Sandy Hook Advisory Commission Excludes Nancy Lanza

January 30th, 2015 | Blog

Why is the Sandy Hook Advisory Commission excluding the murder victim, Nancy Lanza, in its “dedication?”

The people deserve a fact-based report on the evidence, not a white-washed narrative to cover up the failures of  the Yale Child Study Center, Dr. Paul Fox, and Dr. Robert King and their involvement with Nancy Lanza.

Likely, the Sandy Hook Advisory Commission believes the taxpayers are not smart enough to understand how this mass murder/suicide has been twisted into a marketing blitz, with a focus on increased mental health services.

Obviously, the state believes it is necessary to pick and choose whom to release information, and doesn’t believe the taxpayer is smart enough to weigh all the facts and come to their own conclusions.

This seems like a waste of time, money, and effort as public safety falls to the side.

http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Killer-s-mom-not-a-Sandy-Hook-victim-in-6051438.php#photo-7248007

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.

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.

The Hunt For Lanza’s Mental Health Records Becomes Embarrassing For the State

January 24th, 2014 | Breaking News

The Hunt For Lanza’s Mental Health Records Becomes Embarrassing For the State

According to media reports today, Peter Lanza, father of Sandy Hook shooter, Adam Lanza, has had a conversation with the Chairman of the Sandy Hook Advisory Commission, Scott Jackson, regarding Lanza’s willingness to provide the much needed and, frankly, necessary mental health records of his son.

Oddly enough, it appears that Lanza is the only person who truly understands how important this information is and relayed through Jackson that “he (Lanza) believes that retroactive psychoanalysis is fraught with danger.”

In other words, any psychological autopsy done without having all his son’s medical/mental health  information is nothing but speculation and certainly not worthy of building recommendations for sweeping changes within Connecticut’s mental health services programs.

The joke is that Lanza gave up these records to the police immediately following the shooting and this is reported in the State Police Report. Not only did the police have the information, so did the FBI and the state’s attorney, Stephen Sedensky.

Additionally, medical/mental health records were taken from Nancy Lanza’s home immediately after the shooting. Clearly, it is no secret that investigators have these records. Why then hasn’t the commission requested the records from the investigative bodies?

It is incomprehensible to think that Jackson is forced to go begging to the father of the shooter for these records when they were in the hands of the investigators almost immediately.

More distressing is that fact that the state’s attorney knows much more than has been released. Recall that as a result of Ablechild’s law suit to obtain Lanza’s mental health/full toxicology records, we were told by the State’s Assistant Attorney General, Patrick B. Kwanashie, that the reason for not releasing Lanza’s medical records was because it would cause a lot of people to stop taking their medications.”

Where did Kwanashie get that information?  What medications would people “stop taking” if Lanza’s records were made public?  And, in fact, is it because of the medications that Lanza had been prescribed that there appears to be an effort to suppress this information?

Furthermore, recall that the state Office of the Child Advocate was tasked with investigating the deaths at Sandy Hook and requested “any and all records, and all communications Newtown School personnel and any and all entities.”  After having issued a subpoena to obtain those records, there is no follow-up as to whether the Office of the Child Advocate ever got them.  But, it is one more avenue that the commission may take advantage of.

What is certain is that at least the last five years of Lanza’s mental health records are unaccounted for and they are absolutely necessary if the commission is to make any recommendations about the State’s mental health care system.

What also is certain is that the “hunt” for Adam Lanza’s mental health records is becoming embarrassing.  Ablechild would suggest that the commission talk to the investigative bodies, Dr. Robert King of the Yale Child Study Center, Dr. Paul Fox, the Office of the Child Advocate, and the Assistant Attorney General, Patrick Kwanashie.  The records exist. Finding out why they are being treated as a “State Secret” is another matter.

Website Design by Chroma Sites