Log In | Register
CHILDREN as young as two are being prescribed anti-psychotic drugs that have been linked to deaths overseas (in the US).
Toddlers given anti-psychotic drugs
Seeded on Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:10 PM EDT
Article Source: Herald Sun | Victoria and National News, Entertainment, Sport and Weather | HeraldSun- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (16)
"
Dr Louise Newman, of the Royal Australian College of Psychiatrists, argued that in some cases there was a need for children and toddlers to be placed on the drugs.
"They could suffer neurological disorders where the brain might have lesions," she said. "It is wrong that we don't talk about children with depression and other psychological disorders."
"
"We have swallowed all manner of poisonous certainties fed us by our parents, our Sunday and day school teachers, our politicians, our priests, our newspapers, and others with a vested interest in controlling us. ‘Thou shalt become as gods, knowing good and evil,’ good and evil with which to keep children under control, with which to impose local and familial and national loyalties and with which to blind children to their glorious intellectual heritage… The results, the inevitable results, are frustration, inferiority, neurosis and inability to enjoy living, to reason clearly or to make a world fit to live in."
Dr. G. Brock Chisholm, President, World Federation of Mental Health
"We can choose to use our growing knowledge to enslave people in ways never dreamed of before, depersonalizing them, controlling them by means so carefully selected that they will perhaps never be aware of their loss of personhood."
Carl R. Rodgers, Former President of the American Psychological Association (APA)Teaching school children to read was a "perversion" and high literacy rate bred "the sustaining force behind individualism."
John Dewey, Educational Psychologist
- 2 votes
#1 - Tue Mar 23, 2010 2:25 PM EDTIt's unfortunately that these children didn't have parents to protect them.
- 2 votes
#2 - Tue Mar 23, 2010 4:26 PM EDT"Education should aim at destroying free will so that after pupils are thus schooled they will be incapable throughout the rest of their lives of thinking or acting otherwise than as their school masters would have wished ...
Bertrand Russell quoting Johann Gottlieb Fichte
There is a general school of thought among psychiatry & those who practice it that parents AREN'T capable of knowing or properly caring for their own children. They (psychiatrists) prey upon this supposed lack of knowledge or naiveté both in their offices AND in their professional groups (APA, IPA) lobbying activities. You can see evidence of this in the HCR act under the auspices of the Mother's Act which will mandate the overlapping screenings of children (and Mother's including pre-term) for "Mental Illnesses" and then diagnose, prescribe and "treat" them.
I know of at least TWO protests in the last 12 months for facilities which have incarcerated children while AWAY from their parents care ( at school & at a medical facility) & sequestered them in psychiatric facilities and REFUSED to release them to their parents, under the auspices of such "screenings". In both instances it took more than two weeks and a lawyer to secure the childrens' release.
- 1 vote
In the United States, 45 children died while taking anti-psychotic drugs between 2000 and 2004.
from the HeraldSun article
#3 - Tue Mar 23, 2010 4:52 PM EDTThere is a general school of thought among psychiatry & those who practice it that parents AREN'T capable of knowing or properly caring for their own children.
I don't dispute that statement because I've seen it.
I've also seen parents who are lazy and who won't fight for their children under any circumstances.
And let's not forget those parents who are too busy with their lives to parent.
#4 - Tue Mar 23, 2010 6:19 PM EDTI'll be the first to admit that there people who SHOULDN'T be parents.
But to screen the child & make blanket suppositions based on the lowest common denominator causes actions as I've described above and TERRIFYING correct & is all too common.
I have never used an antipsychotic on anyone under 5. But I have had a ten year old with OCD so bad that he was rubbing skin off his hands and another 8 year old with trichatillomania so bad that she gave herself a mohawk from pulling her hair out. Both of those kids I treated with a low dose antipsychotic because SSRI's take weeks to kick in and these kids were suffering right then.
But here I am agian the evil psychiatrist
#5 - Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:07 PM EDTAdmitting it is half the battle.
"We need a program of psychosurgery for political control of our society. The purpose is physical control of the mind. Everyone who deviates from the given norm can be surgically mutilated. The individual may think that the most important reality is his own existence, but this is only his personal point of view. . . Man does not have the right to develop his own mind. . . . We must electronically (chemically) control the brain. Someday armies and generals will be controlled by electronic stimulation of the brain."
Dr. Jose M.R. Delgado, Director of Neuropsychiatry at Yale University Medical School,Feb. 24, 1974.
Did you try alternative therapies before writing the prescription?
Did you try alternative therapies before writing the prescription?
The boy was suffering so bad that I had to medicate him to get him to work the therapy, he would sit in a room to afraid to leave for fear of his triggers. The girl tried CBT for about 6months before she was referred to me. I tried low dose SSRI first but she was bout bald and picking out her eyelashes. I had a suspicion also she was eating the hair which is a serious risk of bezzore. I then moved her to low dose anti-psychotic she now has a full head of hair.
I really dont like the perception that all meds are given to kids to "control" the kids because parents are too lazy to parent. I will admit that happens in far too many cases, but the science is there to prove that some brains are different and perhaps vulernable to function abnormally. Look up Phenius Gage for an example on how altering the brain can change behavior
I don't doubt you and I agree some toxins are necessary. My concerns when it comes to the medical profession is how they reach for the prescription pad before trying alternative therapies.
Antipsychotic prescribing to children and adolescents has become a focus of debate. This is because antipsychotics are increasingly being used in youth for nonpsychotic disorders and off-label indications[1-3]; there is disagreement about the validity of certain childhood diagnoses, namely bipolar disorder[4,5]; data point to a possible lack of psychosocial interventions in lieu of or in addition to antipsychotic treatment for disruptive and aggressive spectrum disorders[6,7]; and there are concerns about antipsychotic-related adverse effects that seem to be more severe and have long-term health implications when they occur during development.[8,9
Take2la
preachin to the choir, evidence based medicine usually lacks clinical experience by 10yrs or so. It is hard to do studies on adolescents and children because they are an especially vulernable population many meds, not just in psychiatry, are use off label with adolecents and children for this reason. Look at tylenol and phenobarital two realtively safe medicines that were grandfathered in to FDA acceptance without being tested now they are coming out with more guidelines that say hey maybe they might need to be studied in youger children.
I also agree with your point that there is much disagreement about diagnosis, but symptoms not so much. I might not call a child bipolar but chronic irritablity, euphoria, psychosis etc speak for themselves.
And yes there are concerns about long term side effects, we have to weigh those risk/benefits like every field. A child with lupus or juvenile rheumatoid arthritis who is going to be on long term NSAID treatment is going to be at risk for kidney problems, but what is the damage and loss of quality of life if you dont treat?
I make a VAST distinction between a "long term" low level side effect's results and quick side effect such as suicide's results. As far as I see it each doctor is directly responsible for the patients under their care. I don't see that as a decision YOU CAN MAKE WITH ANY SENSE OF ETHICS.
Regardless of their age and ESPECIALLY when they are developing.
#6 - Thu Mar 25, 2010 2:21 PM EDTI make a VAST distinction between a "long term" low level side effect's results and quick side effect such as suicide's results
I do to. Only the odds increasing suicidality with antidepressants is 2% more than placebo. The chance of killing your self after a previoius attempt is 30%. ETHICALLY if I know there is a higher chance of killing yourself without treatment than the risk of the treatment increasing suicidal thoughts, how can I not treat, ETHICALLY
The increased odds of renal failure from chronic NSAID use is higher than 2%. No medicine is without risk and side effects. Rheumatolgist get a pass from you but I dont?
#7 - Thu Mar 25, 2010 3:30 PM EDTYou're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
