Skip to main content

Nuts and Shells Pave Over Same Path in Connecticut Treatment of Traumatized Children in State Care.

Written by Able Child on . Posted in Lawmaking, Sandy Hook.

Like a chilling novel, the Hartford Courant rolls out its latest article, (http://www.ct.gov/dcf/cwp/view.asp?a=4071&Q=504228) seemingly in support of the billion dollar mental health system-supported and perpetually conflicted Connecticut Department of Children and Families (CT DCF). It does so in an attempt to pave over a road littered with child victims and torn apart by a system run by mental health vendors. The Hartford Courant’s article is prominently featured on the CT DFC homepage. Josh Kovner’s piece uses the long- effective but shallow attempt to fool his readers with the nut and shell game often seen on the streets of New York City. The hand is quicker than the eye, and your money is always lost. The winner is the guy moving the shells.

The piece opens with a story of a DCF family struggling to receive proper services from CT DCF but could not because of the misguided direction of the current system. However, just like in fairytales, magic happens, the system suddenly changes and all ends well for the family. Ironically, the timing couldn’t be better.

Kovner’s article ties the suffering family’s ordeal into the timing of multi-million dollar federal grant to increase the number of outpatient community clinics and rename the troubled state psychiatric ward from “Riverview” to the Albert J. Solnit Psychiatric Center, and the Connecticut Juvenile Training School. All this happens in one shell move.

Kovner writes, “Turns out her timing was good – the state Department of Children and Families, working with experts in childhood trauma, is using a multi-million dollar federal grant to increase from 16 to about 26 the number of outpatient community clinics that practice trauma-focused therapy, and to put it in play at DCF’s most difficult facilities, the former Riverview Children’s Hospital, reorganized as the Albert J. Solnit Psychiatric Center, and the Connecticut Juvenile Training School.”

Apparently, it turns out the entire system was screwed up because the kids weren’t screened for post-traumatic stress syndrome, just like a combat soldier would be.

The Courant’s blurred report includes the following: “the result is that the true source of child’s pain is often not addressed, and his symptoms – depression, aggression, withdrawal – are often misdiagnosed, said DCF psychologist Bert Plant.”

Really? DCF was failing to correctly diagnose post-traumatic stress in children? How could Dr. Plant and other DCF staff have missed this after all these years?

One only needs to look at the long history in this DCF Billion Dollar shell game. It seems as if DCF, in quiet partnership with mental health vendors, has long-mastered how to make the most money off of Connecticut’s most vulnerable citizens. (https://www.ablechild.org/articles/index.php/billion-dollar-drug-company-law-firm-restructures-connecticut-welfare-system-2/)

Kovner’s article fails to address why 396 Medicaid-covered children under four (4) years old were prescribed dangerous psychotropic drugs in the first place? And even more incredibly, as Dr. Andres Martin, a child psychiatrist with Yale Child Study Center in New Haven, pointed out in an article eleven (11) years ago, that some of those medicated children were less than 1 year old. Perhaps Kovner, DCF and Dr. Plant should concern themselves with over-diagnosing children as opposed to their incredible concerns about under-diagnosing mental illness?

Exactly how long do we need to continue to watch the same old players move the shells around? After Ablechild’s recent testimony before the State legislature to block this “name change”, we would like to make it clear to Connecticut’s citizens, at no point was it publicly divulged that this “technical” name change would be tied to a multi-million dollar federal grant.

This shell game is not only costly, but it’s dangerous. Like the shell games on the streets of New York City, it is your money they are taking. Unlike the shell game, however, small children are exposed to risky drugs with very little potential benefit.

The DCF system is creating broken citizens and a cycle of endless victims. In 2001, the Associated Press reported that $5.8 million in State Medicaid money was spent each year on psychiatric drugs for children with State Insurance. Where are we today, wouldn’t you like to know? The shells get fancier, but the nuts remain the same.

Sheila Matthews
Ablechild.org

Testimony Before CT Education Committee

Written by Able Child on . Posted in Sandy Hook.

Testimony:

Request Insert of Language of Informed Consent Bill 5007 to Bill 5353.

Ablechild is a nationally recognized 501(3)c non-profit parent’s rights organization. Ablechild was recently featured on CNN Special Projects, Perry’s Principles (Quick to Medicate) December 10, 2011. Ablechild contributed to the groundbreaking Diane Sawyer ABC 20/20 year long investigation into the drugging of foster care children which was shown to be a major problem not only within the state of Connecticut, but throughout the Nation.

Ablechild was founded by two moms, Patricia Weathers and myself, Sheila Matthews. Both our schools diagnosed our boys with ADHD through the IEP process in our school system. This diagnosis was based off a “subjective” ADD checklist. We were never informed during the entire IEP process that this ADD/ADHD checklist was subjective and was not endorsed and had never been endorsed by the Board of Education, the State or Federal Government. We have submitted below letters from the Board of Education, State of Connecticut and a Federal Document that states they do not endorse this type of identification of children.

We were never told this checklist came from the Association of School Psychologists through research: behavioral, and clinical drug trials grants. We were never at any time informed that there is no test in existence to diagnose the condition and the diagnosis itself was not based in science. We were never informed at any time that this was a psychiatric label and that we were in essence labeling our children “mentally ill.” We were never informed that there were any other treatments for this diagnosis other than drug treatment. We were never informed at any time what the risks of this recommended drug treatment were and the fact that many of the drugs recommended were not even FDA approved for children.

In fact, we were never informed that we even had a choice to “opt out” of a school psychologist and his or her testing of our child. During this whole process we were only offered mental health services and little if any educational ones. Parents must have the right to have an education or speech and language specialist test their child instead of a psychologist. All parents should have the right to educational services that are evidence based rather than subjective not only within special education but throughout the entire education system.

For the past five years, Ablechild has fought for legislation to prevent what happened to us from happening to other parents. We in many ways have been fortunate. Our children are survivors of this very risky process. Other children have not been so lucky, being injured and having died from misdiagnosis and recommended drug treatment.

Ablechild and all of its parent members continue to urge this committee to pass an informed consent bill which focuses on full disclosure to protect not only parents informed consent rights but our children’s health and safety. Each year for the last five years, a bill for informed consent has been rejected, and it is our hope this year, that you as a committee seriously consider this issue since it involves both the protection of parent’s rights and our children’s health and safety. We are requesting that you incorporate Representative Hetherington’s proposed bill #5007 last proposed in 2011, AN ACT CONCERNING PSYCHIATRIC AND PSYCHIATRIC AND PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING OF SCHOOL CHILDREN AND PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS FOR PARENTS, on informed consent into the language of this bill 5353.

AN ACT CONCERNING PSYCHIATRIC AND PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTING OF SCHOOL CHILDREN AND PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS FOR PARENTS
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/TOB/H/2011HB-05007-R00-HB.htm

We cannot stress enough how important it is to incorporate the Hetherington bill language “5007” within bill “5353“ for parent and children’s rights.

We would be happy to expand on our request and answer any questions you may have.

Thank You for Your Consideration
The Staff of Ablechild.org

Ablechild Opens Legislative Session in CT on Foster Care Reform

Written by Able Child on . Posted in Lawmaking.

Ablechild Opens 2012 legislative Session in Connecticut Testifying before the Select Committee on Children Regarding Foster Care Reform

On February 28, 2012 Ablechild appeared before the Select Committee on Children to Oppose Bill 5217 as Written.

It was a disappointment to see the new DCF Commissioner, Joette Katz, efforts fall short presenting bill 5217 to the committee for “technical” changes requesting the name of the embattled State run psychiatric ward, “Riverview” to be changed rather than present a bill to reform the Child Welfare System. What does a name change do? The Commissioner’s efforts can be liken to rearranging the deck chairs on a leaking ship.

Diane Sawyer’s one year long investigative report into the National problem of psychiatric drugging of children within Foster Care that aired on November 30, 2011, actually included pieces from the State of Connecticut’s DCF System supplied to ABC by Ablechild.org.

Ablechild supplied ABC’s 20/20 Diane Sawyer investigation with the Pharmacy Report from “Riverview” State psychiatric ward. In addition, we would like to point out the annual budget of $29,766,625,000 for psychiatric services for Connecticut DCF. How anyone can go before this committee and present factual data that children don’t have access to psychiatric services or request a “technical change” in current policies should be forced to look at this number and explain where the money is going and how a “technical change” will solve the harmful and expensive approach to taking care of and protecting children.

While we were waiting to testify, It was amazing to sit and listen to testimony on S.B. 156, a request concerning sibling visitation for children in the care and custody of the Commissioner. The discussion circled to who would pay for the transportation to ensure the child could make the visits, thinking of that $29,766,625.00 maybe a limo by DCF? Ablechild was compelled to support S.B. 156 after listening to the DCF victims of sibling break ups when placed into DCF custody. We thought it was disheartening to hear one of the committee members point out to a sibling testifying for visitation rights that they were lucky the Commissioner stayed to hear their testimony. We assumed it was to indicate that the Commissioner cared. We thought she was paid to do that, a pointless comment from a committee member that illustrates the lopsided power DCF seems to hold. Ablechild believes this power stems from good old fashion corruption involving behavioral vendors and drug companies. https://www.ablechild.org/articles/index.php/billion-dollar-drug-company-law-firm-restructures-connecticut-welfare-system-2/. they seem to have an ability to run the legislative process.

Our recommendations during our testimony was to break up the behavioral health oversight committee that reports to the Governor. The oversight committee also makes policy recommendations to the Governor as well as to legislators which includes appropriations. Ablechild sits on that committee and our recommendations continue to fall on deaf, corrupt ears. Not surprised a “technical” name change for the ailing Riverview Psychiatric Ward is all the children get. We strongly recommend empowering and incorporating speech and language specialists within that committee that do not have “behavioral health contracts” with the State or connections with the drug companies, which includes non profit front groups. Split up the behavioral budget to focus on non-drug behavioral health solutions offered by non-drug company vendors. Incorporate the MEDWATCH reporting system as a requirement for this committee to ensure training and education on the Federal Adverse Drug Reporting system, which helps regulates drug safety.

Just a quick refresher flashback to October 20, 2008, testimony before this very same committee from then Attorney General Blumenthal. “if we want real reform at DCF — as we all do — we need a different approach. The General Assembly should mandate.

“A partial breakup of the agency, a complete overhaul of existing management, and the most important a comprehensive outside, objective review” The Attorney General went on to say, “The legislature should require recommended changes by dictating through its appropriations authority how funds are used, linking dollars to sweeping administrative reform.”

Everything this proposed bill doesn’t do.

The point the Attorney General drives home in his testimony in which Ablechid.org agrees. “The agency cannot be both contractor and regulator.” Attorney General Blumenthal, “DCF must better perform in the best interest of children. Rearranging the deck chairs cannot right this leaking, listing ship.”

Ablechild recommends that calls be placed to the Select Committee on Children to opposed 5217 as written or incorporate Ablechild.org recommendations. A name change just won’t protect children. http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/menu/MemberList.asp?comm_code=KID

Sound Deal on Teacher Evaluations in the State of New York?

Written by Able Child on . Posted in Lawmaking.

In Response to Letter “A Sound Deal on Teacher Evaluations” The New York Times Editorial/Letters Friday, February 17, 2012

A shocking $700 million from the federal “race to the top education program” was given two years ago in exchange for a push for a teacher evaluation program in the State of New York. We are now told a deal has been struck between New York State and the teacher’s union, but more details need to be worked out to break the two year blockage. OMG!

Let’s keep it simple. If you ran a hotel or restaurant and were looking to improve your services and attract new clients, you would ask for feedback to evaluate your current services through an evaluation card or survey. The customer or client would be able to evaluate their experience and rate the service. It is done all the time without spending $700 million dollars.

The New York Governor indicates that he believes holding over the teachers union heads a 4% percent increase in the State education financing penalty combined with the threat of losing federal money will be enough to get the two sides to end the two year blockage? Wait a minute, didn’t the $700 million bribe do that? Parents should be alarmed at the notion of a $700 million dollars tax bill for yet another failed education program “race to the top” that has achieved nothing at the end of two years.

The New York Governor is typically endorsed by the teacher’s union. The union is holding off on that endorsement http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20100813/FREE/100819910.
Can anyone spell M.O.N.O.P.O.L.Y? Who cares if the union endorses the Governor or not? Since when should we allow tax paid vendors, i.e. teacher’s union, to call all the shots and even pay off our politicians anyway with endorsements? If the unions serve the people with services, they shouldn’t be in the business of endorsing our lawmakers and gatekeepers that make decisions on their contracts. They should focus their attention on improving the quality of their services.

Things will only change when parents and children have a “mutiny on the bounty” and create a source website that gives other parents and children the heads up on bad quality teachers and bad programs. They are public teachers right? Why not make their reviews public? Send the $700 million dollar in federal money back. This will help us stop having to play class warfare to pay these endless Monopoly driven tax bills.

We should all be allowed to pass go and collect our $200. We are all sick and tired of landing on the luxury tax space. It is time to check the rules on the inside of the box. Let’s go rogue and create our own teacher evaluation program. I am sure it won’t cost $700 million dollars.

ABLECHILD URGES ADDING OVERMEDICATION OF CHILDREN IN STATE CARE TO GOVERNOR’S 2012 AGENDA

Written by Able Child on . Posted in Lawmaking.

Sheila Matthews
National Vice President
www.ablechild.org
(203) 966-8419

WESTPORT, CONN., JANUARY 3, 2012 – Ablechild co-founder Sheila Matthews will brief Connecticut State Healthcare Advocate Victoria Veltri today on the organization’s research into the over-prescribing of psychotropic drugs to children in foster care.

The parents’ rights organization is a sitting member of the Connecticut Behavioral Health Committee that reports directly to Governor Malloy. In today’s meeting, Matthews will share data from last month’s ABC News 20/20 report, which AbleChild helped develop. The show provided a first look at a new Government Accountability Report that found:

  • Foster children were prescribed psychotropic drugs at rates nearly five times higher than non-foster children.
  • More than a quarter of foster children were being prescribed at least one psychiatric drug.
  • Hundreds of foster children received five or more psychiatric drugs at the same time, despite no evidence that this is safe or effective.

The meeting’s agenda includes a report on the $29,766,625,000 spent on psychiatric services by Connecticut’s Department of Children and Families, and AbleChild research showing how making educational, language and vision and hearing/speech solutions available can cut costs while enabling true informed consent for parents. “The most important thing Connecticut can do now is to break the monopoly on psychiatric treatment,” Matthews says. “Medication shouldn’t be the first option addressing behavioral or learning issues and it certainly shouldn’t be the only one.”

In a November briefing with Malloy’s legislative aide, Michael Christ, Matthews also pressed for action on Proposed Bill 5007. If passed, the landmark legislation would require the state to inform parents of their rights regarding diagnosis and treatment of behavioral and mental health disorders in children.

Since 2005, Proposed Bill 5007 has remained stalled in the Connecticut Legislative Education Committee subject to reintroduction by long-time committee chair, State Representative Andy Fleischmann. Matthews says, “It’s extremely frustrating that no action has been taken on this bill for over five years while special-interest and industry-backed legislation not only moves through committees rapidly, its backers have been given fast-track access to the legislative process itself.”

Malloy is preparing his 2012 agenda, which will be announced shortly before the legislature convenes in February. “Ablechild is pleased to support Governor Malloy as he sets his course for the year ahead,” says Matthews. “Connecticut was the first state to prohibit schools from recommending the use of psychotropic drugs, three years before it became federal law. We hope Connecticut will continue to show leadership through best-practice guidelines that protect its most vulnerable residents.”

About AbleChild
AbleChild is a nationally recognized nonprofit organization dedicated to parents, caregivers, and children’s rights alike. The organization is a clearinghouse for objective information regarding ADD, ADHD, and other behavioral issues. All services AbleChild provides are free to the public. To learn more, visit www.ablechild.org.

ABLECHILD INTERVIEWED BY CNN

Written by Able Child on . Posted in Interviews.

AbleChild Co-founders Interviewed by CNN’s Steve Perry!

CNN education contributor Steve Perry interviewed Patty and Sheila yesterday for a program, “Quick to Medicate,” that will air in early December!

In this two-part episode of “Perry’s Principles,” a CNN Weekend segment examining challenges facing today’s schools, CNN profiles a family using behavioral drug treatment and commentary by Dr. Andrew Adesman, chief of developmental and behavioral pediatrics at the Steven & Alexandra Cohen Children’s Medical Center of New York of the North Shore-Long Island Jewish Health System in New Hyde Park.. Patty and Sheila shared their experiences and offered AbleChild support and resources to parents with issues regarding their child’s ADHD/ADD diagnosis and/or drugs recommended to treat it.

CNN’s Steve Perry interviews AbleChild co-founders Sheila Matthews (left) and Patricia Weathers.

Patty described the pressure she felt from the school system and doctors to treat her energetic, outgoing son with drugs. “I thought maybe they knew more than I did; these were educated people, with degrees.” Stimulants made him withdrawn and listless; adding an antidepressant made him “psychotic.” His increasingly erratic behavior prompted Patty to take him off the drugs and seek alternative solutions. “Parents often aren’t told that there are other solutions to behavioral issues because drugs are a quick fix.”

Sheila offered two key pieces of advice to parents: “First, remember that federal legislation now prohibits schools from recommending or requiring children take controlled substances. Second, it’s critical to document any adverse effects drugs have on your child through Medwatch, the FDA’s reporting system so the agency can regulate their use and consumers receive more accurate information.”

After a break to eat pizza, Perry interviewed Patty and Sheila’s younger sons, Brett and Nick. Brett related how he refused to fill out a behavioral survey administered during math class. “It asked questions like whether I ever had thoughts about hurting anyone. There was no reason for me to fill it out so I didn’t.”

Nick, who receives private tutoring through Chyten Educational Services, discussed the support he receives through public special education to serve his speech and language gaps. “Special education services help me organize my work and review with me what projects I am working on and when they are due.” Nick describes himself as a normal 16-year-old with a passion for music. His work is available on the Oven Fresh Beats YouTube channel.

Your browser may not support display of this image.AbleChild co-founder Sheila Matthews and her son Nick chat with CNN’s Steve Perry over pizza during a break from filming.

Don’t forget to tune in next month when “Quick to Medicate” airs: part one on December 3, and part two on December 10, from 7 – 8PM EST!

Keep your ADHD Label, Teach Writing.

Written by Able Child on . Posted in Articles.

Over the years, Ablechild.org has gone directly to the pipeline of ADHD, and has informed parents of the misleading information they are receiving through the public school system and the media relating to the label ADHD and the dangerous mind altering drugs that are recommended as the solution.

Writing is the latest link the drug manufacturers and psychiatric gatekeepers plan on using to lure families into psychiatric drug use. Perfect timing as children start school. Tuesday, August 23 (HealthDay News) reports that Children diagnosed with ADHD have a much higher risk of developing written language disorder, a new study indicates. The findings don’t eliminate the ADHD label or give way to the fact that millions of children have been misdiagnosed with ADHD that had underlying writing issues. The study wants to ensure children are Co-labeled.

What you will find with any ADHD study, the ADHD label is often linked with human actions, i.e., walking, talking, listening, eating, sleeping, crying, laughing and now writing. To validate the label they take those actions and link it to “a much higher risk of developing” problems and across it over to whatever obtains them more clientele. For example, Monday, July 25, 2011 big news (Reuters Health) reported that Children with ADHD are more likely to misjudge risk of walking across the street. The findings, researchers say it may explain why children with the disorder have a higher than average risk of being hit by a car. This approach to taking a verb and associating it with risk and linking with your child becomes alarming. Simple tasks become a concern, something for you to look for to become proactive about. This has created an industry that feeds off our children’s behaviors. Giving cause to analyse it all and cure it. OMG!

As school starts, know the facts and stay in the solution. Writing problems exist, but they can be solved without a ADHD Label or drugs. The recommendation should not be to Co-label a child with ADHD and a writing disorder, but to look at ensuring that schools continue to focus on the connection between writing and the development of the brain.. Thus the research they are not providing to you or mentioning in this breaking news study is a key ingredient for you to make an informed decision. Ablechild gives you a battling study for your review and a breaking news story that illustrates the failure to teach writing at the important developmental ages.

Research.

News Coverage

Stay in touch with your own reality, not what the psychiatric and drug companies want your reality to be for your child. Visit us at www.ablechild.org and let us provide you with more information so that you may make an informed decision relating to your child’s health and well-being.

Have a great start to the new school year!

Sheila Matthews
Cofounder www.ablechild.org

Billion Dollar Drug Company Law Firm Restructures Connecticut Welfare System

Written by Able Child on . Posted in Lawmaking.

By Bob Fiddaman and Shelia Matthews

For some time now, Sheila Matthews has been suspicious about her home state of Connecticut’s treatment of its most vulnerable children. As a mother of two children and co-founder of Ablechild, her instincts led her to scrutinize the dubious relationships among Connecticut’s Department of Children and Family Services [DCF], the pharmaceutical industry and a billion dollar law firm who has defended the likes of Pfizer Inc and Merck & Co., among others.

Sheila’s investigation has led her on a journey that links a non-profit children’s advocacy group, with assets over $15 million [2009] with nationally-renowned mass tort and class action defense law firms, to the Connecticut DCF – an $865 million bureaucracy, as described by the Connecticut Mirror.

The Connecticut DCF serves approximately 36,000 children and 16,000 families across its four Mandate Areas:

  1. Child welfare
  2. Children’s behavioral health
  3. Juvenile Services
  4. Prevention

Sheila’s Ablechild has been questioning the Connecticut DCF since 2003, when Ablechild demanded that the Connecticut DCF immediately ban the use of the antidepressant Paxil in its treatment of mental disorders after multiple studies confirmed Paxil increased the risk of suicide in children and adolescents. This was more than a year prior to America’s Food & Drug Association (FDA) announcement that all antidepressants, including Paxil, should bear a black box warning regarding this suicide risk. Ablechild was disturbed that children in state custody were being prescribed this dangerous psychotropic medication. Ablechild’s public pressure paid off, and the Connecticut DCF deemed Paxil unsafe for children and adolescents, and according to the DCF drug approval list, Paxil has not been approved for use in over eight (8) years.

In August 2003, less than one month later, Ablechild reported that the commissioner of the Connecticu DCF held a ‘behind closed doors‘ meeting with Glaxo officials. This meeting was reported by the Associated Press, who wrote:

The maker of the anti-depressant Paxil plans to meet this week with Connecticut officials, weeks after the State stopped using the drug to treat young people in its care.

GlaxoSmithKline, a British pharmaceutical company, is sending its regional medical director and a medical team to meet with officials from the Department of Children and Families. [Source]

Despite repeated requests from Ablechild, the Connecticut DCF refused to inform the public what was discussed at this secret meeting.

Eight years later, Sheila and Ablechild continue to raise concerns and investigate potential wrongdoings and conflicts within the Connecticut DCF. Last month, in February 2011, Sheila attended a meeting sponsored by the Connecticut Behavioral Health Partnership [CBHP], where its medical director, Dr Steven Kant, presented the Husky Behavioral Pharmacy Data. The CBHP is a state vendor that provides mental health services to DCF children. These services are paid, in part, by the State-run insurance program, HUSKY. Incredibly the pharmacy data presentation showed that dangerous psychotropic drugs, like Paxil, are still being prescribed to thousands of children and adolescents. In fact, the Pharmacy Data presentation showed that the HUSKY program, financed by taxpayer dollars, paid drug companies over $60 million for psychotropic drugs for Connecticut’s children and adolescents in 2009 alone – many of which are not approved by the FDA for use in the pediatric population and all of which carry the most serious warning possible regarding the risk of suicide.

According to the pharmacy data presentation: [Which can be downloaded as a Powerpoint presentation HERE]

More than 50% of HUSKY Youth Behavioral med utilizers are on stimulants.
Close to 30% of HUSKY Youth Behavioral med utilizers are on antipsychotics.

The pharmacy data also revealed the following:

Most Frequently Used Behavioral Meds for DCF-Involved Youth

Medications for ADHD

  • Ritalin (10%)
  • Adderall (5%)
  • Vyvanse (4%)
  • Strattera (3%)

Atypical Antipsychotics

  • Abilify (11%)
  • Risperdol (10%)
  • Seroquel (8%)

Anti-anxiety

  • Hydroxyzine (2.5%)

Antidepressants

  • Prozac (4.5%)
  • Zoloft (4%)
  • Zyban (3%)
  • Desyrel (2.5%)
  • Celexa (2%)

Mood Stabilizers

  • Lithum (3%)
  • Depakote (3%)
  • Lamictal (2.5%)

Curiously, none of the above medications are on the Connecticut DCF list of approved/unapproved drugs listed in its DCF PMAC document.

With this in mind, Sheila Matthews contacted Dr Steven Kant and inquired as to whether any of the above drugs were approved by the Connecticut DCF for use in children.

Dr Kant replied:

… the answer to your question is not that straight forward.. . . Medications may be indicated by age and/or by specific treatment needs so it is not either a simply “yes” or “no”. Also, some medications may have the age indication but for a totally different condition, such as anti epileptic condition. . .Also FDA indications are static, they do not change over time though medical practice is constantly evolving…

Contradicting the very document that lists Connecticut’s approved and unapproved drugs, a “check-off” list that verifies the status of medications, Dr Kant replied, “I don’t think a “check off” for each medication would work in terms of verifying their status.”

With such an ambiguous response from Dr. Kant, we found the DCF Approved Medication List on the Internet. This particular version was revised in 2009.

It appears that the DCF has approved drugs in children that have not been approved for children by the FDA. In fact, the FDA has issued multiple advisories and alerts since 2004 about the increased risk of suicide in children, adolescents and young adults up to age 25 who are treated with psychotropic medications.

And while Fluoxetine (Prozac) is the only medication approved by the FDA for use in treating depression in children ages 8 and older, it still carries a black box warning regarding the risk of suicide.

In contrast, the DCF seems to be ignoring the conclusions of the FDA. Its list of approved medication in children and adolescents include every single antidepressant except paroxetine [Paxil] and venlafaxine [Effexor].

Forest Lab’s citalopram [Celexa] – APPROVED

Forest Lab’s escitalopram [Lexapro] – APPROVED

Solvay Pharmaceuticals’ fluvoxamine [Luvox] – APPROVED

Pfizer’s sertraline [Zoloft] – APPROVED

GlaxoSmithKline’s bupropion [Wellbutrin -also marketed as an anti-smoking cessation drug under the name of Zyban] – APPROVED [1]

Alarmingly, the DCF has produced a guide entitled, “MEDICATIONS USED FOR BEHAVIORAL & EMOTIONAL DISORDERS – A GUIDE FOR PARENTS, FOSTER PARENTS, FAMILIES, YOUTH, CAREGIVERS, GUARDIANS, AND SOCIAL WORKERS” where it writes, “Most of the side effects from the medications are mild and will lessen or go away after the first few weeks of treatment.” The guide also points out possible side effects of SSRI’s/SNRI’s:

SSRIs and SNRIs:

  • Headache
  • Nervousness
  • Nausea
  • Insomnia
  • Weight Loss

One of the most dangerous side effects of these medications, suicidal thoughts/ideation, doesn’t even make the 5 bullet-pointed list. The Guide does, however, add the following: “Watch for worsening of depression and thoughts about suicide.”

The DCF Approved Medication List writes:

“The DCF Approved Medication List is a list of psychotropic medications that has been carefully established by the Psychotropic Medication Advisory Committee, a group of DCF and community professionals.”

Sheila has since investigated other advocacy groups that were concerned about the off-label prescribing of psychiatric medications to youths in state custody. This is where she stumbled upon Children’s Rights, a non-profit charity based in New York City.

In 2005, Children’s Rights employed ten (10) attorneys and a staff of 31. It claims to use its expertise to change child welfare red tape and scrutinize failing systems. If the child welfare system fails to respond, Children’s Rights files a lawsuit. If successful, it enforces reform and then monitors its implementation.

In 1989, Children’s Rights had in fact filed a suit against William O’Neill and the Connecticut state Department of Children and Youth Services [DCYS].

The suit charged that an overworked and underfunded DCYS failed to provide services including abuse and neglect investigations, adoption, foster care, mental health care, caseloads and staffing. The case has been pending for over twenty (20) years, and while there have been numerous arguments that DCYS should be more inclusive or has failed to provide certain services, the issue of massive off-label prescription of psychotropic medications has never been brought to the court’s attention.

Children’s Rights is chaired by Alan C Myers, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher and Flom, a billion dollar law firm which represents the pharmaceutical industry in mass torts and class actions. Myers is also co-head of the firm’s REIT Group [Real Estate Investment Trust].

Also, listed on the Children’s Rights website are individuals and law firms that have served as co-counsel on Children’s Rights’ legal campaigns to reform America’s failing child welfare systems, including:

Missouri – Shook Hardy & Bacon – Eli Lilly Co. and Forest Labs, defended the original Wesbeker Prozac trial in Kentucky and still defend Prozac, Celexa and Lexapro.

New Jersey – Drinker Biddle & Reath – GlaxoSmithKline attorneys – defended Paxil as local counsel in Philadelphia cases.

Oklahoma – Kaye Scholer LLP – provides work in Pharmaceutical Products Liability defense and employs an attorney who was former General Counsel of Pfizer, Inc.

A particular success for Skadden Arps occurred in 2010 when it secured a summary judgement ruling for Pfizer Inc. in a suit filed by two insurance companies who sought $200 million in damages for Pfizer’s predecessors alleged “off-label” marketing of its epilepsy drug, Neurontin.

Furthermore, in February 2011, Skadden Arps secured the dismissal of over 200 cases in a multi-district litigation pending against their client, Pfizer Inc. The plaintiffs had alleged injuries related to the use of Pfizer’s anti-epilepsy drug, Neurontin.

Neurontin, the generic version is called gabapentin, is prescribed by psychiatrists for a variety of “off-label” indications. It is often tried as an alternative treatment, when patients are unable to tolerate the side effect of more proven mood stabilizers such as lithium. [2]

Gabapentin has also been associated with an increased risk of suicidal acts or violent deaths.

This is a drug that has been known to cause behavioral problems, which include unstable emotions, hostility, aggression, hyperactivity or lack of concentration.

Children dependent on child welfare systems have rights and, according to its web page, Children’s Rights is dedicated to protecting them.

It should come as no surprise that the site fails to discuss the off-label prescription of non-approved psychotropic medications to children and adolescents, unless this falls under the ‘abuse and neglect’ category?

If Children’s Rights’ motive was to accomplish fixing the child welfare system then why hasn’t it investigated why thousands of children under state care are prescribed “off-label” psychiatric drugs? With a partner in a billion dollar pro-pharmaceutical law firm as its Chair, and supporters who also defend pharmaceutical products, is it safe to assume that its stance on the drugging of children is one that is being ignored?

Children’s Rights push to remove abused and neglected children into safety.

The basic question always comes down to trust. When power, money and a good cause is mixed, it is imperative to check motives. We would be less of a society if we didn’t check out all the facts. Abuse and neglect exist, always has and always will, but society is obligated to ensure those victims are not transformed into “good cause victims” and expensed out. There is no doubt we have a right to question the system and those who claim to promote change for the good of the children within it.

Children’s Rights Chairman, Alan C. Myers, Medical Director of Connecticut Behavioral Health Partnership, Steven Kant and the Connecticut Department of Children and Families may get their knickers in a twist with regard to an advocate of Ablechild and a blogger from Birmingham, UK questioning their motives but hey, what’s the downside of shinning a light on all these players, be they good or bad players?

Sheila’s concern is that Children’s Rights with its multi-million dollar budget and with the help of its billion dollar law firms, will continue to ignore the risks of these unapproved and dangerous medications, under the guise of helping our nation’s most vulnerable children. The question remains: how can the lawyers who defend pscyhotropic drugs also be the same lawyers who advocate for abused and neglected children to get into state welfare programs which place these children on the same drugs? The conflict is clear and obvious – and it poses an unmistakable danger to children who truly need our help.

[1] Bupropion [also known as Wellbutrin, Zyban] is a non-tricyclic antidepressant.
[2] Gabapentin

Bob Fiddaman is the author of the Seroxat Sufferers blog and the book, “The evidence, however, is clear… the Seroxat scandal.” Chipmunka Publishing.

Sheila Matthews is the co-founder of Ablechild and a mother of two children.

Billion Dollar Drug Company Law Firm Restructures Connecticut Welfare System

Written by Sheila Matthews on . Posted in Lawmaking.

Bob Fiddaman and Sheila Matthews
sheila@ablechild.org
(203) 594-1700

For some time now, Sheila Matthews has been suspicious about her home state of Connecticut’s treatment of its most vulnerable children. As a mother of two children and co-founder of AbleChild, her instincts led her to scrutinize the dubious relationships among Connecticut’s Department of Children and Family Services [DCF], the pharmaceutical industry and a billion dollar law firm who has defended the likes of Pfizer Inc and Merck & Co., among others.

Sheila’s investigation has led her on a journey that links a non-profit children?s advocacy group, with assets over $15 million [2009] with nationally-renowned mass tort and class action defense law firms, to the Connecticut DCF – an $865 million bureaucracy, as described by the Connecticut Mirror.

The Connecticut DCF serves approximately 36,000 children and 16,000 families across its four Mandate Areas:

1.Child welfare;

2.Children’s behavioral health;

3.Juvenile Services; and

4.Prevention.

Sheila’s AbleChild has been questioning the Connecticut DCF since 2003, when AbleChild demanded that the Connecticut DCF immediately ban the use of the antidepressant Paxil in its treatment of mental disorders after multiple studies confirmed Paxil increased the risk of suicide in children and adolescents. This was more than a year prior to America’s Food & Drug Association (FDA) announcement that all antidepressants, including Paxil, should bear a black box warning regarding this suicide risk. AbleChild was disturbed that children in state custody were being prescribed this dangerous psychotropic medication. AbleChild’s public pressure paid off, and the Connecticut DCF deemed Paxil unsafe for children and adolescents, and according to the DCF drug approval list, Paxil has not been approved for use in over eight (8) years.

In August 2003, less than one month later, AbleChild reported that the commissioner of the Connecticu DCF held a ‘behind closed doors’ meeting with Glaxo officials. This meeting was reported by the Associated Press, who wrote:

The maker of the anti-depressant Paxil plans to meet this week with Connecticut officials, weeks after the State stopped using the drug to treat young people in its care.

GlaxoSmithKline, a British pharmaceutical company, is sending its regional medical director and a medical team to meet with officials from the Department of Children and Families. [Source]

Despite repeated requests from AbleChild, the Connecticut DCF refused to inform the public what was discussed at this secret meeting.

Eight years later, Sheila and AbleChild continue to raise concerns and investigate potential wrongdoings and conflicts within the Connecticut DCF. Last month, in February 2011, Sheila attended a meeting sponsored by the Connecticut Behavioral Health Partnership [CBHP], where its medical director, Dr Steven Kant, presented the Husky Behavioral Pharmacy Data. The CBHP is a state vendor that provides mental health services to DCF children. These services are paid, in part, by the State-run insurance program, HUSKY. Incredibly the pharmacy data presentation showed that dangerous psychotropic drugs, like Paxil, are still being prescribed to thousands of children and adolescents. In fact, the Pharmacy Data presentation showed that the HUSKY program, financed by taxpayer dollars, paid drug companies over $60 million for psychotropic drugs for Connecticut’s children and adolescents in 2009 alone – many of which are not approved by the FDA for use in the pediatric population and all of which carry the most serious warning possible regarding the risk of suicide.

According to the pharmacy data presentation: [Which can be downloaded as a Powerpoint presentation HERE]

More than 50% of HUSKY Youth Behavioral med utilizers are on stimulants.
Close to 30% of HUSKY Youth Behavioral med utilizers are on antipsychotics.

The pharmacy data also revealed the following:

Most Frequently Used Behavioral Meds for DCF-Involved Youth

Medications for ADHD

  • Ritalin (10%)
  • Adderall (5%)
  • Vyvanse (4%)
  • Strattera (3%)

Atypical Antipsychotics

  • Abilify (11%)
  • Risperdol (10%)
  • Seroquel (8%)
  • Anti-anxiety
  • Hydroxyzine (2.5%)

Antidepressants

  • Prozac (4.5%)
  • Zoloft (4%)
  • Zyban (3%)
  • Desyrel (2.5%)
  • Celexa (2%)

Mood Stabilizers

  • Lithum (3%)
  • Depakote (3%)
  • Lamictal (2.5%)

Curiously, none of the above medications are on the Connecticut DCF list of approved/unapproved drugs listed in itsDCF PMAC document.

With this in mind, Sheila Matthews contacted Dr Steven Kant and inquired as to whether any of the above drugs were approved by the Connecticut DCF for use in children.

Dr Kant replied:

… the answer to your question is not that straight forward.. . . Medications may be indicated by age and/or by specific treatment needs so it is not either a simply ?yes? or ?no?. Also, some medications may have the age indication but for a totally different condition, such as anti epileptic condition. . .Also FDA indications are static, they do not change over time though medical practice is constantly evolving…

Contradicting the very document that lists Connecticut’s approved and unapproved drugs, a “check-off” list that verifies the status of medications, Dr Kant replied, “I don?t think a ?check off? for each medication would work in terms of verifying their status.”

With such an ambiguous response from Dr. Kant, we found the DCF Approved Medication List on the Internet. This particular version was revised in 2009.

It appears that the DCF has approved drugs in children that have not been approved for children by the FDA. In fact, the FDA has issued multiple advisories and alerts since 2004 about the increased risk of suicide in children, adolescents and young adults up to age 25 who are treated with psychotropic medications.

And while Fluoxetine (Prozac) is the only medication approved by the FDA for use in treating depression in children ages 8 and older, it still carries a black box warning regarding the risk of suicide.

In contrast, the DCF seems to be ignoring the conclusions of the FDA. Its list of approved medication in children and adolescents include every single antidepressant except paroxetine [Paxil] and venlafaxine [Effexor].

  • Forest Lab?s citalopram [Celexa] – APPROVED
  • Forest Lab?s escitalopram [Lexapro] – APPROVED
  • Solvay Pharmaceuticals? fluvoxamine [Luvox] – APPROVED
  • Pfizer’s sertraline [Zoloft] – APPROVED
  • GlaxoSmithKline’s bupropion [Wellbutrin -also marketed as an anti-smoking cessation drug under the name of Zyban] – APPROVED [1]

Alarmingly, the DCF has produced a guide entitled, “MEDICATIONS USED FOR BEHAVIORAL & EMOTIONAL DISORDERS – A GUIDE FOR PARENTS, FOSTER PARENTS, FAMILIES, YOUTH, CAREGIVERS, GUARDIANS, AND SOCIAL WORKERS” where it writes, “Most of the side effects from the medications are mild and will lessen or go away after the first few weeks of treatment.” The guide also points out possible side effects of SSRI’s/SNRI’s:

SSRIs and SNRIs:

  • Headache
  • Nervousness
  • Nausea
  • Insomnia
  • Weight Loss

One of the most dangerous side effects of these medications, suicidal thoughts/ideation, doesn’t even make the 5 bullet-pointed list. The Guide does, however, add the following: “Watch for worsening of depression and thoughts about suicide.”

The DCF Approved Medication List writes:

“The DCF Approved Medication List is a list of psychotropic medications that has been carefully established by the Psychotropic Medication Advisory Committee, a group of DCF and community professionals.”

Sheila has since investigated other advocacy groups that were concerned about the off-label prescribing of psychiatric medications to youths in state custody. This is where she stumbled upon Children’s Rights, a non-profit charity based in New York City.

In 2005, Children’s Rights employed ten (10) attorneys and a staff of 31. It claims to use its expertise to change child welfare red tape and scrutinize failing systems. If the child welfare system fails to respond, Children’s Rights files a lawsuit. If successful, it enforces reform and then monitors its implementation
.

In 1989, Children’s Rights had in fact filed a suit against William O’Neill and the Connecticut state Department of Children and Youth Services [DCYS].

The suit charged that an overworked and underfunded DCYS failed to provide services including abuse and neglect investigations, adoption, foster care, mental health care, caseloads and staffing. The case has been pending for over twenty (20) years, and while there have been numerous arguments that DCYS should be more inclusive or has failed to provide certain services, the issue of massive off-label prescription of psychotropic medications has never been brought to the court?s attention.

Children’s Rights is chaired by Alan C. Myers, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher and Flom, a billion dollar law firm which represents the pharmaceutical industry in mass torts and class actions. Myers is also co-head of the firm’s REIT Group [Real Estate Investment Trust].

Also, listed on the Children’s Rights website are individuals and law firms that have served as co-counsel on Children’s Rights’ legal campaigns to reform America’s failing child welfare systems, including:

  • Missouri – Shook Hardy & Bacon – Eli Lilly Co. and Forest Labs, defended the original Wesbeker Prozac trial in Kentucky and still defend Prozac, Celexa and Lexapro.
  • New Jersey – Drinker Biddle & Reath – GlaxoSmithKline attorneys – defended Paxil as local counsel in Philadelphia cases.
  • Oklahoma – Kaye Scholer LLP – provides work in Pharmaceutical Products Liability defense and employs an attorney who was former General Counsel of Pfizer, Inc.

A particular success for Skadden Arps occurred in 2010 when it secured a summary judgement ruling for Pfizer Inc. in a suit filed by two insurance companies who sought $200 million in damages for Pfizer’s predecessors alleged “off-label” marketing of its epilepsy drug, Neurontin.

Furthermore, in February 2011, Skadden Arps secured the dismissal of over 200 cases in a multi-district litigation pending against their client, Pfizer Inc. The plaintiffs had alleged injuries related to the use of Pfizer’s anti-epilepsy drug, Neurontin.

Neurontin, the generic version is called gabapentin, is prescribed by psychiatrists for a variety of “off-label” indications. It is often tried as an alternative treatment, when patients are unable to tolerate the side effect of more proven mood stabilizers such as lithium. [2]

Gabapentin has also been associated with an increased risk of suicidal acts or violent deaths.

This is a drug that has been known to cause behavioral problems, which include unstable emotions, hostility, aggression, hyperactivity or lack of concentration.

Children dependent on child welfare systems have rights and, according to its web page, Children’s Rights is dedicated to protecting them.

It should come as no surprise that the site fails to discuss the off-label prescription of non-approved psychotropic medications to children and adolescents, unless this falls under the ‘abuse and neglect’ category?

If Children’s Rights’ motive was to accomplish fixing the child welfare system then why hasn’t it investigated why thousands of children under state care are prescribed “off-label” psychiatric drugs? With a partner in a billion dollar pro-pharmaceutical law firm as its Chair, and supporters who also defend pharmaceutical products, is it safe to assume that its stance on the drugging of children is one that is being ignored?

Children’s Rights push to remove abused and neglected children into safety.

The basic question always comes down to trust. When power, money and a good cause is mixed, it is imperative to check motives. We would be less of a society if we didn’t check out all the facts. Abuse and neglect exist, always has and always will, but society is obligated to ensure those victims are not transformed into “good cause victims” and expensed out. There is no doubt we have a right to question the system and those who claim to promote change for the good of the children within it.

Children’s Rights Chairman, Alan C. Myers, Medical Director of Connecticut Behavioral Health Partnership, Steven Kant and the Connecticut Department of Children and Families may get their knickers in a twist with regard to an advocate of Ablechild and a blogger from Birmingham, UK questioning their motives but hey, what’s the downside of shinning a light on all these players, be they good or bad players?

Sheila?s concern is that Children’s Rights with its multi-million dollar budget and with the help of its billion dollar law firms, will continue to ignore the risks of these unapproved and dangerous medications, under the guise of helping our nation?s most vulnerable children. The question remains: how can the lawyers who defend pscyhotropic drugs also be the same lawyers who advocate for abused and neglected children to get into state welfare programs which place these children on the same drugs? The conflict is clear and obvious – and it poses an unmistakable danger to children who truly need our help.

[1] Bupropion [also known as Wellbutrin, Zyban] is a non-tricyclic antidepressant. [2] Gabapentin

Bob Fiddaman is the author of the Seroxat Sufferers blog and the book, “The evidence, however, is clear… the Seroxat scandal.” Chipmunka Publishing.

Sheila Matthews is the co-founder of AbleChild and a mother of two children.

Federal Court Decision May Place More Children At Risk

Written by Sheila Matthews on . Posted in Lawmaking.

Sheila Matthews
National Vice President
www.ablechild.org
sheila@ablechild.org
(203) 966-8419

Last month, in Juan F., et al. v. M. Jodi Rell, et al., the United States District Court in the District of Connecticut held that Connecticut’s Department of Family Services (“DCF”) could not suspend new intakes of children into its Voluntary Services Program (the “Program”). According to the Court, the decision to suspend new intakes would unilaterally cut off the service lifeline for vulnerable, at-risk children. The Court explained that any suspension of intakes would leave children at imminent risk of irreparable harm, and place the defendants in violation of their settlement obligations. Ironically, a point often forgotten, is the fact that the original plaintiff/child in the case, Juan F., died while under State care.

The Court ultimately concluded that children accepted into the Program must be accepted by the State because these “at-risk” children were part of the original settlement in the lawsuit. AbleChild addressed the flawed intake methods in a friend of the court brief. The concern of AbleChild is that many of the children identified for the Program are not “at-risk.” The real danger is that some of these children, who are not “at-risk,” will now be put into harm’s way by taking them away from their families without cause and forcing them to ingest dangerous psychotropic
medications.

Unfortunately, in trying to help more “at risk” children, the Court ignored the State’s current intake methods for determining which children are truly “at risk.” Often times, the State concludes a child is “at risk” without any justification. Children are taken away from their families on the basis of a single phone call into a “hotline” and even without the filing of a police incident report. When this happens, innocent children are unjustly put at risk, and the child’s family is forced to prove to a court that their child is not in danger.

AbleChild appreciates the Court’s concern regarding the well-being of all of Connecticut’s children; however, AbleChild also recognizes that children who enter DCF, regardless of whether the children are “at-risk,” are typically diagnosed with a mental illness and treated with psychotropic drugs. Ablechild believes the parties, and the Court, should make a commitment to first insuring that no child is unnecessarily taken away from their family.