Skip to main content

Tag: Ablechild

Governor’s Newtown Panel Stymied by Lanza’s Missing Mental Health Records

Sandy Hook Advisory Committee Stymied by Lanza’s Missing
Mental Health Records

Say it isn’t so.  The Chairman of the Sandy Hook Advisory Committee, Scott Jackson, doesn’t have the medical/mental health records of Adam Lanza, which are necessary for his committee to make appropriate recommendations for changes to the State’s mental health system.

This is really old news to Ablechild.  Having spent nearly a year utilizing every legislative and legal avenue available to make public the toxicology, medical and mental health records of Sandy Hook shooter, Adam Lanza, Ablechild was stymied by State officials at every step.

Yes, Ablechild is empathetic to the difficulties Jackson is having obtaining this important information, which is key to making – or not making – changes to the State’s mental health system.

Interestingly, Jackson has hired a law firm to comb through the thousands of pages released by the State Police. What law firm and at what cost to Connecticut taxpayers?  It only took Ablechild three days to review the redundant and heavily redacted documents within the State Police Report.  Nevertheless, Jackson apparently has read enough of the report to start asking questions.

According to Jackson, “one of the things that we really talked about quite a bit was that we need to understand the story of Adam Lanza and Nancy Lanza and we really don’t have it.” In particular, Jackson said “in order to understand how we got to where he was from a treatment standpoint, they’re going to need a little bit more.”

“A little bit more?”  With all due respect, the Committee needs more than a “little bit” of information.  Other than providing a few psychiatric diagnoses, and the mention of one psychiatric drug prescribed to Lanza, there are no specifics provided about the shooter’s mental health treatment.

In fact, it’s fair to say that more is known about the mental health records that were destroyed by Lanza’s primary psychiatrist, Dr. Paul Fox, than what mental health treatment Lanza received.  Worse still, the last five years of Lanza’s mental health services is nonexistent.

According to the data provided by both the State Attorney’s office and the State Police Report- literally thousands of pages – there is zero mention of any mental health services provided to Lanza after 2007. Why?

And, with what little information is provided, why are physician treatment “summaries” provided in the recently released State Police Report?  Wouldn’t the actual comments of those psychiatrists treating Lanza be of more help to the Committee than a detective’s summation?

Dr. Harold Schwartz, psychiatrist and member of the Committee, understands the importance of hearing directly from the “horse’s mouth.”  “It’s better,” said Schwartz, “than nothing to have these summaries, but these summaries are not by clinical people.”

Schwartz opines that it may be necessary to contact the shooter’s father, Peter Lanza, to obtain the necessary records.  Why?  Wouldn’t the investigative bodies already have requested and obtained these records?  If not, it seems odd that both investigations would conclude they were unable to find a motive for the attack without first having considered Lanza’s complete mental health treatment record.

Additionally, in May of 2013, Peter Lanza signed a PeterLanzaConsent PeterLanzaConsent form allowing the State Medical Examiner to make public his son’s toxicology report.  Why, then, has the full toxicology report been withheld?

Furthermore, it may serve the Advisory Committee members well to speak with Assistant Attorney General, Patrick B. Kwanashie, who explained during the Ablechild Freedom of Information hearing that the reason for withholding Lanza’s toxicology report was because it “would cause a lot of people to stop taking their medications.”

Sounds like Kwanashie has the inside track on Lanza’s mental health records.  But if that avenue fails to produce results, given that it was his idea to set up the Advisory Committee, perhaps Governor Malloy could pull some strings with his own agencies.

The bottom line is that without reviewing Lanza’s complete mental health record, there is no way the Advisory Committee can, or should, make any decisions about instituting changes to the State’s mental health services.

 

Presidential Executive Orders in Mental Health: A History of Failures

Numerous Presidential Executive orders and millions in appropriations for Mental Health in Connecticut have produced nothing but failure and may actually be harmful. Hundreds-of-millions more tax dollars have been promised with no hope of real change.   Despite the enormous amount of money being funneled into mental health, the big return seems to be little more than semantics – merely changing words rather than policy.

The State of Connecticut was one of 13 States to receive a federal “mental health transformation” grant under President Bush. The grant was issued as an executive order to “transform” the broken mental health system and was funded through 2010.  And, what was the return on the investment?  Connecticut suffers the largest mass murder/suicide in United States history within years of this “new improved mental health delivery system.”

Patricia Rehmer, the Commissioner of Mental Health in Connecticut, touts on her resume the fact she had oversight of the $13.7 million granted to Connecticut to then revamp the mental health delivery system.  Ablechild participated in all the committee hearings on that grant and called for disclosure to the consumer on the link between the increased risk of suicide, violence and psychiatric drugs.  Ablechild encouraged the State to educate the public on the MEDWATCH program, and to provide alternatives to psychiatric drugs and forced mental health services.  Ablechild also wrote to then Governor Rell requesting an accounting of how the funds were distributed and whether the public would be advised of the results. The Governor denied Ablechild’s request.

Despite tens-of-millions poured into the State’s mental health system with little or no accountability as to how those funds were spent, in the wake of Sandy Hook, President Obama has promised another $100 million thru an executive order to “make it easier to access mental health services.”  That’s great. But what happened to the $13.7 million from President Bush’s grant?

Are you doing the math?  Are you following the insane process?

On December 20, 2012, within weeks of the Sandy Hook shooting, Senator Scott Frantz stated on WCBS to Bureau Chief Fran Schneidau that mental health providers will get a “slight boost” in the wake of the shootings and will have no funding cuts despite the fact that, “it has not been determined if there was direct connection between that and the massacre.”

Recall that Lanza’s mental health, educational records, and full toxicology report are being withheld from the public by the state of Connecticut.

The push, apparently, is to use this $100 million dollars to improve access to mental health services. However, according to the Hartford Courant’s article of June 20, 2013, Adam Lanza’s Medical Records Reveal Growing Anxiety” Lanza did have access to mental health services for many years. Lanza had been “screened” and released as not being a harm to himself or others.

Ablechild is taking the lead in calling for Lanza’s records to be made public, which will be crucial during the upcoming Connecticut legislative session.  The goal is to protect public safety and stop the mismanagement of taxpayer funds.  Is the increased mental health helping or hurting the public? Not everyone is convinced that more money spent on mental health access will have a positive effect – at least, to date, the State cannot prove that the tens-of-millions spent so far has shown any improvement.

For example, Dr. Hank Schwarts, psychiatrist-in-chief of the Institute of Living in Hartford said in regard to mental health issues, “to write a report now, with what we have, would almost be embarrassing.”http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/editorials/hc-ed-state-police-drag-feet-on-newtown-report-20131224,0,6056179.story

 

Ablechild Supporters

Dear Ablechild Supporters,

It has been an amazing year!  Your help has brought the mission of Informed Consent relating to psychiatric drugs to a new level.  In order to keep up the continued fight, we are in need of your generous donations.

We are one of the only organizations in the United States that has been on the front lines of this war against our basic parental rights.  One of the most fierce engagements we had was with the State of Connecticut over the disclosure of Adam Lanza’s mental health, special education, and toxicology report.  We appeared before the freedom of information commission and forced the State to admit the reason why they did not want to disclose the records.

Our website continues to receive increased traffic and the media often seeks us out for our opinion.  This upcoming legislative session in Connecticut and throughout the Country will be totally focused on mental health.  The multi-billion dollar mental health and drug industry will be setting the agenda, we cannot let this happen.  Their agenda has already been spelled out to massively screen ALL children within the public education system for mental illnesses.  As we know, there is no test.   It is totally subjective and will traffic children into an unmanageable whirlwind of drug use.  As we have witnessed time and again the deadly school shootings ending with the shooter’s suicide, we cannot stand by and allow this to happen.

Although the economy is in a deep recession, we cannot think of a better cause then to stop the violence these drugs are inducing into our society.  We urge you to support Ablechild and its continued mission of informed consent by making a year end contribution that is tax deductible.  Knowledge is power, share the information.

We wish you a healthy and happy New Year.

The Ablechild Team

 

 

 

ABLECHILD’S APPEAL FOR NEWTOWN SHOOTER’S MEDICAL RECORDS & TOXICOLOGY REPORT GOES TO FULL CT FIO COMMISSION

Within the last few days, Ablechild submitted to the full Freedom of Information Commission our objections to the hearing officer’s proposed final decision.  It is our plan to follow every legal procedure and avenue to secure the critical information being denied to the public relating to the mass murderous actions and suicide of Adam Lanza and their link to psychiatric drugs, which have been shown to increase the risk of violence and suicide.  In fact, there is an overwhelming amount of evidence to establish this link.  There is an obvious growing increase in mass murders and suicides throughout this nation, and yet the public remains in the dark.  We are all probably aware that a large part of this is due to the pharmaceutical industry giant, a profit driven machine with many vested interests, one of which is in keeping us uninformed.

“Toxic relationship have been long established between big pharma, mainstream media, and government.  What is perfectly clear is that all of the conflicts of interest that result from these relationships play a direct role in compromising our health and safety.” Says Patricia Weathers, Cofounder of Ablechild.

Despite this obstacle, Ablechild has and will continue fulfilling its mission of full informed consent because it strongly believes that the public HAS THE RIGHT TO KNOW.  It is simple, without the public given the information they are left being unable to make informed decisions.

This disclosure of information is shown to be never more critical when we watched the impulsive, immediate legislative reaction of the State of Connecticut in the aftermath of the mass murders and suicide in Newtown, which was its push for more mental health screening and psychiatric drug treatment for children despite its obvious lack of information and facts.  Wrongful and improper legislation will continue to have dire consequences on our children health and the publics as a whole.  This is just one more reason why we continue to rally for our right to full informed consent, and of course our children’s safety!

Docket No. FIC 2013-197

Ablechild Notice Submission
Ablechild Objections
Ablechild Original Appeal to FOI

 

Was Connecticut Shooter, Adam Lanza, on Psychiatric Drugs? Medical Examiner Snubs Official Request for Toxicology Report

March 15, 2013
By Kelly Patricia O’’Meara

ablechild-medical-examiner-letter_330Click image to read the official toxicology records request to Connecticut Medical Examiner, H. Wayne Carver II, M.D.

While state and federal lawmakers frantically push for massive mental health reform and sweeping gun control laws, two Connecticut mothers recently took to the streets of Newtown, connecting with local residents and gathering signatures on a petition that asks a simple but essential question.

Did prescription psychiatric drugs play a role in the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting?

Seems like an easy and obvious question that, remarkably, has escaped the consideration of legislators who seem hell-bent on legislating increased mental health services without first having all the necessary information to make thoughtful, fact-based decisions.Sheila Matthews, co-founder of AbleChild, a national parents’ rights organization, and Newtown resident, Patricia Sabato, went one-on-one with local residents to collect hundreds of signatures requesting the release of the complete autopsy/toxicology results and medical/psychiatric records of alleged shooter, Adam Lanza. To back up the need for full disclosure of Lanza’s records, the petition points out certain undisputed facts, such as, at least 31 school shootings and/or school-related acts of violence have been committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs resulting in 162 wounded and 72 killed.

Sheila Matthews has appeared on TV numerous times, including on CNN, NBC and Fox. She has been interviewed on many talk radio programs and has been featured in major newspapers and magazines. The Petition further points out that 22 international drug regulatory warnings have been issued on psychiatric drugs causing violent behavior, including mania, psychosis and homicidal ideation. Additionally, between 2004-2011, there were nearly 13,000 reports to the FDA’s MedWatch system of psychiatric drugs causing violent side effects, including homicide, mania and aggressive behavior. Both Matthews and Sabato were gratified by the community’s support. “The vast majority of the people were really supportive of our efforts,” says Matthews. “They were really engaged,” continued Matthews, “and they wanted, and felt like, they had a right to know if Lanza was on drugs.” Sabato mimics Matthews’ sentiments. “A lot of people,” says Sabato, “actually congratulated us for doing the petition.” “The people of Newtown,” explains Sabato, “know there is more to this story and, though they are tired of hearing Lanza’s name, they still want to know everything that may have played a part in his actions.

Sheila Matthews with former Congressman Ron Paul, who stated, “Too many children are suffering from being prescribed psychotropic drugs for nothing more than children’s typical rambunctious behavior.” The mothers sent the petition to lawmakers and hand-delivered a letter to the State’s Medical Examiner, H. Wayne Carver II, M.D., requesting that Lanza’s autopsy/toxicology and medical/psychiatric history be publicly released. The request literally cites two full pages of federal and state law supporting the request. Despite the fact that, under Connecticut law, Carver is statutorily required to respond to the request, to date, the Medical Examiner has refused to even acknowledge receipt of the request, let alone release the requested information. Certainly there are a number of questions that come to mind as to why the Coroner would refuse to release the information, but interfering with the on-going criminal investigation is not one of them. In fact, Carver already has released selective information about Lanza’s autopsy, which begs the question – what is in the autopsy that obviously has put the Medical Examiner on the wrong side of Connecticut law and the wishes of Newtown residents? In the end, it’s a simple question posed by those who lived through the nightmare. Was Adam Lanza on or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs at the time of the shooting? The information is available. What’s the secret?

Kelly Patricia O’’Meara is an award winning investigative reporter for the Washington Times, Insight Magazine, penning dozens of articles exposing the fraud of psychiatric diagnosis and the dangers of the psychiatric drugs – including her ground-breaking 1999 cover story, Guns & Doses, exposing the link between psychiatric drugs and acts of senseless violence. She is also the author of the highly acclaimed book, “Psyched Out: How Psychiatry Sells Mental Illness and Pushes Pills that Kill“. Prior to working as an investigative journalist, O’Meara spent sixteen years on Capitol Hill as a congressional staffer to four Members of Congress. She holds a B.S. in Political Science from the University of Maryland.

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

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

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.

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

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

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.