Isabella Brooke Knightly and Austin Gamez-Knightly
In Memory of my Loving Husband, William F. Knightly Jr. Murdered by ILLEGAL Palliative Care at a Nashua, NH Hospital
Thursday, November 25, 2010
The Adoption Tax Credit and the Affordable Care Act (10/05/2010 Webchat)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpHxyoHpu8Y
THE CREDIT IS EXTENDED TO 2011, IT WAS SUPPOSED TO EXPIRE IN 2010! "THE CREDIT WAS MADE REFUNDABLE!" IE: ANYONE IS ENTITLED TO THIS CREDIT, THOSE WHO HAVE INTERNATIONAL ADOPTION are ALSO ENTITLED TO THIS CREDIT!!
"BENEFITS OF ADOPTION CREDIT,"
THEY CLAIM, SECRETARY HILLARY CLINTON IS AN ENDORSER OF THIS ADOPTION ISSUE...AND IS AGAINST THE ABDUCTION OF CHILDREN!
START WRITING TO HILLARY!!!!
Listen to Hillary's message about inter-country adoption, which brings diversity to the United States.
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Oath Keeper baby stolen? An update.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBDrA74lM3k&feature=player_embedded#!
Reform - Allegations ~80% Allegations Reported are False~
Reform - Allegations
~80% Allegations Reported are False~
Have Attitudes Really Changed??? Abuse in the Name of Protecting Children
As keeper of the web files, GranPa Chuck, of the NFPCAR website, this is part of my, or should I say Our Story, my wife and I, as Foster Parents caught in the web of false allegations. Please note this happened over a decade ago. We are now a multi-generational family living with our youngest daughter and her three children. (The Rest of Our Story will be featured in the future)
I was the editor of a Foster Parent Association Newsletter. I ran this article throughout three editions of the newsletters in Jan, Feb, and Mar of 1996 and was fired as a volunteer editor for this newsletter in March.
Then within six months, my wife and I had a list of False Allegations presented to us. Guess who gave me this article??? A Social Worker. She was a good meaning worker, but apparently some of her co-workers took offense to this information.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Have Attitudes Really Changed???
Over a decade ago this information was given to caretakers (i.e. parents, teachers, physicians, members of the clergy, and foster parents) of our children who were accused of child abuse. No on condones the physical, emotional, and sexual abuse of our children. However, those who were falsely accused have had their lives ruined even when they were “proven” innocent.
The wheels of bureaucracy are slow to change. Feel free to pass this information on via e-mail or hard copy. We need to unite as one family and change the laws and the attitude that “you are guilty until proven innocent”.
Have attitudes changed?? --- You be the judge!!!
Chuck
Editor-FPA Newsletter
Jan, 1996
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Abuse in the Name of Protecting Children
Bio on Title
Do Children Lie ~ The Child Abuse Industry ~
by Robert L. Emans
Words such as these come from victims of current child abuse laws in the US. Parents, foster parents, teachers, physicians, members of the clergy, and others have been falsely accused of mistreating children.
Many Americans applauded when laws were enacted to protect children from physical, emotional, and sexual abuse. I was one of them, having worked with emotionally disturbed children, many of whom had been victims of such abuse. Clearly, the intent of these laws was good.
Just as clearly, however, the consequences have been disastrous. The laws and the enforcement procedures related to child abuse too often deny human and constitutional rights to both the accused and the alleged victim. Indeed, observers have likened the climate created by these laws to that of Salem, during the witch hunt, to that of Nazi Germany in 1939, or to that of the McCarthy era in the 1950s.
In the U.S. in 1985, reported cases of suspected child abuse totaled 1.7 million. Of the reports involving sexual abuse, 80% were later determined to have been unfounded --up from 40% just five years earlier. Half of the substantiated cases of child abuse involved neglect, not other types of abuse; only 7% of the substantiated cases involved sexual abuse. Accusations of child abuse bring suffering and distress to everyone involved. It has been estimated, for example, that as many as 80% of those who are falsely accused of child abuse lose their jobs or suffer other employment problems. Hundreds of people have had to undergo traumatic investigations to establish their innocence; others have had to take part in corrective activities for things they did not do. Indi viduals falsely accused of child abuse have been psychologically scarred, and their reputations have been severely tarnished. Whole families have been destroyed.
Even when cleared of such charges, parents may lose custody of their offspring, and individuals who work with children may be permanently listed in police records as possible child abusers. Meanwhile, the alleged victims themselves may be stripped, searched or otherwise subjected to intensive physical and psychological examinations. During an interview on the television news program "Nightline," for example, a pediatrician employed by a county protection service said, "I actually put my hand on a little girl's vagina, and asked her if that was what they did to you, and do you think it went in that far, and did it bleed?"
The problem is that laws governing due process are too often misunderstood or ignored. Accusers enjoy complete anonymity and full legal protection. Standard rules of evidence are frequently disregarded. Often, individuals accused are presumed to be guilty until they can establish their innocence. Many officials would argue, however, that saving just one child from abuse justifies the wholesale denial of human and civil rights to those accused.
Anyone--even someone who is emotionally disturbed--can accuse another individual of child abuse at any time. Indeed, it can be a crime not to report a suspected case of child abuse, and social workers and law enforcement officers can be sued for failing to investigate such reports.
Consequently, people have been accused of child abuse as a result of reporting a missing child; hugging or kissing a child; having a child who is reluctant to participate in sports, speaking out in defense of a neighbor or a relative falsely accused of child abuse; complaining about a social worker, declining to submit to counseling; changing a diaper; or having a child who knows the names of bodily parts. Similarly, a drama director who failed to cast a certain child in a particular play, a teacher who gave low grades, a father who photographed his child in the shower, and physicians and dentists who provided normal examinations and treatment have faced such accusations.
The officials who investigate cases of suspected child abuse often have limited knowledge of children. Moreover, the procedures these officials use frequently lack reliability or validity.
The use of anatomically correct dolls to investigate cases involving the sexual abuse of children is a case in point No study has ever demonstrated that such dolls produced reliable and valid evidence. Indeed, conducting such a study would be virtually impossible since the subjects would have to include children who had never been sexually abused and subjecting children to such research may itself constitute sexual abuse. Moreover, the use of anatomically correct dolls as investigatory tools has never been shown to meet the basic procedural requirements established by psychological science. Dr. Ronald Gabriel, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Saskatchewan and practicing child psychiatrist, has noted: "Many persons working in the child protection field ... do not know about the projection-evoking properties of toys. The result has been that material produced ... can appear to confirm suspicions of sexual abuse when it may actually be no more than a normal reaction of a child to the dolls and the situation. ... the suspect will almost always be found "guilty."
Do children lie?
For generations, children were thought to be incapable of reporting what really happened to them. But the current view is that, since normal children are sexually inexperienced, every sexual experience they report must actually have taken place. This argument ignores the realities of child growth and development, however.
The work of Jean Piaget suggests that children do not discriminate between thoughts and the things thought of, between episodes of play and real world events. They do not remember the origins of their knowledge, and they often mistake memories of dreams for memories of actual events. Children are not able to fully differentiate between internal thoughts and external happenings until about age 11.
People who maintain that children never fabricate with regard to sexual experiences are deluding themselves. Vengeful or disturbed adults can manipulate children into believing that they have been sexually abused when that has not been the case. Questioning by adults whom they fear and wish to please can induce children to "lie." Having done so, the children come to believe what they have said. After prolonged questioning by investigators, children often confuse fact and fantasy. When adults already (and often too willingly) believe that sexual abuse has occurred, they often deal with the alleged victims in ways that heighten the suggestibility of these children.
The situation has been further confused by what has come to be known as the "child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome." Derived from cases of incest in intact families, the syndrome includes such behaviors on the part of the victim as secretiveness and helplessness. But children who have not been sexually abused often display these same behaviors, and the syndrome has never been scientifically validated Yet, investigators continue to use the syndrome to corroborate children's statements about having been sexually abused.
Even the polygraph (or lie detector) is biased against innocent suspects who tell the truth. An innocent suspect who distrusts the polygraph test is likely to fail it. Studies have shown that failed polygraph tests are less accurate than polygraph tests that are passed. Yet juries are more likely to accept the results of a polygraph test if the suspect fails it than if the suspect passes it. After 30 years of studying the polygraph. David Lykken, a scientist with no vested interest in the instrument, has concluded that "the assumptions of the polygraph test are implausible and the evidence for its validity is weak."
The child abuse industry
Accusations involving child abuse used to be handled responsibly by established legal and family support agencies. Today the government has established a quasi-independent investigatory system for such cases that functions at taxpayers' expense. Not uncommonly today, child protection workers are women who consider themselves to be or have been of abuse. LeRoy Schulz studied protection workers recently and concluded that they tend to be self-righteous unwilling to admit mistakes, lacking in ethics, naive about children, willing to use hearsay evidence, likely to conduct one-sided investigations, and blind to contradictory evidence. Eileen Anderson found therapists to be addicted to power and often involved in a conflict of interests between their pocket books and their professional responsibilities. Writing for the Boston Globe in 1985, Eli Newberger also had some disturbing views on child protection workers. He said that "many of these individuals seem to take pleasure in inflicting pain on children, to derive personal excitement and titillation from stories of their suffering, and to relish the lively interest of opposing counsel, jurors, and their peers.”
Large national organizations, though they mean well, sometimes contribute to the injustices. For example, in a 1985 statistical report on child abuse and neglect, the American Humane Association stated, "While some unsubstantiated reports are in fact false, most reports are true.”
We are VOCAL, a group of parents and others who are FAMILY advocates. Our goal is to see children and their families protected from all forms of abuse. Many families lack knowledge about the complex laws policies, and procedures governing child protection. In most states, the child protection agencies take an adversarial stand against the families they service: information to help them understand the system is often withheld Our education-oriented services provide a balance within the community, as well as a vehicle for implementing positive changes within the system.
Although our child abuse laws were written with good intentions, disregard for the ultimate goal of these laws may cause system-inflicted abuse. Children are sometimes abruptly removed from their families and familiar surroundings without adequate investigation, creating traumatic experiences and endangering parent-child relation ships. Child protection workers may pursue weak cases and refuse to return children to their homes, not realizing the harm caused to children and families as a result of their intervention. Quite often, children now need protection from child protective services.
We have prepared this information for you as an introduction to Victims of Child Abuse Laws--VOCAL--and the child abuse system. Because the child abuse laws and policies and their Interpretations vary from state to state and even from one caseworker to another, we would encourage you to learn as much as possible about the system in general, and the laws in your own locality.
If you are currently involved in a case with a child protective agency, all the information you can obtain to bring your case to an acceptable resolution and to understand what is happening. If you don't know your rights and understand your alternatives, you will not be able to effectively make the best decisions. We have detailed information packets available to aid your attorneys, mental health professionals, and yourself. A number of the studies and articles in these packets can be submitted into courts as evidence against inaccurate statements and unacceptable procedures often used by the prosecution and child protective services.
The Professional Manual includes approximately 500 pages of information written. by experts in the field of child abuse and neglect, such as Douglas Besharov, J.D., L.L.M., and psychologist Ralph Underwager, Ph.D. It can provide you, your attorney and mental health professional with pertinent information for your own case.
The Personal Manual contains articles and personal accounts which can help make sense out of a difficult experience and aid in case resolution.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Other Publication by Robert L. Emans:
Psychology's responsibility in false accusations of child abuse.
http://nfpcar.org/Reform/Our_Story/Vocal.htm
~80% Allegations Reported are False~
Have Attitudes Really Changed??? Abuse in the Name of Protecting Children
As keeper of the web files, GranPa Chuck, of the NFPCAR website, this is part of my, or should I say Our Story, my wife and I, as Foster Parents caught in the web of false allegations. Please note this happened over a decade ago. We are now a multi-generational family living with our youngest daughter and her three children. (The Rest of Our Story will be featured in the future)
I was the editor of a Foster Parent Association Newsletter. I ran this article throughout three editions of the newsletters in Jan, Feb, and Mar of 1996 and was fired as a volunteer editor for this newsletter in March.
Then within six months, my wife and I had a list of False Allegations presented to us. Guess who gave me this article??? A Social Worker. She was a good meaning worker, but apparently some of her co-workers took offense to this information.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Have Attitudes Really Changed???
Over a decade ago this information was given to caretakers (i.e. parents, teachers, physicians, members of the clergy, and foster parents) of our children who were accused of child abuse. No on condones the physical, emotional, and sexual abuse of our children. However, those who were falsely accused have had their lives ruined even when they were “proven” innocent.
The wheels of bureaucracy are slow to change. Feel free to pass this information on via e-mail or hard copy. We need to unite as one family and change the laws and the attitude that “you are guilty until proven innocent”.
Have attitudes changed?? --- You be the judge!!!
Chuck
Editor-FPA Newsletter
Jan, 1996
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Abuse in the Name of Protecting Children
Bio on Title
Do Children Lie ~ The Child Abuse Industry ~
by Robert L. Emans
Words such as these come from victims of current child abuse laws in the US. Parents, foster parents, teachers, physicians, members of the clergy, and others have been falsely accused of mistreating children.
Many Americans applauded when laws were enacted to protect children from physical, emotional, and sexual abuse. I was one of them, having worked with emotionally disturbed children, many of whom had been victims of such abuse. Clearly, the intent of these laws was good.
Just as clearly, however, the consequences have been disastrous. The laws and the enforcement procedures related to child abuse too often deny human and constitutional rights to both the accused and the alleged victim. Indeed, observers have likened the climate created by these laws to that of Salem, during the witch hunt, to that of Nazi Germany in 1939, or to that of the McCarthy era in the 1950s.
In the U.S. in 1985, reported cases of suspected child abuse totaled 1.7 million. Of the reports involving sexual abuse, 80% were later determined to have been unfounded --up from 40% just five years earlier. Half of the substantiated cases of child abuse involved neglect, not other types of abuse; only 7% of the substantiated cases involved sexual abuse. Accusations of child abuse bring suffering and distress to everyone involved. It has been estimated, for example, that as many as 80% of those who are falsely accused of child abuse lose their jobs or suffer other employment problems. Hundreds of people have had to undergo traumatic investigations to establish their innocence; others have had to take part in corrective activities for things they did not do. Indi viduals falsely accused of child abuse have been psychologically scarred, and their reputations have been severely tarnished. Whole families have been destroyed.
Even when cleared of such charges, parents may lose custody of their offspring, and individuals who work with children may be permanently listed in police records as possible child abusers. Meanwhile, the alleged victims themselves may be stripped, searched or otherwise subjected to intensive physical and psychological examinations. During an interview on the television news program "Nightline," for example, a pediatrician employed by a county protection service said, "I actually put my hand on a little girl's vagina, and asked her if that was what they did to you, and do you think it went in that far, and did it bleed?"
The problem is that laws governing due process are too often misunderstood or ignored. Accusers enjoy complete anonymity and full legal protection. Standard rules of evidence are frequently disregarded. Often, individuals accused are presumed to be guilty until they can establish their innocence. Many officials would argue, however, that saving just one child from abuse justifies the wholesale denial of human and civil rights to those accused.
Anyone--even someone who is emotionally disturbed--can accuse another individual of child abuse at any time. Indeed, it can be a crime not to report a suspected case of child abuse, and social workers and law enforcement officers can be sued for failing to investigate such reports.
Consequently, people have been accused of child abuse as a result of reporting a missing child; hugging or kissing a child; having a child who is reluctant to participate in sports, speaking out in defense of a neighbor or a relative falsely accused of child abuse; complaining about a social worker, declining to submit to counseling; changing a diaper; or having a child who knows the names of bodily parts. Similarly, a drama director who failed to cast a certain child in a particular play, a teacher who gave low grades, a father who photographed his child in the shower, and physicians and dentists who provided normal examinations and treatment have faced such accusations.
The officials who investigate cases of suspected child abuse often have limited knowledge of children. Moreover, the procedures these officials use frequently lack reliability or validity.
The use of anatomically correct dolls to investigate cases involving the sexual abuse of children is a case in point No study has ever demonstrated that such dolls produced reliable and valid evidence. Indeed, conducting such a study would be virtually impossible since the subjects would have to include children who had never been sexually abused and subjecting children to such research may itself constitute sexual abuse. Moreover, the use of anatomically correct dolls as investigatory tools has never been shown to meet the basic procedural requirements established by psychological science. Dr. Ronald Gabriel, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Saskatchewan and practicing child psychiatrist, has noted: "Many persons working in the child protection field ... do not know about the projection-evoking properties of toys. The result has been that material produced ... can appear to confirm suspicions of sexual abuse when it may actually be no more than a normal reaction of a child to the dolls and the situation. ... the suspect will almost always be found "guilty."
Do children lie?
For generations, children were thought to be incapable of reporting what really happened to them. But the current view is that, since normal children are sexually inexperienced, every sexual experience they report must actually have taken place. This argument ignores the realities of child growth and development, however.
The work of Jean Piaget suggests that children do not discriminate between thoughts and the things thought of, between episodes of play and real world events. They do not remember the origins of their knowledge, and they often mistake memories of dreams for memories of actual events. Children are not able to fully differentiate between internal thoughts and external happenings until about age 11.
People who maintain that children never fabricate with regard to sexual experiences are deluding themselves. Vengeful or disturbed adults can manipulate children into believing that they have been sexually abused when that has not been the case. Questioning by adults whom they fear and wish to please can induce children to "lie." Having done so, the children come to believe what they have said. After prolonged questioning by investigators, children often confuse fact and fantasy. When adults already (and often too willingly) believe that sexual abuse has occurred, they often deal with the alleged victims in ways that heighten the suggestibility of these children.
The situation has been further confused by what has come to be known as the "child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome." Derived from cases of incest in intact families, the syndrome includes such behaviors on the part of the victim as secretiveness and helplessness. But children who have not been sexually abused often display these same behaviors, and the syndrome has never been scientifically validated Yet, investigators continue to use the syndrome to corroborate children's statements about having been sexually abused.
Even the polygraph (or lie detector) is biased against innocent suspects who tell the truth. An innocent suspect who distrusts the polygraph test is likely to fail it. Studies have shown that failed polygraph tests are less accurate than polygraph tests that are passed. Yet juries are more likely to accept the results of a polygraph test if the suspect fails it than if the suspect passes it. After 30 years of studying the polygraph. David Lykken, a scientist with no vested interest in the instrument, has concluded that "the assumptions of the polygraph test are implausible and the evidence for its validity is weak."
The child abuse industry
Accusations involving child abuse used to be handled responsibly by established legal and family support agencies. Today the government has established a quasi-independent investigatory system for such cases that functions at taxpayers' expense. Not uncommonly today, child protection workers are women who consider themselves to be or have been of abuse. LeRoy Schulz studied protection workers recently and concluded that they tend to be self-righteous unwilling to admit mistakes, lacking in ethics, naive about children, willing to use hearsay evidence, likely to conduct one-sided investigations, and blind to contradictory evidence. Eileen Anderson found therapists to be addicted to power and often involved in a conflict of interests between their pocket books and their professional responsibilities. Writing for the Boston Globe in 1985, Eli Newberger also had some disturbing views on child protection workers. He said that "many of these individuals seem to take pleasure in inflicting pain on children, to derive personal excitement and titillation from stories of their suffering, and to relish the lively interest of opposing counsel, jurors, and their peers.”
Large national organizations, though they mean well, sometimes contribute to the injustices. For example, in a 1985 statistical report on child abuse and neglect, the American Humane Association stated, "While some unsubstantiated reports are in fact false, most reports are true.”
We are VOCAL, a group of parents and others who are FAMILY advocates. Our goal is to see children and their families protected from all forms of abuse. Many families lack knowledge about the complex laws policies, and procedures governing child protection. In most states, the child protection agencies take an adversarial stand against the families they service: information to help them understand the system is often withheld Our education-oriented services provide a balance within the community, as well as a vehicle for implementing positive changes within the system.
Although our child abuse laws were written with good intentions, disregard for the ultimate goal of these laws may cause system-inflicted abuse. Children are sometimes abruptly removed from their families and familiar surroundings without adequate investigation, creating traumatic experiences and endangering parent-child relation ships. Child protection workers may pursue weak cases and refuse to return children to their homes, not realizing the harm caused to children and families as a result of their intervention. Quite often, children now need protection from child protective services.
We have prepared this information for you as an introduction to Victims of Child Abuse Laws--VOCAL--and the child abuse system. Because the child abuse laws and policies and their Interpretations vary from state to state and even from one caseworker to another, we would encourage you to learn as much as possible about the system in general, and the laws in your own locality.
If you are currently involved in a case with a child protective agency, all the information you can obtain to bring your case to an acceptable resolution and to understand what is happening. If you don't know your rights and understand your alternatives, you will not be able to effectively make the best decisions. We have detailed information packets available to aid your attorneys, mental health professionals, and yourself. A number of the studies and articles in these packets can be submitted into courts as evidence against inaccurate statements and unacceptable procedures often used by the prosecution and child protective services.
The Professional Manual includes approximately 500 pages of information written. by experts in the field of child abuse and neglect, such as Douglas Besharov, J.D., L.L.M., and psychologist Ralph Underwager, Ph.D. It can provide you, your attorney and mental health professional with pertinent information for your own case.
The Personal Manual contains articles and personal accounts which can help make sense out of a difficult experience and aid in case resolution.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Other Publication by Robert L. Emans:
Psychology's responsibility in false accusations of child abuse.
http://nfpcar.org/Reform/Our_Story/Vocal.htm
CPS violates these EVERY CASE
CPS violates these EVERY CASE
Print one of these up and keep it handy it for future use- Violation_Warning-Denial_Rights_under_Color_Law.pdf
THE RIGHTS-
The First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Thirteenth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution
The Statutes-
42 U.S.C. § 671(a)(15) Reasonable Efforts
42 U.S.C. § 671(a)(19) Relative Placement
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241
Conspiracy Against Rights
Laws: Cases and Codes : U.S. Code : Title 18 : Section 241
This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).
It further makes it unlawful for two or more persons to go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another with the intent to prevent or hinder his/her free exercise or enjoyment of any rights so secured.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years, or both; and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years, or for life, or may be sentenced to death.
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
Laws: Cases and Codes : U.S. Code : Title 18 : Section 242
This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.
This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her color or race.
Acts under "color of any law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under "color of any law," the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 245
Federally Protected Activities
Laws: Cases and Codes : U.S. Code : Title 18 : Section 245
1) This statute prohibits willful injury, intimidation, or interference, or attempt to do so, by force or threat of force of any person or class of persons because of their activity as:
a) A voter, or person qualifying to vote...;
b) a participant in any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by the United States;
c) an applicant for federal employment or an employee by the federal government;
d) a juror or prospective juror in federal court; and
e) a participant in any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
2) Prohibits willful injury, intimidation, or interference or attempt to do so, by force or threat of force of any person because of race, color, religion, or national origin and because of his/her activity as:
a) A student or applicant for admission to any public school or public College;
b) a participant in any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by a state or local government;
c) an applicant for private or state employment, private or state employee; a member or applicant for membership in any labor organization or hiring hall; or an applicant for employment through any employment agency, labor organization or hiring hall;
d) a juror or prospective juror in state court;
e) a traveler or user of any facility of interstate commerce or common carrier; or
f) a patron of any public accommodation, including hotels, motels, restaurants, lunchrooms, bars, gas stations, theaters...or any other establishment which serves the public and which is principally engaged in selling food or beverages for consumption on the premises.
3) Prohibits interference by force or threat of force against any person because he/she is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or class of persons from participating or affording others the opportunity or protection to so participate, or lawfully aiding or encouraging other persons to participate in any of the benefits or activities listed in items (1) and (2), above without discrimination as to race, color, religion, or national origin.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life or may be sentenced to death.
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 1001
Fraud and False Statements
United States Code
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 47 - FRAUD AND FALSE STATEMENTS
U.S. Code as of: 01/02/01
Section 1001. Statements or entries generally
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully -
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
18 USC Sec. 1203
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 55 - KIDNAPPING
Laws: Cases and Codes : U.S. Code : Title 18 : Section 1203
STATUTE
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, seizes or detains and threatens to kill, to injure, or to continue to detain another person in order to compel a third person or a governmental organization to do or abstain from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the release of the person detained, or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished by imprisonment for any term of years or for life and, if the death of any person results, shall be punished by death or life imprisonment.
United States Code TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES CHAPTER 109 - SEARCHES AND SEIZURES
U.S. Code as of: 01/02/01
Section 2234. Authority exceeded in executing warrant
Whoever, in executing a search warrant, willfully exceeds his authority or exercises it with unnecessary severity, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year. U.S. Code as of: 01/02/01
Section 2235. Search warrant procured maliciously Whoever maliciously and without probable cause procures a search warrant to be issued and executed, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year.
Section 2236. Searches without warrant
Whoever, being an officer, agent, or employee of the United States or any department or agency thereof, engaged in the enforcement of any law of the United States, searches any private dwelling used and occupied as such dwelling without a warrant directing such search, or maliciously and without reasonable cause searches any other building or property without a search warrant, shall be fined for a first offense not more than $1,000; and, for a subsequent offense, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
This section shall not apply to any person -
(a) serving a warrant of arrest; or
(b) arresting or attempting to arrest a person committing or
attempting to commit an offense in his presence, or who has
committed or is suspected on reasonable grounds of having
committed a felony; or
(c) making a search at the request or invitation or with the
consent of the occupant of the premises.
More on Section 2236
Title 42 USC Section 1983
Laws: Cases and Codes : U.S. Code : Title 42 : Section 1983
Sec. 1983. - Civil action for deprivation of rights
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia
Title 42 USC Section 1983 Information
Title 42, U.S.C., Section 14141
Pattern and Practice
Laws: Cases and Codes : U.S. Code : Title 42 : Section 14141
This civil statute was a provision within the Crime Control Act of 1994 and makes it unlawful for any governmental authority, or agent thereof, or any person acting on behalf of a governmental authority, to engage in a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers or by officials or employees of any governmental agency with responsibility for the administration of juvenile justice or the incarceration of juveniles that deprives persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
Whenever the Attorney General has reasonable cause to believe that a violation has occurred, the Attorney General, for or in the name of the United States, may in a civil action obtain appropriate equitable and declaratory relief to eliminate the pattern or practice.
Types of misconduct covered include, among other things:
1. Excessive Force
2. Discriminatory Harassment
3. False Arrest
4. Coercive Sexual Conduct
5. Unlawful Stops, Searches, or Arrests
FRAUD
United States Code
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 47 - FRAUD AND FALSE STATEMENTS
Section 1001. Statements or entries generally
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully -
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that party's counsel, for statements, representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding. (OK for system to lie?)
(c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to -
(1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a matter related to the procurement of property or services, personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or
(2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.
http://familyrights.us/bin/CPS_violates_these_every_case.htm
Print one of these up and keep it handy it for future use- Violation_Warning-Denial_Rights_under_Color_Law.pdf
THE RIGHTS-
The First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Thirteenth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution
The Statutes-
42 U.S.C. § 671(a)(15) Reasonable Efforts
42 U.S.C. § 671(a)(19) Relative Placement
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241
Conspiracy Against Rights
Laws: Cases and Codes : U.S. Code : Title 18 : Section 241
This statute makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person of any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the United States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same).
It further makes it unlawful for two or more persons to go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another with the intent to prevent or hinder his/her free exercise or enjoyment of any rights so secured.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to ten years, or both; and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years, or for life, or may be sentenced to death.
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
Laws: Cases and Codes : U.S. Code : Title 18 : Section 242
This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.
This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her color or race.
Acts under "color of any law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under "color of any law," the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 245
Federally Protected Activities
Laws: Cases and Codes : U.S. Code : Title 18 : Section 245
1) This statute prohibits willful injury, intimidation, or interference, or attempt to do so, by force or threat of force of any person or class of persons because of their activity as:
a) A voter, or person qualifying to vote...;
b) a participant in any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by the United States;
c) an applicant for federal employment or an employee by the federal government;
d) a juror or prospective juror in federal court; and
e) a participant in any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
2) Prohibits willful injury, intimidation, or interference or attempt to do so, by force or threat of force of any person because of race, color, religion, or national origin and because of his/her activity as:
a) A student or applicant for admission to any public school or public College;
b) a participant in any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by a state or local government;
c) an applicant for private or state employment, private or state employee; a member or applicant for membership in any labor organization or hiring hall; or an applicant for employment through any employment agency, labor organization or hiring hall;
d) a juror or prospective juror in state court;
e) a traveler or user of any facility of interstate commerce or common carrier; or
f) a patron of any public accommodation, including hotels, motels, restaurants, lunchrooms, bars, gas stations, theaters...or any other establishment which serves the public and which is principally engaged in selling food or beverages for consumption on the premises.
3) Prohibits interference by force or threat of force against any person because he/she is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or class of persons from participating or affording others the opportunity or protection to so participate, or lawfully aiding or encouraging other persons to participate in any of the benefits or activities listed in items (1) and (2), above without discrimination as to race, color, religion, or national origin.
Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or for life or may be sentenced to death.
Title 18, U.S.C., Section 1001
Fraud and False Statements
United States Code
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 47 - FRAUD AND FALSE STATEMENTS
U.S. Code as of: 01/02/01
Section 1001. Statements or entries generally
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully -
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
18 USC Sec. 1203
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 55 - KIDNAPPING
Laws: Cases and Codes : U.S. Code : Title 18 : Section 1203
STATUTE
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, seizes or detains and threatens to kill, to injure, or to continue to detain another person in order to compel a third person or a governmental organization to do or abstain from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the release of the person detained, or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished by imprisonment for any term of years or for life and, if the death of any person results, shall be punished by death or life imprisonment.
United States Code TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES CHAPTER 109 - SEARCHES AND SEIZURES
U.S. Code as of: 01/02/01
Section 2234. Authority exceeded in executing warrant
Whoever, in executing a search warrant, willfully exceeds his authority or exercises it with unnecessary severity, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year. U.S. Code as of: 01/02/01
Section 2235. Search warrant procured maliciously Whoever maliciously and without probable cause procures a search warrant to be issued and executed, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year.
Section 2236. Searches without warrant
Whoever, being an officer, agent, or employee of the United States or any department or agency thereof, engaged in the enforcement of any law of the United States, searches any private dwelling used and occupied as such dwelling without a warrant directing such search, or maliciously and without reasonable cause searches any other building or property without a search warrant, shall be fined for a first offense not more than $1,000; and, for a subsequent offense, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
This section shall not apply to any person -
(a) serving a warrant of arrest; or
(b) arresting or attempting to arrest a person committing or
attempting to commit an offense in his presence, or who has
committed or is suspected on reasonable grounds of having
committed a felony; or
(c) making a search at the request or invitation or with the
consent of the occupant of the premises.
More on Section 2236
Title 42 USC Section 1983
Laws: Cases and Codes : U.S. Code : Title 42 : Section 1983
Sec. 1983. - Civil action for deprivation of rights
Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia
Title 42 USC Section 1983 Information
Title 42, U.S.C., Section 14141
Pattern and Practice
Laws: Cases and Codes : U.S. Code : Title 42 : Section 14141
This civil statute was a provision within the Crime Control Act of 1994 and makes it unlawful for any governmental authority, or agent thereof, or any person acting on behalf of a governmental authority, to engage in a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers or by officials or employees of any governmental agency with responsibility for the administration of juvenile justice or the incarceration of juveniles that deprives persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
Whenever the Attorney General has reasonable cause to believe that a violation has occurred, the Attorney General, for or in the name of the United States, may in a civil action obtain appropriate equitable and declaratory relief to eliminate the pattern or practice.
Types of misconduct covered include, among other things:
1. Excessive Force
2. Discriminatory Harassment
3. False Arrest
4. Coercive Sexual Conduct
5. Unlawful Stops, Searches, or Arrests
FRAUD
United States Code
TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
PART I - CRIMES
CHAPTER 47 - FRAUD AND FALSE STATEMENTS
Section 1001. Statements or entries generally
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully -
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that party's counsel, for statements, representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding. (OK for system to lie?)
(c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to -
(1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a matter related to the procurement of property or services, personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or
(2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.
http://familyrights.us/bin/CPS_violates_these_every_case.htm
Kangaroo Court-Definition
Slang of U.S. origin.] An unfair, biased, or hasty judicial proceeding that ends in a harsh punishment; an unauthorized trial conducted by individuals who have taken the law into their own hands, such as those put on by vigilantes or prison inmates; a proceeding and its leaders who are considered sham, corrupt, and without regard for the law.
The concept of kangaroo court dates to the early nineteenth century. Scholars trace its origin to the historical practice of itinerant judges on the U.S. frontier. These roving judges were paid on the basis of how many trials they conducted, and in some instances their salary depended on the fines from the defendants they convicted. The term kangaroo court comes from the image of these judges hopping from place to place, guided less by concern for justice than by the desire to wrap up as many trials as the day allowed.
Read More:http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Kangaroo+Court
The concept of kangaroo court dates to the early nineteenth century. Scholars trace its origin to the historical practice of itinerant judges on the U.S. frontier. These roving judges were paid on the basis of how many trials they conducted, and in some instances their salary depended on the fines from the defendants they convicted. The term kangaroo court comes from the image of these judges hopping from place to place, guided less by concern for justice than by the desire to wrap up as many trials as the day allowed.
Read More:http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Kangaroo+Court
An American Phenomenon: The Widespread Psychiatric Drugging of Infants and Toddlers
An American Phenomenon: The Widespread Psychiatric Drugging of Infants and Toddlers
The United States has become the psychiatric drugging capital of the world, medicating children at a younger and younger age.
April 20, 2010 |
By Evelyn Pringle
The United States has become the psychiatric drugging capital of the world for kids with children being medicated at a younger and younger age. Medicaid records in some states show infants less than a year old on drugs for mental disorders.
The use of powerful antipsychotics with privately insured children, aged 2 through 5 in the US, doubled between 1999 and 2007, according to a study of data on more than one million children with private health insurance in the January, 2010, "Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry."
The number of children in this age group diagnosed with bipolar disorder also doubled over the last decade, Reuters reported.
Of antipsychotic-treated children in the 2007 study sample, the most common diagnoses were pervasive developmental disorder or mental retardation (28.2%), ADHD (23.7%), and disruptive behavior disorder (12.9%).
The study reported that fewer than half of drug treated children received a mental health assessment (40.8%), a psychotherapy visit (41.4%), or a visit with a psychiatrist (42.6%) during the year of antipsychotic use.
"Antipsychotics, which are being widely and irresponsibly prescribed for American children--mostly as chemical restraints--are shown to be causing irreparable harm," warned Vera Hassner Sharav, president of the Alliance for Human Research Protection, in a February 26, 2010 InfoMail.
"These drugs have measurable severe hazardous effects on vital biological systems, including: cardiovascular adverse effects that result in shortening lives; metabolic adverse effects that induce diabetes and the metabolic syndrome," she wrote. "Long-term use of antipsychotics has been shown to result in metabolic syndrome in 40% to 50% of patients."
The lead researcher on the study above, Columbia University psychiatry professor Mark Olfson, told Reuters that about 1.5% of all privately insured children between the ages of 2 and 5, or one in 70, received some type of psychiatric drug in 2007, be it an antipsychotic, a mood stabilizer, a stimulant or an antidepressant.
Psychiatric drugs bathe the brains of growing children with agents that threaten the normal development of the brain, according to Dr Peter Breggin, founder of the International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology (ICSPP), and author of about 20 books, including "Medication Madness."
The drugs themselves are causing severe disorders in millions of children in the US, he warns. "Substances like antidepressants, stimulants, mood stabilizers, and antipsychotic drugs cause severe, and potentially permanent, biochemical imbalances."
American Phenomenon
A number of presentations at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association in May 2009, addressed the diagnosis of bipolar disorder, including one titled, "Pediatric Bipolar Disorder: A Critical Look at an American Phenomenon," at which Dr Peter Parry, a consultant child & adolescent psychiatrist, and senior lecturer at Flinders University in Australia, presented a survey on, "Australian and New Zealand's Child and Adolescent Psychiatrists' Views on Bipolar Disorder Prevalence and on Rates of Pediatric Bipolar Disorder in the USA."
Dr Parry and his colleagues conducted a survey of child and adolescent psychiatrists in Australia and New Zealand. Of the 199 psychiatrists who responded to the survey, 90.5% thought pediatric bipolar disorder was overdiagnosed in the US.
In an October 1, 2009 article titled, "Medicating Our Children," Dr Parry reports that since "the mid-1990s in the USA, some researchers have claimed that Paediatric Bipolar Disorder (PBD) frequently starts prior to puberty."
One of PBD's main proponents, Harvard University's Professor Joseph Biederman, stating onset "is squarely in the preschooler age group," he notes.
Parry explains that "PBD has been created by moving the diagnostic goalposts away from traditional concepts of bipolar disorder."
"In children," he says, "episodes were redefined to last hours instead of days or weeks and, instead of manic elation, severe anger in children sufficed as mania."
"Unlike diagnoses like ADHD or depression, or simply accepting a child has serious emotional and behavioural problems in reaction to various stressors, PBD implies a lifelong severe mental illness requiring of strong psychiatric medication," Parry warns.
"In the USA," he says, "the public is furthermore exposed to direct pharmaceutical advertising that can feed the natural desire parents of distressed and aggressive children have for a quick solution by suggesting a simple medication fix."
"The medicating of America's children has become intensely controversial, highlighted by the tragic case of Rebecca Riley, a four-year-old Boston girl diagnosed at 28 months old with ADHD and PBD," he points out.
Evelyn Pringle is a columnist for Independent Media TV and an investigative journalist focused on exposing corruption in government.
Read More:http://www.alternet.org/drugs/146551
The United States has become the psychiatric drugging capital of the world, medicating children at a younger and younger age.
April 20, 2010 |
By Evelyn Pringle
The United States has become the psychiatric drugging capital of the world for kids with children being medicated at a younger and younger age. Medicaid records in some states show infants less than a year old on drugs for mental disorders.
The use of powerful antipsychotics with privately insured children, aged 2 through 5 in the US, doubled between 1999 and 2007, according to a study of data on more than one million children with private health insurance in the January, 2010, "Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry."
The number of children in this age group diagnosed with bipolar disorder also doubled over the last decade, Reuters reported.
Of antipsychotic-treated children in the 2007 study sample, the most common diagnoses were pervasive developmental disorder or mental retardation (28.2%), ADHD (23.7%), and disruptive behavior disorder (12.9%).
The study reported that fewer than half of drug treated children received a mental health assessment (40.8%), a psychotherapy visit (41.4%), or a visit with a psychiatrist (42.6%) during the year of antipsychotic use.
"Antipsychotics, which are being widely and irresponsibly prescribed for American children--mostly as chemical restraints--are shown to be causing irreparable harm," warned Vera Hassner Sharav, president of the Alliance for Human Research Protection, in a February 26, 2010 InfoMail.
"These drugs have measurable severe hazardous effects on vital biological systems, including: cardiovascular adverse effects that result in shortening lives; metabolic adverse effects that induce diabetes and the metabolic syndrome," she wrote. "Long-term use of antipsychotics has been shown to result in metabolic syndrome in 40% to 50% of patients."
The lead researcher on the study above, Columbia University psychiatry professor Mark Olfson, told Reuters that about 1.5% of all privately insured children between the ages of 2 and 5, or one in 70, received some type of psychiatric drug in 2007, be it an antipsychotic, a mood stabilizer, a stimulant or an antidepressant.
Psychiatric drugs bathe the brains of growing children with agents that threaten the normal development of the brain, according to Dr Peter Breggin, founder of the International Center for the Study of Psychiatry and Psychology (ICSPP), and author of about 20 books, including "Medication Madness."
The drugs themselves are causing severe disorders in millions of children in the US, he warns. "Substances like antidepressants, stimulants, mood stabilizers, and antipsychotic drugs cause severe, and potentially permanent, biochemical imbalances."
American Phenomenon
A number of presentations at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association in May 2009, addressed the diagnosis of bipolar disorder, including one titled, "Pediatric Bipolar Disorder: A Critical Look at an American Phenomenon," at which Dr Peter Parry, a consultant child & adolescent psychiatrist, and senior lecturer at Flinders University in Australia, presented a survey on, "Australian and New Zealand's Child and Adolescent Psychiatrists' Views on Bipolar Disorder Prevalence and on Rates of Pediatric Bipolar Disorder in the USA."
Dr Parry and his colleagues conducted a survey of child and adolescent psychiatrists in Australia and New Zealand. Of the 199 psychiatrists who responded to the survey, 90.5% thought pediatric bipolar disorder was overdiagnosed in the US.
In an October 1, 2009 article titled, "Medicating Our Children," Dr Parry reports that since "the mid-1990s in the USA, some researchers have claimed that Paediatric Bipolar Disorder (PBD) frequently starts prior to puberty."
One of PBD's main proponents, Harvard University's Professor Joseph Biederman, stating onset "is squarely in the preschooler age group," he notes.
Parry explains that "PBD has been created by moving the diagnostic goalposts away from traditional concepts of bipolar disorder."
"In children," he says, "episodes were redefined to last hours instead of days or weeks and, instead of manic elation, severe anger in children sufficed as mania."
"Unlike diagnoses like ADHD or depression, or simply accepting a child has serious emotional and behavioural problems in reaction to various stressors, PBD implies a lifelong severe mental illness requiring of strong psychiatric medication," Parry warns.
"In the USA," he says, "the public is furthermore exposed to direct pharmaceutical advertising that can feed the natural desire parents of distressed and aggressive children have for a quick solution by suggesting a simple medication fix."
"The medicating of America's children has become intensely controversial, highlighted by the tragic case of Rebecca Riley, a four-year-old Boston girl diagnosed at 28 months old with ADHD and PBD," he points out.
Evelyn Pringle is a columnist for Independent Media TV and an investigative journalist focused on exposing corruption in government.
Read More:http://www.alternet.org/drugs/146551
A screening of the “heartbreaking but inspirational” new film DHS - Give Us Back Our Children
Jane Boyer
cjb
www.abusefreedom.com
abusefreedomunited
803 438 8119
You are Invited
A screening of the “heartbreaking but inspirational” new film
DHS - Give Us Back Our Children
followed by a Community Dialogue on
Child Welfare, Poverty & Welfare Cuts -Does Caregiving Count?
Friday, December 3, 5:30-8:30pm
Tabernacle Church
3701 Chestnut St. (W. Philly)
· Child welfare from the point of view of children as well as of mothers, grandmothers & other relative caregivers & supporters. Our poverty is not child neglect, & we refuse to be punished for it. Of every 1000 of the poorest children in Phila County, the Dept of Human Services snatches 28 children from families – the highest rate in the US – and children of color are more likely to be its victims.
· Cuts in welfare, lack of housing, and domestic abuse resulting in the detention of children by DHS and criminalization of mothers. Older people are forced out of their homes into institutions and into debt.
· The Luzerne County case exposed how “justice” for children and young people is about money. Phila has the highest incarceration rate in the US, with 1 in 9 Black adults under 35 behind bars. PA has the highest number of minors serving life sentences without parole. State crime against children.
· Valuing the caregiver and those they care for - children, elders, people with mental health and other disabilities, veterans. And those who are cared for also do caregiving.
· Raising children is a job: mothers count, count mother’s work! The caregiving work of a mother is valued at $100,000/year (Alternet.com, 2007).
· Living wages/income, quality healthcare, housing, education and healthy food for all caregivers and our families. Money for mothers, not banks, war and occupation.
· Policymakers and advocates invited to hear from YOU!
Come & speak out! Spanish translation, childcare, refreshments. Wheelchair accessible.
Documentary film showing: DHS - Give Us Back Our Children:
mothers & others come together to reclaim children from the child welfare industry
18 min. To order www.everymothernetwork.net
cjb
www.abusefreedom.com
abusefreedomunited
803 438 8119
You are Invited
A screening of the “heartbreaking but inspirational” new film
DHS - Give Us Back Our Children
followed by a Community Dialogue on
Child Welfare, Poverty & Welfare Cuts -Does Caregiving Count?
Friday, December 3, 5:30-8:30pm
Tabernacle Church
3701 Chestnut St. (W. Philly)
· Child welfare from the point of view of children as well as of mothers, grandmothers & other relative caregivers & supporters. Our poverty is not child neglect, & we refuse to be punished for it. Of every 1000 of the poorest children in Phila County, the Dept of Human Services snatches 28 children from families – the highest rate in the US – and children of color are more likely to be its victims.
· Cuts in welfare, lack of housing, and domestic abuse resulting in the detention of children by DHS and criminalization of mothers. Older people are forced out of their homes into institutions and into debt.
· The Luzerne County case exposed how “justice” for children and young people is about money. Phila has the highest incarceration rate in the US, with 1 in 9 Black adults under 35 behind bars. PA has the highest number of minors serving life sentences without parole. State crime against children.
· Valuing the caregiver and those they care for - children, elders, people with mental health and other disabilities, veterans. And those who are cared for also do caregiving.
· Raising children is a job: mothers count, count mother’s work! The caregiving work of a mother is valued at $100,000/year (Alternet.com, 2007).
· Living wages/income, quality healthcare, housing, education and healthy food for all caregivers and our families. Money for mothers, not banks, war and occupation.
· Policymakers and advocates invited to hear from YOU!
Come & speak out! Spanish translation, childcare, refreshments. Wheelchair accessible.
Documentary film showing: DHS - Give Us Back Our Children:
mothers & others come together to reclaim children from the child welfare industry
18 min. To order www.everymothernetwork.net
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)