The Arrest of Sandy Hook Killer’s Psychiatrist Raises a Host of Issues

May 8th, 2016 | Breaking News

Dr. Paul Fox, the primary psychiatrist for Sandy Hook shooter, Adam Lanza, has been charged with three felony counts of sexual assault on a then 19 year-old patient that reportedly occurred back in 2010-2011. Getting to Fox’s arrest has been a complicated journey, raising a host of issues that, frankly, need to be addressed.

First the original investigation, regarding accusations of sexual assault, was conducted four years ago in March of 2012 by the State of Connecticut Department of Public Health. During that investigation several important issues came to light, one of which involved Fox’s psychiatric drug prescribing practices.

According to the investigative file, over the course of one year, Fox prescribed what the victim called a “dynamic cocktail of psychiatric drugs.” The “constantly changing mix” of psychiatric drugs included: Ativan (anxiety), Saphris (bi-polar disorder), Abilify (schizophrenia), Nuvigil (sleep apnea, narcolepsy), Prozac (Major-depression, OCD), Zyprexa (Schizophrenia, bi-polar disorder), Xanax, and Vistaril (anxiety, tension). Vistaril also is used as a sedative and for general anesthesia.

After reviewing the above cocktail of psychiatric drugs, one can only wonder how anyone could even remotely believe the victim participated in “consensual” sex with Fox, especially in light of the victim’s comment that she was “usually drugged up out of (her) mind…” That is an understatement, and begs the question: if Fox is drugging his patient’s with cocktails of drugs, was Adam Lanza a victim of Fox’s prolific drugging?  How many different psychiatric diagnoses did Fox subjectively bestow on Adam Lanza and what kind of psychiatric “dynamic cocktail” was Lanza prescribed while a “patient” under Fox’s “care.”

Tough to know. The State refuses to release Lanza’s mental health records or autopsy/toxicology results and Fox claims to have little memory of Lanza. Fox also claims to have destroyed his medical records prior to his 2012 departure to New Zealand.   Apparently law enforcement never thought it important, at least, to review Fox’s billing records, which Fox claims still existed in December of 2012. So how about now? Has Fox retained the billing records of his patients and will law enforcement finally look at them?

This is an important question. When Fox surrendered his medical license in July 2012 he also agreed (as a condition of surrender) to adhere to the records retention laws of Connecticut (19a-14-44). Fox was required to retain all medical and billing records for patients up to seven years after the last date of “treatment.” If one accepts that Fox last saw Lanza in 2007, then Fox admits he destroyed Lanza’s “treatment” records two years too early. And, of course, one can only assume that the records of the alleged victim(s) of Fox’s reported sexual assault also have been destroyed.

Furthermore, one has to wonder what responsibility the Department of Health has when it comes to alleged sexual predators masquerading as doctors and working as counselors in the state’s universities. According to the investigation, the State Department of Health concluded that “review of the documentation identified exchanges between the patient and the respondent that exceed the boundaries of a professional doctor, patient relationship.”

But has the public health and welfare been served by allowing the doctor to simply surrender his license? Should the State be required to, at a minimum, report serious sexual assault allegations to local law enforcement?

And one simply cannot ignore what appears to be another questionable patient “treatment” problem which has arisen in New Zealand, where Fox fled to practice psychiatric counseling. Fox reportedly “treated” Nicky Stevens, a young man who died while under psychiatric care in New Zealand.

The questions regarding that case are too numerous to even consider. But one cannot help but question the obvious. If Fox surrendered his license to practice medicine and prescribe drugs in July of 2012, how was he allowed to practice psychiatric counseling and prescribe psychiatric drugs in New Zealand?

Additionally, Danbury State’s Attorney, Stephen Sedensky, will be prosecuting Fox’s case, because he tells Ablechild that the sexual assault charges are “the strongest.”   But Ablechild cannot help but wonder why Sedensky, who, according to the Sandy Hook investigation, knew about the allegations of Fox’s sexual assault, the failure of Fox to retain his records and the questionable psychiatric drugging back in 2012, didn’t initiate an investigation of Fox at that time. The information, that was available in 2012, hasn’t changed.

These are important questions because there are victims of what appear to be blatant psychiatric abuses. These are important questions because, in the immediate aftermath of Sandy Hook, Connecticut lawmakers passed sweeping, costly, mental health legislation without having any information to warrant the increased mental health services.

In fact, based on what has been revealed in the Department of Health investigation about Dr. Paul Fox, Adam Lanza’s last known primary psychiatrist, it would appear that an investigation into psychiatric practices in the state were actually needed. And if ever there was an argument for release of Lanza’s mental health records for the five years leading up to the shooting, it doesn’t get any better than simply reviewing the long-known unquestionably abusive mental health services provided by Fox.

 

 

 

 

 

Milford, CT School Sued for Student’s Mental Health Treatment Prior to Murder

March 17th, 2016 | Breaking News

According to the Newtown Patch, a recently filed lawsuit, regarding the stabbing of Maren Sanchez alleges that “Maren reported to the high school guidance department her concern that Christopher Plaskon was emotionally disturbed and was threatening to commit suicide or acts of serious self-harm by cutting himself with a knife, and that she believed it was important for high school personnel to help Plaskon, then 16, to prevent him from engaging in potentially violent conduct dangerous to himself or to others.”

With the ever-increasing number of school shootings across the nation, one must wonder if this lawsuit may be the tipping point for a national discussion on schools involvement in arbitrarily identifying students with alleged psychiatric disorders and recommending mental health “treatments,” known to be associated with an increased risks of suicide and violence?

The National Association of School Psychology, NASP, is responsible for the information that is supplied to the school psychologists that function within the school and evaluates and identifies students for eligibility for special education.  A common factor in all mass shootings and stabbings committed by students is the failure of the school system or institution to release the mental health records of the perpetrator.

The mental health records, which would reveal whether psychiatric drugs were involved during the incident, more than the choice of weapon, is the critical information needed to identify contributing factors that may help to eliminate this massive public health crisis.  Without the information contained within the mental health records, the public, as well as our lawmakers, cannot write effective legislation to protect students, families, as well as all consumers.

Is the NASP a monopoly with strong conflicts of interests that relies on privacy to shield their role in the increased risks of violence and suicide plaguing our education system?

According to the NASP services listed below, and their claim regarding the school psychologists’ unique qualifier, this lawsuit provides the public with a unique opportunity to initiate a conversation about how much power this association is given and the risks it creates for our children. After all, even NASP knows there is no known abnormality in the brain that is any alleged psychiatric disorder, making these diagnoses suspect.

Nevertheless, the NASP writes, “School psychologists are uniquely qualified members of school teams that support students’ ability to learn and teachers’ ability to teach. They apply expertise in mental health, learning, and behavior, to help children and youth succeed academically, socially, behaviorally, and emotionally.”   So, the NASP basically does it all.

Data collection and analysis
Assessment
Progress monitoring
School-wide practices to promote learning
Resilience and risk factors
Consultation and collaboration
Academic/learning interventions
Mental health interventions
Behavioral interventions
Instructional support
Prevention and intervention services
Special education services
Crisis preparedness, response, and recovery
Family-school-community collaboration
Diversity in development and learning
Research and program evaluation
Professional ethics, school law, and systems”

Is this safe? After all, it is near impossible to eliminate their involvement with a student who attends the public education system.  The NASP political influence on lawmaking only grows stronger each year.  A student has a very difficult time to refuse psychiatric evaluations and still receive special education help and is not provided informed consent on the subjective nature of their assessment tools – basically opinions of behavior.

The Milford Lawsuit is interesting in that the family seems to have chosen the right target – the school’s involvement with the perpetrator’s mental health treatment.

The State missed this opportunity in the Sandy Hook mass murder to investigate the link between mental health “treatment” and the mass shooting and to hold those treating Lanza accountable. In fact, the State used the killings to push for more mental health “treatment,” based on no evidence that Adam Lanza lacked access to school-based or community-based mental health services or that those services were not the best that money could buy. The mental health billing records, autopsy, and toxicology of Adam Lanza were never released to the public, despite AbleChild vs. Chief Medical Examiner Freedom of Information request.

What Happened to the First Amendment, Sandy Hook?

January 21st, 2016 | Press Releases

In response to Jacqueline Smith and her opinion of Professor James Tracy, two words immediately spring to mind: Toughen up. Strong reaction? Yes. But trampling on the First Amendment is serious and requires a strong response.

Smith claims that Professor Tracy doesn’t have a First Amendment right to “spew his nonsense.” There is no need to go any further in her rambling, disjointed piece. Smith simply does not understand that it is precisely this kind of “nonsense” that the Founding Fathers intended to protect.

Smith may not like, appreciate, or understand Professor Tracy’s thoughts and motives, but he has a right – and some would argue a duty – to critical thinking, and a right to publically espouse those thoughts, however repugnant they may be to Smith’s, and others, delicate sensitivities.

The problem with Smith’s thought pattern, as it pertains to the First Amendment, is that she believes that if the speech is hurtful or offensive to another then it simply is unacceptable and constitutionally unprotected. That’s not how the First Amendment works, as made clear by Smith’s own ugly diatribe directed at Professor Tracy.

Let’s not forget that the Founding Fathers believed that open dialogue was so important that they made it the FIRST Amendment, not the sixth or seventh, etc.   More importantly, that freedom of speech is unabridged and there is no caveat that the speech cannot hurt someone’s feelings.

Smith’s attack on Professor Tracy’s Constitutional rights, ultimately, is due to the Professor’s questioning of the official version of events at Sandy Hook. While Smith claims her concern is that Professor Tracy crossed the First Amendment line by making a request of Lenny Pozner, in reality, anyone remotely familiar with this important case, is fully aware that Smith’s version of events was less than unbiased.

The bigger question, though, is why questioning the official version is so offensive to an alleged “newsperson?” Professor Tracy is far from the only person raising issues about Sandy Hook, as there literally are millions of websites dedicated to questioning the events at Sandy Hook and, one would think, many more millions who read them. Surely Smith is not suggesting that all of these people are not entitled to their views on the matter and must be silenced should they dare speak out publically.

What occurred at Sandy Hook has serious repercussions for not only the families of the victims and others associated with the tragedy, but everyone who is subjected to the legislative policy that has come from the incident.

As Smith well knows, the Connecticut Legislature passed sweeping, costly mental health legislation a full year prior to the release of the investigation. In other words, the legislative action was taken without full knowledge of the facts. Nevertheless, the good folks of Connecticut must not only pay for, but live by, those emotional, not fact-based, decisions. By anyone’s standards, this cannot be called responsible or thoughtful legislating.

Ablechild, a parent organization fighting for informed consent rights as they pertain to psychiatric diagnosing and psychiatric drugs, is intimately aware of the difficulties surrounding the gathering of information about Adam Lanza’s mental health records.

Despite Ablechild filing a FOIA to obtain Lanza’s mental health, toxicology and autopsy records, the state refused to publically release this information when Assistant State Attorney, Patrick Kwanashie, stated disclosure of Adam Lanza’s records “can cause a lot of people to stop taking their medications.”

These records may have provided some insight into Lanza’s actions. But to this day, despite a lengthy and costly investigation, no information about Lanza’s mental health for the five years leading up to the incident has been made publically available. Frankly, there is no information publically available that Lanza did, or did not, receive mental health services in the five years leading up to the incident.   These facts did not stop poorly thought out legislative measures from being rammed down the throats of the citizens of Connecticut.

This is just one example of the problems surrounding this incident. Anyone who read the 6700-page investigation knows there are many more. But, beyond all of this, the issue remains the right to publically discuss any, and all, issues surrounding the official version of events at Sandy Hook regardless of whose feelings may be hurt.

No, Editor Smith, you do not get to decide whose voice is worthy. You do not get to judge whose First Amendment rights are more important.  You may not like the voices you hear, or how they are used. They may be distasteful and hurtful, but every American has a right to that voice. It’s quite possible that Professor Tracy finds your opinion hurtful, and he may even think that you are writing it to purposefully harass him, but even he would have to agree that you are entitled to your damning words.

 

 

AbleChild Participates in Gun Violence Roundtable in Bridgeport, Connecticut

July 1st, 2015 | Press Releases

On June 29, 2015, AbleChild was one of two organizations that participated in an important Roundtable on gun violence, held in Bridgeport, Connecticut.  Mayor Bill Finch, Senator Richard Blumenthal, and Bridgeport Police Chief, Joseph Gaudett Jr., hosted the event in response to yet another community rocked by an attempted mass killing in Bridgeport, Connecticut that took the life of one and injured eight others.

Kenny Jackson of Street Safe, an organization that mentors young people, told the group, “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people,” referring to Senator Blumenthal’s attempt to sue gun manufacturers, go after the NRA, and ban “illegal” weapons.  Jackson illustrated that it is the human element that his organization’s mission focuses on, including increased parental involvement and mentoring programs.

Jackson introduced several of his staff members who shared their stories about their own journeys through the criminal justice system. AbleChild is in agreement with one of the member’s experiences with a child he mentored in the Bridgeport public school system. The Street Safe member said the student was misdiagnosed with a psychiatric disorder, ADHD, and thought there was great need for increase numbers of parent advocates for families meeting in Individual Education Plans (IEP).

Mayor Finch indicated that over-diagnosing may be due to “cultural differences” and that this was not the first time he had heard of psychiatric misdiagnosing.  AbleChild believes over-diagnosing is the product of mass marketing of psychiatric drugs and the lack of informed consent.

AbleChild’s mission is informed consent regarding psychiatric diagnosing and the potentially deadly “treatment” that is recommended.  The DEA classifies many of the mind-altering psychiatric drugs as “controlled substances.”  The “treatments” are associated with increased risk of suicide and violence according to the Food & Drug Admistration’s Black box warning on the drug packaging.

Senator Blumenthal, one of the sponsors of the roundtable, explained his desire to propose legislation to ban the use of illegal guns termed straw purchases. AbleChild does not understand how Senator Blumenthal believes a ban on an already illegal process would reduce gun violence.

AbleChild pointed out the recent indictment of several Newtown police officers who were reportedly involved in the distribution of controlled substances and “illegal” guns (4 long guns), exactly what Senator Blumenthal is trying to ban.

Furthermore, on November 26, 2013, one day after the release of the report of the Sandy Hook tragedy, Senator Blumenthal held a roundtable discussion in Bridgeport with the intent to reduce gun violence .  According to Senator Blumenthal, “The report on the Newtown tragedy revived the memories of what gun violence did not only to the Newtown community but to all communities.”

So it appears to be the same old, same old.  It is all about guns and no personal responsibility. Despite the fact these roundtables have been held on several occasions, lawmakers and law enforcement refuse to look outside the possibilities that something or someone is responsible other than a gun.  And the violence will continue.

 

 

 

Newtown Panel to Deliver Final Report Friday, March 6, 2015

March 4th, 2015 | Breaking News, Press Releases

In the immediate weeks after the mass murder and suicide at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut that left 20 first graders and seven adults dead, Governor Malloy selected 16 experts to make recommendations, many of whom have ties with the behavioral health industry and Yale Child Study Center, the last place Adam Lanza was treated.

Their task according to the New York Times article, Members of Newtown Shootings Panel Recall Toll Their Work Took, by Kristin Hussey, published on March 3, 2005, was “to examine the event.”

The two years of 29 closed sessions to the public were televised where selective “stakeholders” were invited to participate. The carefully scripted agenda did not focus on any material or physical evidence.

The first guest speaker invited by the Sandy Hook Advisory Commission (SHAC) was Former Colorado Governor Bill Ritter.  Governor Ritter did not discuss the mental health records of 18-year-old Eric Harris and his accomplice, Dylan Klebold who killed 12 students and a teacher and wounded 26 others before killing themselves in the Columbine High School massacre, a school shooting that occurred on April 20, 1999, at Columbine High School in Columbine.

Harris was on the antidepressant Luvox.  Klebold’s medical records remain sealed.  Both shooters had been in anger-management classes and had undergone counseling.  Harris had been seeing a psychiatrist before the shooting. Source: Citizen’s Commission on Human Rights.

The state police report, toxicology, autopsy, ballistics reports, and educational records were not incorporated within the hearings or incorporated in the recommendations.  The public was denied access to this critical information.

The public only had access to a fragmented 6,700 page police report that is often referred to in pharmaceutical litigation as a “data dump.”

The Sandy Hook Commission at one point criticized the State Police Report in the Connecticut Post.

“But there is one problem: the recently released State Police report the panel must rely on to understand the crime is all but indecipherable, some members of the Sandy Hook Advisory Commission say. Indeed, the report is so disorganized that the commission has sought the help of a Hartford law firm to turn the 6,700 page file — an online collection of hundreds of individual documents, without a table of contents or index — into a searchable database. “I think all of us have gone into the document pages and were just never quite sure whether we missed something or have gotten to the thing that matters most to us,” said Hamden Mayor Scott Jackson, chairman of the commission.”

The 6,700 pages were never indexed or placed in a searchable database as promised by the Commission.  In fact, AbleChild had to pressure the Governor’s office to release the name of the legal firm that offered it’s services pro-bono.

Furthermore, according to the New York Times article, “The Sandy Hook experts were struck by a common denominator in mass shootings:  the killer’s lack of social connectedness.”

It is easy to illustrate the common denominator with the material evidence that has been disclosed for multiple school shootings, which is more likely the mental health “treatment” itself, the mind-altering drugs.

According to the Citizen’s Commission on Human Rights who published documents showing between 1988 and January, 2013, there have been at least 31 school-related acts of violence committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs resulting in 162 wounded and 72 killed.

The Newtown Panel is expected to deliver their final report to the Governor, Friday, March 6, 2015.  We know from the New York Times article, that one panel member took a trip to Japan to deal with producing the long awaited report, while another panel member compared Adam Lanza and all children’s lack of social connectedness and isolation, as serious as taking a lethal dose of heroin in their bedrooms.  Very dramatic! Where are the facts to support such a comparison?  This type of “expert” authoritarian fear tactics erode informed consent protections for parents.

AbleChild has joined forces with 8 other parent right organizations to oppose these bizarre recommendations  given without supporting documentation.

In addition, AbleChild wants to clarify that PA 13-3 was passed before the state police report was released to the lawmakers as well as to the general public.

Within PA 13-3 legislation is a program called  “mental health first aid.” Mental health first aid provides training to teachers to screen and identify children without parental consent or the right to refuse.  This legislation was passed without open public meetings and is funded by a Presidential Executive Order.  In addition within that legislation was a mandate for a “taskforce” that believes the state policy should be just “shy of forced medication.” AbleChild strongly opposes PA 13-3.

AbleChild wants to point out that these screenings are subjective and lack science.  Adam Lanza was identified and screened by Danbury Hospital and released as not a harm to himself or others.  He was also provided “mental health treatment” at Yale Child Study Center. How does one return deadly mental health treatment and get a refund?

Kyle’s Story Featured on Anderson Cooper & Used by the DEA is Now Trapped on a Cocktail of Psychiatric Drugs

February 10th, 2015 | Breaking News

Robin Smith’s son, Kyle, was featured on the September of 2013 Anderson Cooper show to illustrate the dangers associated with synthetic marijuana and other street drugs. Robin also met with the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and shared Kyle’s story to educate the agency on the crisis facing teenagers today.

The Anderson Cooper report, along with Kyle’s story, helped the DEA enter into a dialogue with the Chinese importers to address the deadly synthetic drugs flooding the US market. Robin’s efforts in sharing Kyle’s experience, clearly had a very powerful impact.

In the aftermath, Robin sought the best mental health care for Kyle for his recovery from the severe adverse reaction experienced from using the synthetic drug. So where is Kyle now and how is he doing? Robin asked AbleChild if she could share Kyle’s “treatment” regiment, which includes multiple psychiatric drugs.

“My name is Robin and I am a Maryland resident. This story is about my nineteen year old son Kyle.

In April 2010 Kyle became sick after ingesting the designer street drug “synthetic marijuana”. He immediately started with psychosis and paranoia. We took him to the local emergency room, where we learned from him what he had done. He was moved to a psychiatric hospital the next day and was started on five different psychiatric medications.

Boy, how I wish I knew then what I know now. I am certain I would not be here telling you of our horrific nightmare. His journey since then has been one that I would not wish on another soul. I watched as the “psychiatric world” turned my once handsome athletic son into one of the sickest persons I have ever known.

This is what has happened to him since…………… To date: He has been hospitalized THIRTY SIX (36) times, with very long stays in inpatient hospitals and Residential Treatment Facilities. Many doctors telling us that he was one of the sickest patients on their unit. He has undergone TWENTY EIGHT (28) ELECTRICAL SHOCK THERAPY PROCEDURES, all because of his body being in delirium from all the heavy dosages of antipsychotic medications. He has tried TEN (10) times in trying to commit suicide, two being almost fatal. He has been on THIRTY PLUS (30) heavy psychotic medications, to many to list.

He has had every psychiatric diagnosis available from Bipolar to schizophrenia. I believe he does not have any of them. He has been looked at, probed, tested, been four point restrained on numerous hospital stays to his bed because of the delirium and their (doctor’s fear) of him hurting himself, banged his head for a solid week on a hospital concrete wall which resulted in frontal lobe damage, was assaulted by other patients and has been asked a thousand questions by at least FORTY psychiatrists. He lost all of his High School years. I didn’t get to see my son graduate or have his senior picture taken.

But the saddest part of this story is watching my once vibrant child turn into a sad, non-functioning person. Our dreams for his future are dulled by the constant reminder of what the psych world has done to him and what he has lost. I live in fear every day that I will get that call that he has finally succeeded in taking his life.

I continue to persevere in advocating for Kyle and my hopes are that I can find the help needed in getting him better and back to living his life. That is my only wish. I welcome any help, questions or words of encouragement. Thank you!”

Sandy Hook Commission Remedy Misfires & Injures Taxpayers and Children

January 19th, 2015 | Breaking News, Legislation Alerts

The good news is that the Sandy Hook Advisory Commission’s report finally will be released sometime in February. The bad news is that one can only wonder, after more than two years of considering “all” of the data, what additional information about Sandy Hook shooter, Adam Lanza, can be withheld from the people of Connecticut.

So far Lanza’s complete autopsy, medical and toxicology reports have been withheld from public review, as have his school and mental health records. Sure, the State Police released its report, which provides zero information about Lanza’s mental health history for the five years leading up to the shooting, and the public also has been provided a “story,” albeit confused and incomplete, by the Connecticut Office of the Child Advocate (OCA). But the only thing these reports have in common is the deliberate withholding of actual documentation to support the conclusions.

Now the Sandy Hook Commission intends to sell some narrative of events that “was really, really hard work,” that apparently will justify recommendations for massive increases in mental illness identification and treatment that, according to Commission Chairman, Jackson, “frankly will take a lot of effort and money to implement.”

Let’s not kid ourselves; the focus of the Commission always has been to recommend increased screening to identify mental illness in the schools. And, apparently, the Commission will recommend school-based psychological and social work teams that can recognize and react to mental health needs in children. In short, that equates to mental illness diagnosing and drugging.

This despite the fact that there is absolutely no data provided to the public that Adam Lanza had any mental health needs in the five years leading up to the shooting and, if he did, it certainly wasn’t the responsibility of the Connecticut school system to track him once he left the system.

In fact, the information provided by the OCA report is so convoluted that it’s difficult to follow, let alone believe. For example, Lanza’s educational and mental health records were reviewed and interviews were conducted with counselors, teachers and even Peter Lanza, yet despite more than a hundred pages of explanations of how the system dropped the ball with Lanza, nowhere does it make mention that despite his paralyzing mental illnesses, Lanza still made the Honor Roll from the eighth through the eleventh grade and graduated a year early.

How is it possible that everyone involved in the OCA report, including Lanza’s father, could miss this important information? Did anyone at the OCA actually review his school records? If the records were reviewed, then one can only surmise there was a deliberate withholding of any mention of Lanza’s superior academic achievements. Why?

But even this missing information is, well, academic. Based on what was provided in the OCA report, one can also assume that the Commission’s recommendations will provide no sanctions or penalties for the newly-formed army of psychologists and social workers who may fail the children and families of Connecticut.

In other words, there is no doubt, according to the OCA report, that the IEP “team” responsible for tracking Adam Lanza’s academic and psychological needs failed in their duties. The “team” did not follow the state statutes already on the books. Will there be some form of disciplinary action taken for such failures moving forward? The OCA made no such recommendations.

More importantly, what recommendations will the Commission provide to protect families from over-reaching and intrusive mental health providers? Given the fact that mental illness diagnosing is not based in science or medicine, making it completely subjective, will the Commission provide the parents of Connecticut some avenue of recourse?

It seems a legitimate recommendation. After all, if the state intends to gouge taxpayers for the mental illness services in its schools, then the state also must be prepared to accept responsibility for its failures. Given the known flaws in psychiatric diagnosing, there will be many.

Thomas Insel, the Director of the National Institute of Mental Health, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), psychiatry’s diagnosing manual, said “the weakness is its lack of validity” and “at best, a dictionary, creating a set of labels and defining each.”

Or maybe it was Dr. Allen Frances, professor emeritus of psychiatry, Duke University, and chairman of the task force to revise the DSM-IV, who said it best. The DSM5 “will dramatically expand the realm of psychiatry and narrow the realm of normality – converting millions more people from being without mental disorders to being psychiatrically sick.”

If the state accepts the Commission’s reported recommendations there is little doubt that the number of school children being labeled as mentally ill will skyrocket. This psychiatric onslaught of the state’s children seems odd given the fact that it has yet to be explained how the school system is responsible for the actions of a former student, five years after graduating from the system.

What’s Really Behind the Increased Violence in Connecticut?

January 12th, 2015 | Breaking News

Look at Psychiatric Drugs, Not Subjective Mental Illness Labels.

AbleChild is fascinated by the “logic” behind New Canaan Police Department’s recent flip-flop regarding firearm permits based on mental health records.

The entire debacle initially was sold as a public safety issue with New Canaan Police Chief Leon Krolikowski arguing that there was grave concern about “gun violence that has occurred in our state as a direct result of individuals that are mentally ill possessing firearms.” Krolikowski reported that he did not have access to the Department of Health & Addiction Services database and, therefore, could not issue temporary state permits.

Within a day of that announcement, Krolikowski reversed his stand when he reported that, unbeknownst to him, police actually do have access to an applicant’s mental health history through the state police department.

What is of interest, though, is Krolikowski’s remarks about the gun violence that has occurred in the state as a result of the mentally ill possessing firearms. Krolikowski did not provide specific information about the number of mentally ill possessing firearms or, for that matter, what mental illnesses were involved.

Is Krolikowski referring to the Sandy Hook Shooting and Adam Lanza? If so, no permits for the firearms used at the Sandy Hook shooting were issued to Adam Lanza. Additionally, neither of Adam Lanza’s mental health issues would have precluded him from obtaining a firearm permit. Adding insult to injury, the State of Connecticut has refused to make public Lanza’s mental health records. Worse still, Lanza’s psychiatrist, Dr. Paul Fox, destroyed his records without any repercussion. Simply put, there is no way for law enforcement (or anyone) to know whether Lanza had some unknown mental illness that would have precluded his obtaining a permit.

While AbleChild supports any effort to protect public safety, it seems there are other actions that could be taken by Connecticut’s law enforcement personnel that may prove more effective in understanding what actually may be behind the increased violence in the state. For example, rather than collect information about an applicant’s mental illness label, law enforcement may find it more advantageous to collect data about the “treatment” being prescribed.

There is overwhelming evidence that psychiatric drugs, prescribed to “treat” mental illness, cause violent behavior. In fact there are twenty-two international drug regulatory warnings that cite psychiatric drugs causing violent behavior, including mania, hostility, violence, aggression and homicidal/suicidal ideation.

Between 2004 and 2012, there were nearly 15,000 reports to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) MedWatch system on psychiatric drugs causing violent side effects, including more than fifteen hundred cases of homicidal ideation/homicide, 3,287 cases of mania and more than eight thousand cases of aggression.

Furthermore, according to a 2011 study from the Institute for Safe Medication Practices, published in the journal PloS One, and based on data provided by the FDA’s MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting System, 31 drugs were linked to reports of violent behavior. Nine of these were psychiatric drugs prescribed to “treat” mental illness, including the antidepressants prestig, Effexor, Luvox, Strattera, Paxil, Prozac and Chantix; Amphetamines used to treat ADHD; and the benzodiazepine, Halcion.

As the mental health industry most often prescribes psychiatric drugs for the “big four” “mental disorders,” which include depression, ADHD, bi-polar and schizophrenia, it would appear that having information about what is being prescribed is far more important than the psychiatric label.

Many states in the nation collect psychiatric drug data upon arrest and, if transferred to the county jail, processing must include this data, as the suspect will be provided the medication while awaiting trial. This data would provide a larger picture of those who are committing violent crime while being treated with a psychiatric drug and also would provide detail about which drugs are most implicated.

Denying Constitutional rights based on subjective psychiatric labels, which are not based in medicine or science, does little to protect public safety. One need only look at recent actions taken by the Russian government to restrict those with “gender identity disorders, disorders of sexual preference and psychological and behavioral disorders associated with sexual development and orientation” from driving in the country to see that restricting basic rights based on subjective psychiatric labeling is a slippery slope.

In the case of Connecticut, today, restrictions are imposed on those who have been labeled with a subjective mental illness and voluntarily or involuntarily committed. The question is whose rights will be restricted tomorrow?   If law enforcement is really interested in what is causing the increase in violent crime, Ablechild believes that information can easily be obtained by looking at psychiatric drugs taken by those committing the crimes.

Mom of George Washington Carver Arts & Technology Student Wants “Nemphos” Mental Health Records Revealed for Public Safety

November 7th, 2014 | Breaking News

A Baltimore mother, who has a child attending the school where the recent aborted mass-shooting plot by 16-year old Sash Nemphos was foiled, has contacted AbleChild. This mother’s concerns shine a light on the idiocy of Connecticut Governor Malloy and his Sandy Hook Advisory Commission’s latest recommendations targeting homeschoolers in the aftermath of Sandy Hook mass murder. Governor Malloy’s Commission wants “special education program teams,” to conduct mental health assessments on children homeschooled.

Rather than address, and make public, the specific mental health history of Newtown shooter, Adam Lanza, the Sandy Hook Advisory Commission intends to force the State’s ever-broadening mental health policies on the families of those who choose opt-out of the public school system to homeschool.

The Baltimore mother only recently returned her child to the Maryland public school system after years of homeschooling. Having been acutely aware of the recent school shootings, this mother rightly questions, whether the would-be school shooter’s intended actions in any way were precipitated by psychiatric drugs, prescribed to “treat” an alleged mental disorder?

This Baltimore mother’s call for the attempted shooter’s mental health records further support AbleChild’s belief that the mental health/medication history of school shooters is a public safety issue across the Country.

According to police reports, sophomore Nemphos had homemade explosive devices and had a gun at his home, intending to go to the Baltimore area George Washington Carver Center for Arts and Technology and use these weapons to kill. The planned attack only was uncovered by police officers when they stumbled upon the plot while investigating a series of auto break-ins.

This question is as relevant today for this Baltimore area mother as it was on December 14, 2012 for the parents of Newtown, where Adam Lanza carried out a brutal killing spree, taking the lives of 26 innocent people.

What is odd about the Commission’s decision to drag homeschoolers into the mental-health mix, like every other aspect of the Lanza investigation, is that, to date, no factual, supporting information has been provided to back up this recommended action. The Commission has not provided the public with any specific information about Lanza’s education history, including any specific information about the reported years Lanza was homeschooled.

The fact that the Commission has inserted homeschooling into the Sandy Hook mental health equation becomes even more bizarre when one considers that according to publicly available information, the only time Adam Lanza was “homeschooled” was for a few months in the fall of 2005 – seven years prior to the shooting incident. During this time, a psychiatrist, Paul Fox, saw Lanza. Between 2006 and 2007, mental health professionals at the Yale Child Study Center also saw Lanza. And, in 2006, Newtown High School psychologist, Michael Ridley, evaluated Lanza.

While the Sandy Hook Advisory Commission would like to suggest that because Lanza was homeschooled he, therefore, slipped through the mental health cracks, no information has been made publicly available to support these assertions.

The available information paints a very different picture. Lanza’s mental health issues were known throughout his public school years and accommodations were made by the public school system to help the family with Lanza’s reported deteriorating mental health.

The Baltimore mother who contacted AbleChild summed up what really is at the heart of the Sandy Hook tragedy when she wrote, “More now than ever, our children are being placed on psychiatric drugs, which carry warnings of psychosis, suicidal and homicidal thoughts and tendencies. Many of these kids will tell their parents that they don’t like the way these drugs make them feel, but are forced to take them anyway. For every one of these children who carries out an act of violence there are hundreds more screaming for help, but the only help they get is more drugs.”

This mother wants to know whether the would-be child killer in Baltimore was taking psychiatric drugs. Like AbleChild, she believes that it is a matter of public safety. The people of Connecticut have yet to learn the motive behind the Sandy Hook attack and, as the Sandy Hook Advisory Commission seems more interested in creating new victims of the mental health system at the expense of homeschoolers, it seems likely they never will. The Commission’s unwillingness to reveal Lanza’s mental health/medication history does nothing to ensure the public’s safety.

 

 

Sandy Hook Promise at Odds with Constitution and Other Parents

October 29th, 2014 | Breaking News

Sandy Hook Promise founder, Rob Cox, recently asked the question, “Did the law, and our Constitution, make this massacre easier to carry out?” His organization advocates for massive mental health screening for all children, according to the Burlington Free Press article, “Sandy Hook lessons yet to be learned, two years later“.

This is the same “mental health screening” that clearly failed Adam Lanza at Danbury Hospital, where he was screened by the Department of Psychiatry for harm to himself and others and released prior to the mass murder in Sandy Hook, Newtown, Connecticut.

According to the Burlington Free Press Interview, “In asking these wrenching questions, Cox was essentially framing the mission of the organization he would help to forge during the coming weeks in Newtown, Sandy Hook Promise.”

This has prompted AbleChild cofounder, Patricia Weathers, to ask some pointed questions to the founder, Mr. Cox, who has garnered the attention and support of the mainstream media, politicians, and financial supporters.

“This stunning “anti-constitutional” mission of the Sandy Hook Promise should have us all alarmed,” says Patricia Weathers.

The question, Mr. Cox, why are you not asking for the medical and mental health records like AbleChild, or finding it a little “strange” to say the least that there are just too many discrepancies in the reporting?

Why does Sandy Hook Promise blame the Constitution and yet does not want access to all the data involved in the “treatment” that failed this young adult?

Cox seems to buy into the State’s “Lanza Narrative”  that he didn’t get mental health treatment or needed drugs instead of looking to facts within the police investigative report.  Is this why Cox hasn’t asked for the records to be opened or held the State of Connecticut and the Sandy Hook Commission accountable to the public?

My son was placed on psychiatric drugs with dangerous side effects and had a violent adverse event.  Being a mother who testified before the FDA and Congress with the hundreds of parents that have had children who have died as a result of antidepressants linked to violence and suicide, I know that parents who want answers DON’T STOP until all information is revealed and all questions are answered. These parents, despite their loss, fought through the bureaucratic rhetoric to get to the truth and based on this truth changed appropriate laws and worked to get a Black Box Warning on the drugs and TV Ads so that other children would not share the same fate. They were not pawns for one political group pushing an agenda. They saw through this and the pharmaceutical conflict of interest within the government.

Perhaps this is why the Sandy Hook Promise doesn’t have all the Sandy Hook victims’ families that lost a child on that horrifying day supporting their efforts.  A fact Cox admits in the article.

An organization like Sandy Hook Promise, that blame the Constitution and uses innocent victims to spread misinformation without having all the facts is reprehensible.  This organization, by pushing forced mental health treatment and gun control without public hearings is endangering our children and violating parental rights.  This flies against the very foundation of this Country.

Page 1 of 41234
Website Design by Chroma Sites