidence that MIes are legitimate medical 'diseases' and that psych drugs will 'cure' them?

Here's how that goes.
Zoloft commercial claims:
1) No one knows what causes depression. Truth
2) One THEORY is that there?s a chemical imbalance in the brain. Truth. Theory does not = proof.
3) Zoloft works to correct this imbalance. Implying a ?cure??  For a ?theory??

I think the average person does expect a cure. What they will soon learn is that they will be on Zoloft the rest of their lives and god forbid the massive emotional hurricane that will reek havoc if they somehow get separated from their drug.

[Deborah]

Please don't start spamming this thread with lengthy Anit-Scientology propoganda. Start your own thread and post away. It distracts from the topic of "Mental Health Screening" of children.

[Anonymous]

On 2005-08-24 10:50:00, Deborah wrote:

"

Please don't start spamming this thread with lengthy Anit-Scientology propoganda. Start your own thread and post away. It distracts from the topic of "Mental Health Screening" of children.

"

Who is spamming you about Scientology and why would they.

You are right, and have done your research. It is the psychiatrist who make up the mental illness and the drugs cause the symptoms!

Naysayers say that if one goes to a shrink because they already have a chronic illness and all chronic illness are managed by medications in current medicine. Then they say take away the meds and you will have the same illness the patient went to the shrink for in the first time.

That is stupid.

Mental Illness is not diabetes or even MS, rather it is all in one's head!

Right on Deborah, don't cower with an "implied threat" from the anti-Scientology people, you can de-bunk them quickly. You have the talent and you have done it before on fornits.

Don't give in to them ...

[Dolphin]

I know what post partum depression feels like.  I know what it felt like for me.  I don't know what it felt like for Brooke  Shields.  

If a doctor doesn't know what it feels like and can only make a educated "guess" then the doctor will prescribe drugs to mask the symptoms while
the symptoms are being looked at or talked about with a friend, a psychologist, etc.

There are many other options besides drugs to mask the symptoms - like bio feedback, NLP, hypnosis../ these and more other ways can make a huge difference pretty quickly.

Unfortunately for most of America, we want a quick fix and popping a pill or two is the accepted answer - the others are a quicker fix, but last longer.

I'm happy to say that I am not an advocate of quick fixes including drugs.  Sometimes the hardest thing is to do it ourselves and not depend on drugs.  

Cross Creek is not an advocate of the quick fix drug answer either.  They will get the kids off the ADD meds asap so they can begin to make some life long changes depending on themselves, not the drugs - just had to throw that in cuz I hear how some people think they drug the kids - so not true.

[Anonymous]

On 2005-08-24 10:29:00, Deborah wrote:



I think the average person does expect a cure. What they will soon learn is that they will be on Zoloft the rest of their lives and god forbid the massive emotional hurricane that will reek havoc if they somehow get separated from their drug.

"

I think it would be great support for Deborah against the anti-Scientologists if all those that
had a psych drug withdrawal that caused the inevitable massive emotional hurricane that reeked havoc on their lives would post their stories.

It could be a short, me too, or a description. Either would show support for Deborah against the
constant naysayer nemesis!

[Anonymous]

On 2005-08-24 10:29:00, Deborah wrote:

"

I think the average person does expect a cure. What they will soon learn is that they will be on Zoloft the rest of their lives and god forbid the massive emotional hurricane that will reek havoc if they somehow get separated from their drug.

"

Well, you know, if a diabetic is separated from their insulin, their body pretty much wreaks havoc on them too, and they have to take insulin for the rest of their lives. Or what about someone on dialysis?

However, I agree that some of these drug companies were negligent in warning their patients that they needed to taper when weaning themselves off of the drug and they couldn't just stop outright. (ESPECIALLY with Paxil.) In addition, you CAN stop taking Zoloft, (if you taper) especially because Zoloft rarely works indefinitely. In addition, there are a lot of people who suffer from depression who didn't always have to take anti-depressants for the rest of their lives. (However, some of them do, but can cut back their dosages after a while once they stabilize.) It just depends on your individual situation.

On 2005-08-24 11:03:00, Anonymous wrote:

"

Mental Illness is not diabetes or even MS, rather it is all in one's head!


"

Oh, buh-rilliant! And water on the knee is in one's knee! And tennis elbow is in one's elbow! Of course mental illness is in one's head for fuck's sake! That's where the fucking brain is, you moron!  :flame:

There are two problems in this country, and both problems feed into each other.

The first problem is one of stigma and trivialization of mental illness, and I think we have seen plenty of it in this thread, thank you very much. It's been around forever, but fortunately, many mental conditions and illnesses are starting to gain more acceptance and credibility.

However, that is a double edged sword, which is what the topic of this thread is about. (i.e. mental illness screening in schools, which is a complete invasion of privacy.) And that leads to the second problem: Overdiagnosis, and mis-diagnosis. Now, when this happens, especially when there is a "designer condition", such as ADD, and every kid seems to be getting diagnosed with it left and right (whether they really have it or not), it feeds into the first problem, further trivialization and disbelief in mental illness, because people are being misdiagnosed, especially when there is a focus on it in the media, which I think does more harm then good most of the time, because the media is notorious for bashing a topic to death after we've already heard about it a million times over.

On top of that, you have these drug companies on TV with their commercials pushing their medicine, which is a new thing. (I remember when they weren't allowed to do that.) When I see an ad for Zoloft (with that stupid half-assed drawn oval) right after I see one for a reality show, it loses some credibility in my eyes.

I guess a good analogy to draw to this would be rape cases. Rape is real and it happens. But every time, god forbid, a woman cries rape, and it doesn't really happen, she does an injustice to all of the women who were truly raped, because that means that the defense attorneys have that much more ammunition and will be that much more grueling and brutal on the stands in the next rape case with a woman who might have been actually raped. Every time people are misdiagnosed, and teens are put on meds that give them awful side effects that make them want to kill themselves, and stupid commercials come on TV, and the media does a huge extravaganza about it for three weeks, and things are done to trivialize mental illness, it makes it all the more difficult for mental illness in this country to be taken seriously.

It's a series of many variables that contribute to a prejudice that already existed before any of this new shit even started to happen. I personally think that the prejudice is starting to go away for the most part, actually. It's more a question of what the media decides to focus on.

[Antigen]

On 2005-08-24 17:59:00, Anonymous wrote:

The first problem is one of stigma and trivialization of mental illness, and I think we have seen plenty of it in this thread, thank you very much. It's been around forever, but fortunately, many mental conditions and illnesses are starting to gain more acceptance and credibility.

However, that is a double edged sword, which is what the topic of this thread is about. (i.e. mental illness screening in schools, which is a complete invasion of privacy.) And that leads to the second problem: Overdiagnosis, and mis-diagnosis.

A-Men and A-Men!  :nworthy:

Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich.
--Napoleon Bonaparte, French emperor

[Deborah]

Sen. Nancy Schaefer puts the Cruise issue in perspective. The shrinks done went and stepped on the 'traditionalists' toes. They don't like their dx.

Lets get right to the point. Mental health monitoring of children and adults is not a Tom Cruise, nor a celebrity, issue. It is the drugging of children and adults that demands the attention of every American.

Children in America are being medicated to death?death by mind-altering drugs. Children are coerced into mental health screening, they are forced into psychiatric treatment and they are prescribed dangerous psychotropic drugs. America's children are oftentimes denied contact with their parents, they are restrained without parental knowledge and they are given many different psychiatric medications.

Children in America are victims of fraud and death. Millions of them are diagnosed with alleged mental disorders because they are easily distracted, or they talk out of turn in class, or because they don't follow directions. Because they have discipline problems, they are subsequently drugged on substances equal to heroin and cocaine.

It is unconscionable. I am a mother of 5 children. I have four sons and one daughter. They were youngsters who, at times, were distracted, talked out of turn, or didn't always follow directions. In today's schools system and psychiatric world with forced mental health screening, my children would have been placed on deadly drugs and potent pills that are capable of completely debilitating that child?or driving them to violence or suicide.

The deadly drugging of our children should be on the front page of every paper in America. In a Family Concerns, Inc. newsletter in 2004 {a paper I produce), I wrote an article on the subject of the dangers of mental health screening of children. As a Georgia State Senator, in the 2005 General Assembly, I authored a resolution, SR128 (http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2005 ... /sr128.htm) opposing the mental health screening for all children.

Since Illinois was the first state to pass the Illinois Children's Mental Health Act (ICMHA), which created a $10 million Children Mental Health Partnership, I fearfully expected other states to follow suit and pass this dreadful piece of legislation. I want to prevent this at all costs in Georgia. The Illinois legislation calls for a social and emotional exam to be administered to all children without parental consent and for women to be examined for depression during pregnancy.

It is my understanding that many Illinois legislators were shocked when they learned what they had voted on and passed. The policy included: (1) Periodic development exams for children ages 0-18 years of age, (2) Statewide data reporting tracking system on each and every person; (3) Social emotional screening with mandated school exams for K, 4th, and 9th grades; and (4) Report cards on children's emotional development

How could this happen? And, even more important, why is this happening? In April of 2002, the Bush administration established the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. This Commission was to carry out a "comprehensive" study of the United States mental health service delivery system. According to Dr. Dennis L. Cuddy, in his article "Mental Health, Education and Social Control", Part 5, as of the end of 2004 there were "...27 sites around the country piloting various aspects of the New Freedom Initiative," which provided for strong antipsychotic and antidepressant drugs as treatment for the many "so called" mental health problems detected. Additionally, Dr. Cuddy revealed that the most powerful force behind this initiative is the pharmaceutical industry, including Eli Lilly & Company. Eli Lilly manufactures Prozac? and the antipsychotic drug Olanzapine?. In my research, I discovered that Eli Lilly is a financial supporter of Planned Parenthood?the largest abortion provider in the world?and is a proponent of population control.

Eli Lilly CEO, Sidney Taurel, I am advised, is on the Homeland Security Council. Several years ago, I interviewed Beverly Eakman about her book: "Cloning the American Mind: Eradicating Morality Through Education." Now, in her more recent book "What, Are You Crazy? The Screening of America" she wrote: "In August 2003, the National Institute of Mental Health and the National Science Foundation announced the results of their $1.2 million taxpayer-funded study. It stated that 'traditionalists' are 'mentally disturbed'. Scholars from the University of Maryland, California at Berkeley, and Stanford had determined that social conservatives in particular, suffer from 'mental rigidity,' 'dogmatism' and 'uncertainty avoidance,' together with associated indicators of mental illness. It is worth remembering that both the Nazis and Communists used mental health screenings to identify their adversaries. Globalists and internationalists must have complete control over the population to promote their faith of 'world patriotism' or should I say 'internationalism.'"

http://www.jonchristianryter.com/2005/073005.html

[Anonymous]

Parental rights?

Yup, let's keep up those parental rights so we can get another generation into BM schools ...

[Anonymous]

Does Homeschooling teach evolution or creationism?

[Anonymous]

On 2005-08-26 08:24:00, Anonymous wrote:

"Does Homeschooling teach evolution or creationism?"

Neither, if they know what they are talking about, they teach about the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

http://venganza.org/

[Antigen]

I can only speak about our own home education program. We learn about evolotion, creation, space alient, the flying spaghetti monster, the great Bob and others, as well as the people who make up their various constituencies and following. Then there's the political factor of it all.

Nothing is off limits, so we go where our interests lead us. Interests can be based on need and/or idle curiosity. I bet my 8yo knows more about a basic real estate transaction than your typical HS graduate. Why? When we sold one house and purchased another, she was only 5years old. However, whe wasn't locked away in a boring classroom "learning" sight reading. She went with us.

As democracy is perfected, the office of President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people.   On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
--H.L. Mencken

[Anonymous]

its nice to see another believer in the spaghetti monster from the sky