We will segue from immigrant public policy wrapped into DACA MOVING FORWARD TRANS PACIFIC TRADE PACT-----to health care by stating the obvious ---most Latino immigrant citizens KNEW DACA was A TRAP--------IT'S A TRAP say the 99% of global labor pool. When global 1% United Nations Obama and Clinton neo-liberals are behind immigration policy---they are those having rebuilt the global slave trading distribution system these few decades with the help of those DASTARDLY 5% black, brown, and white citizens-----no one knows these global labor pool TRAPS better than our Latino immigrants.
What we see from FAMILY GUY as a Hollywood TV show is that blend of DARK AGES ROMAN EMPIRE GLOBAL 1% meets PLANETARY MINING SLAVE COLONIES technology-----but it does hint at the power of our 99% of citizens against what looks to be impossible odds. Today, WE THE PEOPLE THE 99% don't even have impossible odds----we have extreme power against those measly global 1% with a 5% knowing only how to lie, cheat, and steal doing whatever they are told.
For US citizens thinking the filling of our US cities with global labor pool to be enslaved is somehow going to benefit you----those 5% are envisioning themselves as labor brokers for example-----MOVING FORWARD SMART CITIES ONE WORLD ONE ENERGY/TECHNOLOGY GRID will take any power a 5% or 99% of citizens have to fight for freedom, liberty, and justice. Please stop thinking these global labor pool enslavement policies are OK as long as it is not ONE FAMILY BUT THE OTHER----as long as it is ONE POPULATION GROUP BUT NOT THE OTHER.
YES, DACA WAS A TRAP-----THE INTENT WAS ONLY TO BUILD GLOBAL LABOR POOL PRE-K -CAREER JOB TRAINING FOR THE COMING FEW BILLION OF DEVELOPING NATION WORKERS TO BE ENSLAVED IN US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES AS THEY ARE OVERSEAS-----taking WE THE PEOPLE THE US 99% with them.
‘Dreamers’ Put Their Trust in DACA. What Now? SEPT. 9, 2017
Of course we also know that DACA tied to immigrant access to health care in US is also far-right wing global 1% telling our global labor pool ---YOU WILL RECEIVE WORLD HEALTH/UNITED NATIONS PREVENTATIVE HEALTH CARE ONLY and never experience developed nation broad access to quality health care as US citizens have last century. Below is NEW YORK TIMES being FAKE NEWS----the goal of UNITED NATIONS PREVENTIVE CARE FOR ALL is to use MENTAL HEALTH against the global 99% and US 99% -----these mental health identifiers are always used by the far-right wing, authoritarian, militaristic dictatorships to enslave and imprison a 99% of citizens. Since the US Constitution, Federal law with 300 years of Federal court rulings do not allow for these abuses===they are using the same global 1% WE ARE HELPING THE POOR to bring these third world mental health stances to our US cities deemed Foreign Economic Zones.
What causes high levels of PTSS, emotional, mental health issues for our immigrant citizens as with poor US citizens? It is EMPIRE BUILDING BY GLOBAL 1% CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA who will not write policy that helps the global or US 99% with issues of extreme poverty====
The Psychic Toll of Trump’s DACA Decision
By KARLA CORNEJO VILLAVICENCIOSEPT. 8, 2017
“I did not raise you to cry,” my father would say when I fell off my bike, as he poured rubbing alcohol on my bloody 6-year-old knees. Not hydrogen peroxide — alcohol. Whenever I cried, which was usually when I did not get an A on a math test or saw a lost-dog poster or read about Anne Frank, my parents, immigrants from Ecuador, handed me a mirror to observe myself. They wanted to desensitize me to my own tears, to line my small heart with bulletproof glass, even if doing so meant making me hate my own weakness.
Undocumented life in America is hard on the mind and body. Poverty, precarious employment, poor access to health care, discrimination and trauma from the migration itself often lead to disorders like depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder. Access to mental health treatment is scant, the demands of simply surviving are overwhelming, the fear of being discovered discourages people from seeking care, and the stigma of mental illness has perpetuated a culture of silence that only worsens the suffering.
Enter the Trump administration. With its aggressive hunt for undocumented people like my family — capped off by the announcement on Tuesday that the president plans to end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program for the so-called Dreamers — the administration has placed new emotional and mental burdens on an already deeply stressed community. Thanks to DACA, I was able to get a state ID, land my first paid office job and fly without fear for the first time in my life. My best friend from college is in DACA, as are the children of nearly everyone I have interviewed for the dissertation I am working on. We know all too well people like the two young brothers from Maryland without criminal records who were deported after one of them, a soccer star, told immigration officials he had won a scholarship to college. Or the children on their way to school who filmed the detention of their parents on their phones while sobbing and screaming. Or the DACA recipient who hid in her closet as her father was arrested by armed ICE agents.
Some studies have found that the first wave of immigrants has a better mental health outlook than subsequent generations, which researchers say results from traditional family networks and values, as well as “lower expectations for success.” But such conclusions betray a misunderstanding. As a graduate student, I have interviewed dozens of undocumented people, including first-wave adults. Most of them speak of symptoms that we might call anxiety, depression and PTSD, even if the subjects themselves do not use this language, and have less familiarity with diagnostics and less access to treatment than their American-citizen children. These studies are from a more innocent time.
All of the immigrants I have interviewed and known throughout my life seem to accept chronic exhaustion, low self-esteem, fear and panic, low moods and fits of crying as normal for the melancholic migrant struggling to subsist without being arrested. Older immigrants are at the highest risk for mental health struggles, having aged out of manual labor, with grown children and dead parents, and being unable to receive health care.
My parents have lived in this country for 30 years, and they have seen their share of ghosts. I recently learned that my father hid his father’s death from me for three years because he did not want it to affect my mental health. Unable to travel, he could not bury him. I made my way through Harvard and Yale as an undocumented student. But even safe in my Ivy League college town, I have nightmares — of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, of swastikas. When I travel the country meeting undocumented immigrants for my dissertation, I see my father’s face in theirs and I know this astigmatism will always be with me. Anytime my parents take too long to text me back or when they call me at an unusual time, I panic. When I hear them say, “Just reminding you to wear sunscreen today!” I want to laugh in relief.
And then I worry that nothing but death will liberate me from the constant anxiety. We all live with the thought: My life as I know it might end now. Or now. Or now. The uncertainty is torture.
Experts on immigrant mental health say they have already seen a spike in symptoms since President Trump’s inauguration. Roberto Gonzalez, an assistant professor of education at Harvard who studies undocumented youth, says he has seen parents pull their children from school out of fear. “This kind of elevated fear and anxiety can have detrimental physical and mental health effects in the long term,” he told me. “Many of the young people I’ve been studying have shown physical and emotional manifestations of stress: chronic headaches, toothaches, ulcers, sleep problems, trouble getting out of bed in the morning, eating issues.” It will get only worse, he said, with Mr. Trump’s DACA announcement.
Rosa Maria Bramble, a social worker who works with undocumented families, including former ground zero cleanup workers with PTSD, told me that news of stepped-up enforcement triggers symptoms in her clients. “I work with a number of people who fled their countries because of political violence or gender violence, and after they reached these shores their symptoms of PTSD began to mitigate,” she says. “Now they feel just as vulnerable and persecuted and terrorized as they did prior to being here.”
Spreading fear and anxiety, of course, is part of the administration’s plan. Thomas Homan, the acting director of ICE, recently said: “If you’re in this country illegally and you committed a crime by entering this country, you should be uncomfortable. You should look over your shoulder, and you need to be worried.”
A common Spanish refrain is that dirty laundry is washed at home. But silence equals death. In lieu of comprehensive immigration reform, what can we do? Churches, community health centers and nonprofit organizations can provide referrals to bilingual therapists and conduct workshops on self-care, explaining depression and anxiety from a culturally sensitive perspective. Licensed therapists, psychologists and psychiatrists can offer care for reduced fees to low-income clients, and clinics can hire more bilingual practitioners. Teachers can check in with students from mixed-status families. All of this would be smart from a public health perspective. But it is also a moral imperative.
Every morning at 6:40, as he is going to work in construction, I text my father extravagant statements about my love for him. I do it again in the evening, urging him to rest, reminding him my dog has green eyes just like my grandfather, asking if he has ever been so adored, hoping that I can inoculate him and my mother against the evils of the current administration. We are a generation apart and have different ideas about what tactics can preserve the heart. Here is the child whom he taught not to cry, begging her father to accept her love as a substitute for everything else that is good and fair.
But love alone cannot cure what ails us, and neither can resilience or quiet strength.
Writing today about how bad the GLOBAL PHARMA industry is, especially surrounding mental health PHARMA , is like writing about how bad NEO-LIBERAL ECONOMICS is today and not 30 years ago-----so HARVARD as king of global IVY LEAGUE HEDGE FUNDS MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE is not being left social progressive in writing these articles TODAY. We have the same writing from global IVY LEAGUE HEDGE FUND Johns Hopkins which has driven the worst of global PHARMA abuses locally and globally.
The American people have known how predatory our medical research and patented medical and PHARMA has become ---we need to make sure our global labor pool and global 99% of citizens understand as well. When China and developing nations introduce what they call US QUALITY MEDICAL CARE-----we need the global 99% to understand----
NONE OF THESE FEW DECADES OF CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA HAS BEEN ABOUT US QUALITY HEALTH CARE----IT IS THE OPPOSITE----
We know a China and other far-right, authoritarian, militaristic, extreme wealth extreme poverty nations will abuse these UNITED NATIONS ONE WORLD HEALTH MENTAL HEALTH policies just as is the goal in US CITIES DEEMED FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES.
'Messy. And, of course, the whole system is now being exported to China and other countries where the middle class is growing and the mental health industry is still in a developing stage'.
Harvard Expert Ties Mental Illness “Epidemic” to Big Pharma’s Agenda
For any mental illness or passing mood swing that may trouble a person, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders — better known as the DSM — has a label and a code. Recurring bad dreams? That may be a Nightmare Disorder, or 307.47. Narcolepsy uses the same digits in a different order: 347.00. Fancy feather ticklers? That sounds like Fetishism, or 302.81. Then there’s the ultimate catch-all for vague sadness or uneasiness, General Anxiety Disorder, or 300.02. That’s a label almost everyone can lay claim to.Drug companies are particularly eager to win over faculty psychiatrists at prestigious academic medical centers. Called “key opinion leaders” (KOLs) by the industry, these are the people who through their writing and teaching influence how mental illness will be diagnosed and treated. They also publish much of the clinical research on drugs and, most importantly, largely determine the content of the DSM. In a sense, they are the best sales force the industry could have, and are worth every cent spent on them. Of the 170 contributors to the current version of the DSM (the DSM-IV-TR), almost all of whom would be described as KOLs, ninety-five had financial ties to drug companies, including all of the contributors to the sections on mood disorders and schizophrenia.
By Minyanville Staff
July 28, 2011
When the DSM-II was published in 1980, it became “the bible of psychiatry,” writes Angell, who adds, “but like the real Bible, it depended a lot on something akin to revelation. There are no citations of scientific studies to support its decisions.”
For any mental illness or passing mood swing that may trouble a person, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders — better known as the DSM — has a label and a code. Recurring bad dreams? That may be a Nightmare Disorder, or 307.47. Narcolepsy uses the same digits in a different order: 347.00. Fancy feather ticklers? That sounds like Fetishism, or 302.81. Then there’s the ultimate catch-all for vague sadness or uneasiness, General Anxiety Disorder, or 300.02. That’s a label almost everyone can lay claim to.
These codes are used by doctors, psychologists, and regulators to maintain a mutual language; it’s a handy shorthand system for bureaucratic purposes. But over the past few decades, the staggering, ever-expanding influence of the ever-expanding DSM, which is published by the American Psychiatric Association, has also played a lead role in building wealth and off-label product uses for the major drug manufacturers. In an insightful essay in this week’s New York Review of Books, Marcia Angell, a senior lecturer in social medicine at Harvard Medical School and former Editor in Chief of The New England Journal of Medicine, explains how.
The medical director of the American Psychiatric Association (APA), Melvin Sabshin, declared in 1977 that “a vigorous effort to remedicalize psychiatry should be strongly supported."
Angell’s essay is based on a review of three current books examining the psychiatric industry: The Emperor’s New Drugs: Exploding the Antidepressant Myth, by Irving Kirsch; Anatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America by Robert Whitaker, and Unhinged: The Trouble with Psychiatry–A Doctor’s Revelations About a Profession in Crisis, by Daniel Carlat. She also cites the DSM-IV, the most recent edition of the manual, while her review traces big pharma’s role in our current mental disorder epidemic to the DSM-III, published in 1980.
To begin, Angell describes the psychiatric profession’s backlash against a developing perception in the 1960s and 1970s that the practice was a “soft” almost pseudo science:
In the late 1970s, the psychiatric profession struck back–hard. As Robert Whitaker tells it in Anatomy of an Epidemic, the medical director of the American Psychiatric Association (APA), Melvin Sabshin, declared in 1977 that “a vigorous effort to remedicalize psychiatry should be strongly supported,” and he launched an all-out media and public relations campaign to do exactly that. Psychiatry had a powerful weapon that its competitors lacked. Since psychiatrists must qualify as MDs, they have the legal authority to write prescriptions. By fully embracing the biological model of mental illness and the use of psychoactive drugs to treat it, psychiatry was able to relegate other mental health care providers to ancillary positions and also to identify itself as a scientific discipline along with the rest of the medical profession. Most important, by emphasizing drug treatment, psychiatry became the darling of the pharmaceutical industry, which soon made its gratitude tangible.
Of the 170 contributors to the current version of the DSM (the DSM-IV-TR), ninety-five had financial ties to drug companies, including all of the contributors to the sections on mood disorders and schizophrenia.
These efforts to enhance the status of psychiatry were undertaken deliberately. The APA was then working on the third edition of the DSM, which provides diagnostic criteria for all mental disorders. The president of the APA had appointed Robert Spitzer, a much-admired professor of psychiatry at Columbia University, to head the task force overseeing the project. The first two editions, published in 1952 and 1968, reflected the Freudian view of mental illness and were little known outside the profession. Spitzer set out to make the DSM-III something quite different. He promised that it would be “a defense of the medical model as applied to psychiatric problems,” and the president of the APA in 1977, Jack Weinberg, said it would “clarify to anyone who may be in doubt that we regard psychiatry as a specialty of medicine.”
When the DSM-II was published in 1980, it became “the bible of psychiatry,” writes Angell, who adds, “but like the real Bible, it depended a lot on something akin to revelation. There are no citations of scientific studies to support its decisions.”
Despite its lack of citations, that DSM named 265 disorders doctors were meant to identify by matching (or mostly matching) a list of symptoms in the book with symptoms described by a patient. The drug companies were quick to see this radical shift in psychiatry as an opportunity. From the 1980s until now, as Angell demonstrates, the drug makers have supported the move away from talk therapy to the drug therapy, which also benefits practitioners, since doling out drugs and tweaking prescriptions earns a psychiatrist more money for less time spent with a patient.
Here Angell explains how companies influence the DSM itself. The bold typeface is ours.
Drug companies are particularly eager to win over faculty psychiatrists at prestigious academic medical centers. Called “key opinion leaders” (KOLs) by the industry, these are the people who through their writing and teaching influence how mental illness will be diagnosed and treated. They also publish much of the clinical research on drugs and, most importantly, largely determine the content of the DSM. In a sense, they are the best sales force the industry could have, and are worth every cent spent on them. Of the 170 contributors to the current version of the DSM (the DSM-IV-TR), almost all of whom would be described as KOLs, ninety-five had financial ties to drug companies, including all of the contributors to the sections on mood disorders and schizophrenia.
The drug industry, of course, supports other specialists and professional societies, too, but Carlat asks, “Why do psychiatrists consistently lead the pack of specialties when it comes to taking money from drug companies?” His answer: “Our diagnoses are subjective and expandable, and we have few rational reasons for choosing one treatment over another.” Unlike the conditions treated in most other branches of medicine, there are no objective signs or tests for mental illness—no lab data or MRI findings—and the boundaries between normal and abnormal are often unclear. That makes it possible to expand diagnostic boundaries or even create new diagnoses, in ways that would be impossible, say, in a field like cardiology. And drug companies have every interest in inducing psychiatrists to do just that.
Eli Lilly gave $551,000 to NAMI
In addition to the money spent on the psychiatric profession directly, drug companies heavily support many related patient advocacy groups and educational organizations. Whitaker writes that in the first quarter of 2009 alone, “Eli Lilly gave $551,000 to NAMI [National Alliance on Mental Illness] and its local chapters, $465,000 to the National Mental Health Association, $130,000 to CHADD (an ADHD [attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder] patient-advocacy group), and $69,250 to the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention.”
And that’s just one company in three months; one can imagine what the yearly total would be from all companies that make psychoactive drugs. These groups ostensibly exist to raise public awareness of psychiatric disorders, but they also have the effect of promoting the use of psychoactive drugs and influencing insurers to cover them. Whitaker summarizes the growth of industry influence after the publication of the DSM-III as follows:
“In short, a powerful quartet of voices came together during the 1980’s eager to inform the public that mental disorders were brain diseases. Pharmaceutical companies provided the financial muscle. The APA and psychiatrists at top medical schools conferred intellectual legitimacy upon the enterprise. The NIMH [National Institute of Mental Health] put the government’s stamp of approval on the story. NAMI provided a moral authority.”
And now here we are in 2011, with almost everyone we know taking two or three different mood disorder drugs. (This trend is not limited to mental disorder, mind you. See Disease Branding.)
Work started on the DSM-V in 1999, which is due out in 2013. It will contain many new disorders, such as “binge eating” and “restless leg disorder.” It will also expand existing categories by tacking on words like “spectrum” to the end of a known disorder, Angell reports. “It looks as though it will be harder and harder to be normal,” she writes.
But the curtain gets pulled back further still.
In her review of Daniel Carlat’s book, Angell calls attention to the “disillusioned insider’s” frank admission that when he prescribes a drug, his decision process is largely guesswork. Carlat’s view is that although any psychiatrist will acknowledge that he or she has had great success with mental disorder drugs for say, depression or anxiety, no doctor can say with certainty whether the drugs are working or if a placebo effect has taken effect.
[Carlat’s] work consists of asking patients a series of questions about their symptoms to see whether they match up with any of the disorders in the DSM. This matching exercise, he writes, provides “the illusion that we understand our patients when all we are doing is assigning them labels.” Often patients meet criteria for more than one diagnosis, because there is overlap in symptoms. For example, difficulty concentrating is a criterion for more than one disorder. One of Carlat’s patients ended up with seven separate diagnoses. “We target discrete symptoms with treatments, and other drugs are piled on top to treat side effects.” A typical patient, he says, might be taking Celexa for depression, Ativan for anxiety, Ambien for insomnia, Provigil for fatigue (a side effect of Celexa), and Viagra for impotence (another side effect of Celexa).
As for the medications themselves, Carlat writes that “there are only a handful of umbrella categories of psychotropic drugs,” within which the drugs are not very different from one another. He doesn’t believe there is much basis for choosing among them. “To a remarkable degree, our choice of medications is subjective, even random. Perhaps your psychiatrist is in a Lexapro mood this morning, because he was just visited by an attractive Lexapro drug rep.”
Messy. And, of course, the whole system is now being exported to China and other countries where the middle class is growing and the mental health industry is still in a developing stage.
Here is that same CCHR INTERNATIONAL NGO first allowing GLOBAL ONE WORLD EMPIRE-BUILDING EXTRAORDINAIRE HARVARD look like it cares about the poor-----to yet another global 1% Clinton/Obama neo-liberal NAACP looking as though it cares about the poor. Now, Affordable Care Act ACA was the policy tool for ending our quality US public access to health care and it heavily funded ONE WORLD WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION PREVENTATIVE CARE ONLY ESPECIALLY MENTAL HEALTH POLICIES. So, NAACP pushed the worst of third world regressive health policies through AFFORDABLE CARE ACT while pushing locally one or two public health justice issues that will not stand as MOVING FORWARD becomes more and more far-right and authoritarian.
We know NAACP partnered with Clinton-era 1990s pipeline to prison zero tolerance----it works locally with global Wall Street Baltimore Development to keep our Baltimore City Police Department corrupt, repressive, and installing DEEP DEEP STATE, REALLY DEEP STATE Smart City technology and global security policing -----
THESE ARE THE PUBLIC HEALTH/MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES THAT WILL OPPRESS OUR 99% OF US AND IMMIGRANT CITIZENS MOVING FORWARD.
It does not matter if we pass a few policies looking to protect our poor if that NGO is partnered in MOVING FORWARD.
The idea that the US is now having citizens fighting ELECTROSHOCK policies that will become MANDATORY-----is CRIMINAL -----our US Constitution does not allow this. Yet, we have in Affordable Care Act all control of public health policy to be written by global health executives pretending EVIDENCE-BASED is public interest and not GLOBAL 1% PREDATORY AND ABUSIVE.
When we know AFFORDABLE CARE ACT is MOVING FORWARD United Nations ONE WORLD WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION preventative are only -----Trans Pacific Trade Pact protections allowing global health systems and global medical corporations earn profits anyway they can ----we know which media outlets and/or NGO organizations NOT TO FOLLOW.
We KNOW NAACP is pushing Trans Pacific Trade Pact----MOVING FORWARD---in all US cities deemed Foreign Economic Zones-----they will never be a good media source---they are working only for global 1% and their 2%.
National NAACP Resolutions Call for Banning Electroshock on Children & Protections Against Psychotropic Drugging of Youth
"The NAACP says it will work with advocates to “oppose the misdiagnosis and over-prescription of psychotropic drugs for children” and calls for Child, Family and Foster Care agencies and Juvenile detention and probation systems to implement safeguards against the potential physical abuse and injury these drugs may cause."
Mental Health Watchdog Applauds NAACP Resolutions Protecting Children’s Rights Against Mental Health Abuse
By CCHR International
The Mental Health Industry Watchdog
August 16, 2017
Resolution on the Psychotropic Drugging of Children
One of the NAACP Resolutions passed unanimously in July 2017 on the “Psychotropic Drugging of Children” says that “Persons of color are overrepresented in high poverty areas and an analysis of national Medicaid claims for foster youth found 49 percent were on antipsychotics and 48 percent were on antidepressants, despite a ‘black box’ warning—the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) most serious drug labeling—that antidepressants may increase the risk of suicidal thinking and behavior in children, adolescents, and young adults.”
The Resolution describes the indiscriminate use of psychotropic drugs on children as potential child endangerment and abuse, citing documented drug side effects that include stroke, diabetes, pancreatitis, cardiac issues, suicidal thoughts, and even death. The NAACP says it will work with advocates to “oppose the misdiagnosis and over-prescription of psychotropic drugs for children” and calls for Child, Family and Foster Care agencies and Juvenile detention and probation systems to implement safeguards against the potential physical abuse and injury these drugs may cause.
Rev. Frederick Shaw Jr., the National Director of Public Affairs for the CCHR International, who is a former Los Angeles Sheriff’s Deputy and currently a Vice President of the Inglewood/South Bay chapter, helped author the resolutions that were passed at the 108th Annual NAACP Convention held recently in Baltimore. He said there is an over-representation today of African American children being placed in foster care and in special education where they are prescribed potent mind-altering drugs.
NAACP Resolution Calls for Ban on Electroshocking Children
A second NAACP Resolution calls for a banning of electroshock treatment on children, youths and young adults up to the age of 21. Electroshock, also known as Electroconvulsive Therapy or ECT, involves up to 450 volts of electricity sent through the brain causing a massive convulsion to theoretically relieve, but not cure depression. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reports adverse effects from ECT that include cardiovascular (heart) complications; cognition and memory impairment; death; dental/oral trauma; device malfunction; manic symptoms; pain/discomfort; physical trauma; pulmonary (lung) complications; potential worsening of psychiatric symptoms and brain damage.
The FDA is currently reviewing whether the ECT device, which manufacturers have never been required to provide clinical studies to prove is safe or effective, should be reduced in its risk classification. If successful, this would broaden its use, including children whose developing brains are more likely to be more damaged by the shock. The NAACP Resolution says it “vehemently opposes any attempt by the FDA to reduce the risk classification of the ECT device.”
The Resolution points to four U.S. states—California, Colorado, Texas and Tennessee—having banned the pediatric use of electroshock and a United Nations report on Torture that recommends “an absolute ban on all forced” electroshock. African Americans are more at risk of this potentially brain-damaging procedure as “psychiatrists now diagnose African American men in mental hospitals as having a serious mental disorder at a rate of up to 1,500 percent higher than white men,” according to the Resolution.
CCHR was first to obtain state legislation banning the use of electroshock treatment (ECT) on children and adolescents in 1976 in California and also wants to see a nationwide ban on the practice of administering ECT for mental health or behavioral problems.
The FDA’s proposal to reduce the ECT risk classification has been opposed by thousands of individuals and a Citizens Petition was filed with the FDA Commissioner last year indicating this. An amendment to that Petition was provided to the FDA, dated July 29, 2017, which reinforced the treatment’s risks, stating:
- “That ECT drastically shortens the lifespan of recipients has been well known for decades. For example, in a large retrospective study of 3,288 patients receiving ECT in Monroe County, NY, recipients were found to have a substantially increased death rate from all causes.”
- The ECT device manufacturers have indicated that brain damage is a potential risk associated with ECT.
Over a two-year period, the Florida Dept. of Juvenile Justice bought 326,081 tablets of antipsychotic drugs for use in state-operated jails and homes for children. That’s enough to hand out 446 pills a day, seven days a week, for two years in a row, to kids in jails and programs that can hold no more than 2,300 boys and girls on a given day.
Rev. Shaw said that minority children are over-represented in foster care and juvenile detention systems where they are at risk of being prescribed psychotropic drugs, especially antipsychotics. As of 2013, Black juveniles were nearly four times as likely to be committed to juvenile detention facilities as white juveniles. American Indian juveniles were nearly four times as likely, and Hispanic juveniles were 61 percent more likely.
These children and teens need greater protections, he said. For example, over a two-year period, the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice bought 326,081 tablets of antipsychotic drugs for use in state-operated jails and homes for children. That’s enough to hand out 446 pills a day, seven days a week, for two years in a row, to kids in jails and programs that can hold no more than 2,300 boys and girls on a given day.
Research indicates that antipsychotics may shrink the brain and there is little data on how they affect brain development during the teen years when the brain grows more than at any other time but infancy. Indeed, youth are more vulnerable than any other group to the drugs’ worst side effects, according to a TIME article in 2011.
Federal policies have also “allowed for the introduction of disproportionate behavioral-stimulant use with Black males as a mode of social control,” reported researchers of the study, “Controlling the Black School-Age Male: Psychotropic Medications and the Circumvention of Public Law….”
Rev. Shaw said that historically, African Americans’ response to discrimination and oppression has been labeled as a mental disorder. Professors Herb Kutchins and Stuart Kirk also report: “Defenders of slavery, proponents of racial segregation…have consistently attempted to justify oppression by inventing new mental illnesses and by reporting higher rates of abnormality among African Americans or other minorities.”
In the 1960s, psychiatrists claimed civil rights protests caused violent “schizophrenic” symptoms in African Americans, which they labeled as “protest psychosis.” Jonathan M. Metzl, Professor of Sociology and Psychiatry, writing in his book The Protest Psychosis, said that Black men were said to have developed “hostile and aggressive feelings” and “delusional anti-whiteness” after listening to civil rights leaders. Advertisements appeared in psychiatric journals using African symbols to convince people that African Americans had so-called violent traits requiring antipsychotics.
Today, African American students are more than twice as likely to be labeled cognitively “deficient” than white American students. Although they comprise only 17% of the student population African Americans represent 33% of those enrolled in programs for the “mentally challenged.” “Special education” classes are just a new form of segregation, says Rev. Shaw. “This is literally a fight for kids’ lives,” he added.
Rev. Shaw wants to see nationwide support for the NAACP Resolutions and said that while it is clear that children and youths can face serious problems in life, “we have to work to provide humane and workable social services for them. We need effective medical—not mind-numbing psychiatric—help; good nutrition; a healthy, safe environment and activities that promote confidence. Effective education will also do far more for a troubled person than drugging, shocks, and other damaging psychiatric practices,” he says.
As a non-profit, public benefit organization, CCHR has been responsible for helping obtain over 180 laws enacted, including the 2004 Federal Child Medication Safety Amendment that prohibits schools from forcing children to take psychotropic drugs as a requisite for their education. Click here to support the “Fight for Kids” campaign.
When a global NGO pretends to be FIGHTING FOR KIDS----in the midst of CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA ROBBER BARON FRAUDS, dismantling of all Federal and US Constitutional rights and agencies that provide oversight and accountability protecting WE THE PEOPLE THE 99% AND ENFORCING THOSE LAWS-----we see LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE POSING.......
So, here is a public policy that SEEMS to support children and medication safety and rights while in schools but as we all know 2004 was Bush -era where our public K-12 was being privatized, outsourced, with no protections for parents and students in classrooms----this soared under Obama.
Yet, these same NGOs are ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE UNITED NATIONS US CITIES AS FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES----so they are not REAL left organizations----the 99% must create their own local media with real public policy discussions especially in MOVING FORWARD AFFORDABLE CARE ACT. THE ACA IS THE MIRROR DEREGULATION/CONSOLIDATION policy of Clinton-era banking creating criminal predatory Wall Street and it is creating the same in our US public health system.
'As a non-profit, public benefit organization, CCHR has been responsible for helping obtain over 180 laws enacted, including the 2004 Federal Child Medication Safety Amendment that prohibits schools from forcing children to take psychotropic drugs as a requisite for their education. Click here to support the “Fight for Kids” campaign'.
The Department of Health and Human Services
The Department of Justice
Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control Program
Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2015
The Annual Report of the Attorney General a
nd the Secretary detai
ling expenditures and
revenues under the Health Care Fraud and Abus
e Control Program for Fiscal Year 2015 is
provided as required by Section 1817(k)(5
) of the Social Security Act.
The Social Security Act Section 1128C(a), as es
tablished by the Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-191, HIPAA or
the Act), created the Health Care Fraud
and Abuse Control Program, a far-reaching program
to combat fraud and abuse in health care,
including both public and private health plans.
Where has all health care for our low-income communities gone? To what are called MEDICAL ENTERPRISE ZONES----ENTERPRISE ZONES are those profiteering private national chain systems having already taken our community development and yes, these national health chains being tied to our community charter schools are AS ABUSIVE, FRAUDULENT, DEREGULATED, AND PROFITEERING as global Wall Street banks. So, are these GLOBAL NGOs really working to PROTECT OUR KIDS? Of course not.
Charter Schools Gone Wild: Study Finds Widespread Fraud, Mismanagement and Waste
May 5, 2014
by Joshua Holland
Students in a kindergarten classroom at North Valley Academy in Gooding, Idaho, wear red, white and blue shirts as part of their school uniform. The K-12 charter school is the first in Idaho to advertise itself as a patriotic choice for parents, with an emphasis on individual freedoms and free-market capitalism. (AP Photo/Jessie L. Bonner)
Charter school operators want to have it both ways. When they’re answering critics of school privatization, they say charter schools are public — they use public funds and provide students with a tuition-free education. But when it comes to transparency, they insist they have the same rights to privacy as any other private enterprise.
But a report released Monday by Integrity in Education and the Center for Popular Democracy — two groups that oppose school privatization — presents evidence that inadequate oversight of the charter school industry hurts both kids and taxpayers.
Sabrina Joy Stevens, executive director of Integrity in Education, told BillMoyers.com, “Our report shows that over $100 million has been lost to fraud and abuse in the charter industry, because there is virtually no proactive oversight system in place to thwart unscrupulous or incompetent charter operators before they cheat the public.” The actual amount of fraud and abuse the report uncovered totaled $136 million, and that was just in the 15 states they studied.
Diane Ravitch on school privatization.
According to the study, fraud and mismanagement of charter schools fall into six categories:
- Charter operators using public funds illegally — outright embezzlement
- Using tax dollars to illegally support other, non-educational businesses
- Mismanagement that put children in potential danger
- Charters illegally taking public dollars for services they didn’t provide
- Charter operators inflating their enrollment numbers to boost revenues
- General mismanagement of public funds
The report’s authors note that, “where there is little oversight, and lots of public dollars available, there are incentives for ethically challenged charter operators to charge for services that were never provided.” They cite the example of the Cato School of Reason Charter School in California, which, despite its libertarian name, collected millions of tax dollars by registering students who actually attended private schools in the area.
Perhaps the most troubling examples of mismanagement were those the report says actually put kids in danger:
Many of the cases involved charter schools neglecting to ensure a safe environment for their students. For example, Ohio’s State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Dr. Richard A. Ross, was forced to shut down two charter schools, The Talented Tenth Leadership Academy for Boys Charter School and The Talented Tenth Leadership Academy for Girls Charter School, because, according to Ross, “They did not ensure the safety of the students, they did not adequately feed the students, they did not accurately track the students and they were not educating the students well. It is unacceptable and intolerable that a sponsor and school would do such a poor job. It is an educational travesty.”
Integrity in Education and the Center for Popular Democracy aren’t the first to warn of problems plaguing an under-regulated industry fueled by billions of tax dollars. A 2010 report to Congress by the Department of Education’s Inspector General’s office warned of the agency’s “concern about vulnerabilities in the oversight of charter schools” in light of “a steady increase in the number of charter school complaints.” It blamed regulators’ failure “to provide adequate oversight needed to ensure that Federal funds [were] properly used and accounted for.”
Read the full report for the watchdogs’ recommendations for how policymakers could strengthen oversight and bring real transparency to the charter school industry.
Of course the most abused policy by corporate charters filled with fraud and mismanagement is ILLEGALLY USING MENTAL HEALTH PHARMA to control children especially in our low-income communities----who pushes these deregulated, corporate charter policies? Global Wall Street Baltimore Development 'LABOR AND JUSTICE' organization 5% to the 1%.
The policy of HEALTH ENTERPRISE ZONES brings what already was global Wall Street development of urban centers to medical system development. There is no intent of bringing health care to low-income---the intent is to use Federal funding to expand existing global health corporation footprints throughout a US Foreign Economic Zone allowing them to operate free from any US Federal or US Constitutional laws------so as in Baltimore we are filling these HEALTH ENTERPRISE ZONES with national and global health system clinics------mobile health units all operating within a corporate charter system filled with fraud and mismanagement----and VOILA----billions of dollars in education and public health funding YET AGAIN BEING FLEECED IN FRAUD----our students exposed to profiteering in basic health care---and corporate charters sometimes thinking nothing of using PHARMA TO CONTROL STUDENTS.
PHILADELPHIA AS BALTIMORE have the same ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE forget all US Rule of Law moving funding for WE THE PEOPLE THE 99% into the hands of global 1% anyway they can. It is no coincidence that all BUSINESS JOURNALS love HEALTH ENTERPRISE ZONE policies.
“Introducing school-based health services can help ensure students have access to the routine and preventative care that will help them grow academically, physically, and socially.”
Who supported and pushed these HEALTH ENTERPRISE ZONES as good for low-income just as ENTERPRISE ZONE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT these few decades? Baltimore Development, global Johns Hopkins, URBAN League, Urban Institute, NAACP----same groups forcing corporate pre-K - career schools.
Newly created 'Health Enterprise Zone' to tackle health disparities in North Phila.
Oct 20, 2016, 2:35pm EDT
John George Senior Reporter Philadelphia Business JournalState and city officials unveiled plans Thursday to address the health disparities in North Philadelphia through the creation of a "Health Enterprise Zone."
The HEZ is being created to try new and innovative community-based approaches to health care, and reward approaches that reduce health disparities, improve health outcomes, and stabilize and reduce health care costs.
The HEZ will focus on four goals:
- Innovation: Developing, deploying, and coordinating human and technological resources to improve and elevate the social, economic, and health outcomes for North Philadelphia.
- Investment: Redirecting and investing resources into core infrastructure institutions to achieve long-term health, stability, and sustainability in the zone.
- Incentive: Aligning public and private capital and financial models to properly resource community, staff, and institutions within the zone to affect short and long-term change.
- Integration: Focusing on coordination of efforts, reducing duplication, improving quality, and promoting economies of scale.
“By bringing together government, health care providers, hospitals, philanthropy and community stakeholders, we hope to increase access, improve quality, and reduce health disparities for North Philadelphia families,” said Ted Dallas, secretary of the state Department of Human Services.
Jim Kenney said current residents of North Philadelphia — nearly 300,000 of whom are Medicaid recipients — experience lower life expectancies and higher rates of obesity, diabetes and heart disease than those found in other parts of the city.
“We need to work collaboratively with system partners to make life better for those who live here,” Kenney said.
As part of the intitiative, up to $1.5 million will be made available to Philadelphia from the state Department of Education to improve access to higher quality health care in cooperation with the Mayor’s Community Schools Initiative.
“Research shows that good health can have a tremendous impact on student academic growth by reducing absenteeism, easing disciplinary issues, and improving a student’s ability to focus and learn,” said state Department of Education Secretary Pedro Rivera. “Introducing school-based health services can help ensure students have access to the routine and preventative care that will help them grow academically, physically, and socially.”
This is what we have been seeing these several years of OBAMA and RACE TO THE TOP global neo-liberal education privatizing our US public K-12. No matter how city councils and school boards pretend parents and students still have protections and the goals of these global charter chains are to create the BEST OF THE BEST IN THE WORLD learning conditions----NONE OF THAT IS TRUE.
What we are seeing as expected are policies saying a corporate K-12 have the right to require students be medicated----have the right to refuse students they deem too expensive to manage without medication ----and now we are being told our students LEARN MORE WHEN MEDICATED.
All of these EVIDENCE-BASED MENTAL HEALTH/LEARNING DATA are advancing the right of corporations to require any kinds of PHARMA they think will introduce better learning---keeping in mind these GLOBAL PRE-K-TO CAREER EDUCATION CORPORATIONS are almost always owned by global % having no background in education or health.
'The state also is limited in what it can find out about management companies. The state charter board can audit only the charter school, not the private company hired to run the school’s operations…'
When a global NGO pretends to be throwing a left social progressive bone in protecting against PHARMA ABUSES while partnered with global 1% ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE----they are POSERS AND PRETENDERS-----5% TO THE 1%----please stop allowing these groups be our REAL populist 99% action groups.
As with all US CITY ENTERPRISE ZONE DEVELOPMENT global corporate campuses use our poor communities and citizens to FUND DEVELOPMENT of their own expanded corporate campuses-----they don't care about any students other than those 1-3% of exceptional students. We will see MOVING FORWARD where these lower tier vocational tracking for 99% of WE THE PEOPLE will use PHARMA and behavioral devices to manage populations----not educate.
Parent Horror Stories from BASIS: Corporate Charter Hurting Children?
Posted on June 8, 2014 by Dr. Julian Vasquez Heilig in Charter Schools
Today I am blogging about two parent horror stories from BASIS. Let me just warn you, after hearing parents talk about what allegedly happened to their children at BASIS, you will likely be in a surly mood learning about this corporate (quasi-for profit) charter chain. The BASIS corporate charter chain is now a very unfavorite of mine. Who/What is BASIS? Wikipedia describes the BASIS corporate charter schools:
BASIS Schools, Inc. is an Arizona charter school operator. It operates eight schools in Arizona and one in the District of Columbia….BASIS recently announced plans to add three more schools for the 2013-2014 year: one in Ahwatukee, one in San Antonio, Texas, and a new K-4 program near their original location in Tucson.
I first blogged about BASIS in the post What BASIS?: Nepotism and aggrandizement in charters? (One of the interesting things about the first BASIS post is that 50-100 people read that post each day) I am always curious where that traffic is coming from. At the time, I included Charter School Scandals uncovered about BASIS:
The schools are the brainchild of Michael and Olga Block, who envisioned a college-prep curriculum that would rival the best countries. The first school opened in 1998 in Tucson. A second followed in 2003 in Scottsdale.
For years, the Blocks worked for and were paid by the non-profit schools. Michael was the chief operating officer and treasurer, Olga the chief executive officer.
The Blocks later formed a separate, for-profit company and in 2009 signed a service agreement with the non-profit that provides Basis’ six schools with most everything they need to operate: school directors, teachers, accounting, technology, human resources, public relations and Michael and Olga Block…
Basis Inc. denied a request from The Arizona Republic to review a copy of its agreement with the Blocks’ company.
The state also is limited in what it can find out about management companies. The state charter board can audit only the charter school, not the private company hired to run the school’s operations…
A few of the Blocks’ relatives also received money for work performed for the schools, including a relative who performed accounting services for the schools in the Czech Republic, as recently as fiscal 2009.
The tax returns no longer include these details because the Blocks work for the privately held company, not the non-profit. Michael Block said the company is a private business and declined to discuss salaries or whether family members are performing work for the schools…
So that is some quick background on BASIS. Gene Glass, Arizona State professor emeritus, recently posted A Basis Schools Horror Story. In this post a parent described the situation at BASIS for her child. A quick summary:
Background and Introduction to BASIS San Antonio: “When we learned about BASIS San Antonio, it sounded too good to be true.”
The Education: “Throughout the school year, he gave up all extracurricular activities in order to complete the homework requirements”
Challenges: “According to children attending the school, the students were kind, respectful and courteous but the parents were bullies to each other and the students. By the end of the school year, mandatory detention for any and all infractions was developed and highly enforced with no oversight by the Head of School.”
Charter Schools Have No Nurse:
“Because there was no nurse and no nurse’s station, when our son became extremely ill at school, he was sent to the boy’s bathroom and was unsupervised by an adult for over 45 minutes while young boys using the restroom walked in and out of the restroom. When I arrived at the school, he was lying on his backpack under the urinals in the boy’s bathroom… When I posted the facts of what happened to our son on the school Facebook page in order to work with other parents to discuss Best Practices at other charter schools and to discuss solutions, over 75 personal threatening comments from other parents were posted in response to my comment asking to work together for a positive solution comment.”
“Students at BASIS would frequently steal each others lunches, backpacks, cell phones and other personal property with no direction from the administration of the school.”
Charter Schools Have No Lunch Program:
“There is no lunch program at charter schools. My son had his lunch stolen from his backpack by another student. The students are not allowed to use the phone at the school and my son went an entire day without eating food. He snuck a crust of another student’s pizza out of the garbage can to sustain himself during the day.”
Lack of Governance:
“I contacted Victoria Rico, the Chairman of the George Brackenridge Foundation. I offered to help the school obtain access to a nurse at no cost, help establish collaboration with local hospital systems and help obtain grants to help fund, the result was very positive. A meeting with the CEO of the Texas BASIS Schools was scheduled. The result of the meeting with the CEO was that there was no interest on the part of BASIS San Antonio to collaborate with the community nor add infrastructure that was not required. Dan Neinhauser, CEO of BTX (Basis Texas)”
Lack of Nurturing and Compassion:
“We have a 22 year old daughter with a terminal illness. I emailed all of our son’s teachers/administrators to let them know that our son may need additional support and at times could be sad due to the situation at home. Not one teacher or administrator communicated back. I called and left messages with all teachers. No calls were returned. I contacted Mr. Ross, new Assistant Head of School and he claimed that he received the email but he was transitioning into his new role and just forgot to contact us.”
“A note came home stating that BASIS would be implementing a mandatory detention for students who were late to class and unprepared in any way. The first week, my son received mandatory detention for forgetting a dry erase marker in Algebra, for not completing three problems out of 180 required Algebra problems and forgetting a poem in English Class.”
The End of BASIS for our Son:
“On May 6th, 2014, I was called by Mr. Ross, Assistant Head of School. He was Dr. Abby Hasberry’s replacement, (she was hired to be the Head of School for the new BASIS North Campus). My son was found alive yet mentally nonresponsive sitting on the floor under an Art Table. Upon arriving at the school, I immediately knew that he needed mental health support. I took him to Clarity Child Guidance Center. Upon evaluating my son, the diagnosis was extreme depression, anxiety disorder and suicidal thoughts to harm himself. The hospital / psychiatrist medical opinion, they believed that our son was suffering from PTSD from the experiences at the school due to the rigorous educational requirements coupled with the mandatory detention had become a source of terror for him. Our son is now a patient at Clarity Child Guidance Center. He spent time inpatient at the hospital and is now receiving day program outpatient treatment at a cost of $835 per day inpatient and $125 per day outpatient.”
Terror – Not an Isolated Experience:
“I contacted Victoria Rico at the George Brackenridge Foundation and she asked if she could help “make it right” for our family. She offered to help find another school for him to attend. The damage has been done. We feel comfort and extreme sadness to learn that our son’s experience at BASIS San Antonio is not an isolated experience. When we took our son to Clarity Child Guidance Center both the psychiatrist and counselor both told us that other children had been seen inpatient and outpatient at the facility and had been at BASIS San Antonio, same symptoms, same story.”
The BASIS parent concluded,
We have no idea where to take our son for education at this point. But, we know that whatever decision we make that nurturing and compassion of a child must be the foremost important factor in the choice we make. Our son was terrorized at a high performance charter school and he is not the only one. This can not be the future of children in our community. We are publicly sharing our experiences because it should have never happened to our son. He was a victim and more importantly he is 12 years old. Children should be in a safe and nurturing environment. BASIS San Antonio is more of a concentration camp than a school for children.
Oh, but there is more… now for an exclusive story to Cloaking Inequity from a BASIS parent. What you are about to read is unsolicited— as the parent came to Cloaking Inequity with her concerns after the BASIS was non-responsive to her in the manner that she felt was appropriate.
The beginning of the 2013-2014 school year for my child was the start of a new educational and social endeavor at the newly founded Basis San Antonio charter school. As the year comes to a close, my child is not the only one reflecting on what he learned this year. As a parent, I am also reflecting on what I have learned about my child’s new school, and its harsh educational climate. I learned that although Basis claims to accept children of all races, ethnicities, and disabilities, they are not culturally sensitive nor equipped to assist children with disabilities. I learned that although the United States of America has established laws protecting the civil rights of children with disabilities, my protection is limited to what I can afford to pay for legal counsel and defense. I learned that Basis will “woo” potential students and parents with false promises. More concerning, I learned that Basis San Antonio will open another school next school year.
Our story at Basis San Antonio began much like a romantic tale, with interest, intrigue, and hope for the future. We could not resist the Basis appeal with all its promises and presumed prestige. So, we took the plunge and enrolled our 6 grade child at Basis San Antonio in the fall of 2013. There was a courting period, including open houses, informational sessions, and campus tours. Next, there were the promises of endless opportunities, a world class facility, an exciting curriculum, top notch educators, and more. These vows were seemingly executed the first week of school, when teachers were literally opening car doors for students at the curb. The staff collectively appeared friendly, understanding, and willing to help my child, who has a disability that affects his academic performance.
As a parent, I was “wooed” by Basis. We were sure that Basis was the “one” for us – the school that would accept all children regardless of color, creed, or impairment. Who wouldn’t fall in love with this charter school initially? Who would have thought our year would end with a hearing, and a desperate search for legal counsel?
Basis San Antonio has a Special Education Director, who held a meeting and created a 504 Accommodation Plan for my child in the fall of 2013. Section 504 is an amendment of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 law that prohibits the discrimination on the basis of disability. Much to my surprise, drawing up a 504 Accommodation Plan was the extent of the service we got from Basis. There were no plans implemented or followed up on throughout the fall months. The spring was no different. The evidence first came when I saw my child’s failing grades. Basis ignored my steady emails day after day, and week after week. With every failing quiz, test, and progress report, I sent my concerns to the Special Education Director, Head of School, and teachers, which were met with no reply, dismissive attitude, or disciplinary action against my child. It was clear that the honeymoon was over.
As failing grades became the norm for my child, my e-mails to the school staff and administration began to accumulate. It was January and still no response from the Basis Administration. It was difficult to watch my child struggle with his disability, and watch his self-esteem plummet. Knowing that pre-comprehension exams were quickly approaching, I continued writing e-mails with specific concerns about my child’s 504 testing accommodations for the exams. With still no response from Basis, I contacted my child’s doctor with hopes that a change in medication would help him cope with the educational demands.
The lack of aid I received from Basis over e-mail correspondence was only met with deficient assistance face-to-face. January 16th, I attempted to pick up my child from Basis for a cardiologist appointment, they refused to release him because it was not the “right time,” and was against their policy. Confused, I coiled into a corner of the lobby and e-mailed the Head of School once more, this time to let her know I was being denied my child, and that he needed to be released to me. Seeing there was an apparent disconnect between Basis and I, I sent a subsequent e-mail to the Head of School explaining the scarce communication I had received regarding my child’s academic progress. In return, I never received a response from Head of School. On January 21st a Basis administrator contacted me to reiterate Basis’ release policy. I voiced my concerns about the failure to accommodate my child’s disability and the ability to take him to the doctor for alternative medication. She stated she would look into my child’s 504 Accommodation Plans and that she would contact me. This administrator never called me back.
I continued my barrage of emails February and March, addressed to the Head of School, Special Education Director, and teachers. Finally, after months of concerns, the Special Education Director agreed to meet with me. On March 5th, the director confirmed that the 504 accommodations were not being met and blamed my child, claiming he chose not to “participate.” She did not have a response as to why I was not informed about my child’s alleged failure to comply, or why no one responded to my continuous questions and concerns. She proceeded to inform me that my child performed poorly in his pre-comprehension exams. I requested an evaluation of my son’s 504 Accommodation Plan and a meeting with all his teachers. To increase parent-teacher communication and clarify assignments due, I proposed an alternate planner to the Basis communication journal “CJ”; the Special Education Director stated she would seek approval from the Head of School. On March 20th the Special Education Director responded by e-mail reporting the Head of School declined my request for an alternate planner to the Basis “CJ,” however, recommended a teacher change.
After my meeting with the Special Education Director, I scheduled Basis method of scheduling parent-teacher conferences/15 minute brief sessions with each of his eight teachers. On March 24th, I was scheduled to meet with my child’s algebra teacher at 7:00 am however after arriving 5 minutes late; she would not meet with me. To my disbelief and after months of e-mails, instead, I found myself meeting with the Head of School.
During our meeting, the Head of School informed me that my child’s algebra teacher did not feel comfortable meeting with me. I came prepared with information and an article about my child’s disability and with ideas of how I could help my child at home with hopes she could guide me. Instead, the Head of School stated she would be placing my child in 5th grade effective immediately, and that my child would be retained the following year if I choose to continue at Basis. She asked me numerous times why I wanted my child at Basis. When I stated my child wanted to attend Basis, she wanted to know why he wanted to attend Basis, to which I responded “who wouldn’t want to attend the ‘world’s best school’?” I asked why my child did not receive 504 accommodations, to which she responded she did not know, and that was not her responsibility. She denied ever receiving my numerous emails. I stated that it appeared unfair for Basis to fail my child after not assuring my child’s disability was accommodated as outlined at the beginning of the year. I explained not providing accommodations is like not providing my child prescription eye glasses so he can read a book, this was an example that was given in a CHADD article. CHADD.org is an authority on my child’s disability, and recommended by my our doctor. Head of School emphatically disagreed with the article. I also requested a full Special Education Evaluation on the grounds that Basis stated my child is not functioning at the same pace as his peers.
Retaliation began after I asserted my child’s 504 rights; he was disciplined for actions related to his disability. I requested copies of the discipline referrals/reports requiring detention of my son; however Head of School stated they do not document when students are sent to the office or detention. Further retaliation, a 504 re-evaluation would be held without me as I was removed as a viable decision maker for my child’s academic planning. April 1st, Head of School, referred to me as a “guest” with regard to my participation in 504 planning meetings. There appeared to be no regard for my knowledge of my child’s academic, medical, social and emotional history. In a calm but eerie tone she stated if I did not like this, I could contact the Office of Civil Rights (OCR). Head of School was unapologetic for the lack of 504 accommodations, concern for my child, and disregard for my parental rights.
After months of expressing my concerns for the lack of regard to my child’s disability, the 504 re-evaluation was conducted. Despite my protest on April 2, Head of School informed me that the meeting was held without me. I requested a copy of my procedural safeguards which was emailed to me and I followed the hearing procedure. April and May went by and the 504 accommodations still appeared ambiguous. During this time it appears the Special Education Director left Basis. May 21st, I met the new Special Education Director and all my child’s teachers all at once in a “staffing” who basically informed that my child still was not preforming well. During this meeting, Head of School tried to convenience me that my child should have a choice in his accommodations to which I disagreed. May ended with little change to my child’s academic progress and teacher/administration apathy continued. Basis did hire an attorney to defend their position and a pre-hearing conference was held.
Along with their own attorney, Basis hired a “non-bias” attorney to serve as a hearing officer. Our hearing date is July 15, 2014. Seeing the enormity of the situation, I contacted Disability Rights, Texas Rio Grande Legal Aid, OCR, MALDEF, and other nonprofit agencies. I received letters of denial from these agencies, except MALDEF, who has not returned my calls. I am grateful to the Office of Senator Leticia Van de Putte, who responded by assisting me with a complaint to TEA. Currently, a response is pending from Congressman Joaquin Castro with hopes of reviewing our OCR complaint.
Essentially, I have to defend my child’s disability rights against two attorneys, who are well-versed in educational law. Its Basis attorney’s job to assure my child’s rights are denied, and that my parental rights are stripped. Are the events of this year tactics Basis San Antonio practices to scare away children who do not meet their academic standards? Other Basis parents who did not feel supported transferred out earlier this year, should we have moved too? My child was emotionally tormented and struggled entire school year trying to maneuver through the Basis curriculum without his 504 accommodations. What I learned is Basis San Antonio lacks empathy, skill, and proper staff to support neither disabled children nor their parents. More importantly, how can a “world class” publically funded, educational institution be permitted to ignore the needs of their disabled students and their parent’s constant cries for help?
Getting back to the NEW YORK TIMES article telling us TRUMP ENDING DACA is a psychic toll on our global immigrant 99% needing all our global PHARMA -------it is indeed our corporate charter chains in US city low-income communities often immigrant being exposed to the worst of these deregulated global health systems meets deregulated global neo-liberal education systems-----all with a goal of using HUMAN CAPITAL ANYWAY THEY CAN TO INCREASE PROFITS.
The Psychic Toll of Trump’s DACA Decision
Our immigrant 99% are being fed so much mis-information on education and health care---they don't understand that MOVING FORWARD CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA is killing access and opportunity our immigrants had all last century and are being made to believe less is more. The article below has an immigrant family charged $10,000 emergency bill for a son hit by a car-----in US we have Federal funds specifically designed to pay all emergency room bills FOR CITIZENS AND IMMIGRANTS if they cannot pay. So, why was his family charged $10,000? Do our Latino families know how PHARMA is badly used in America----YES, it is not a benefit in most cases.
'Even if he had not enrolled in DACA, Sanchez would soon qualify for full-scope Medi-Cal through California’s Health Care for All Kids program, set to launch in May. The program allows all children under 19 years of age living in California -- documented or otherwise – the opportunity to enroll in Medi-Cal if their family makes less than 138 percent of the federal poverty level.
But now that he has DACA, Sanchez doesn’t have to wait. As a DACA recipient, he can apply for full-scope Medi-Cal now'.
DACA Opens Door to Health Care
New America Media, News Report, Viji Sundaram, Posted: Apr 26, 2016
Editor's Note: The original Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, launched in 2012, continues to exist and is not affected by the case before the U.S. Supreme Court. Among the benefits of DACA in California is the ability to access the health care program Medi-Cal, writes NAM health reporter Viji Sundaram.
OAKLAND, Calif. -- Jesus Pina Sanchez remembers all too vividly that morning two years ago when he was crossing the street near his home and got hit by a car in the crosswalk.
The then15-year-old was rushed by ambulance to Children’s Hospital in Oakland, X-rayed and treated for the bruises he suffered. He was discharged later that day and his parents were slapped with a $10,000 bill, which weeks later went to collections.
This Federal agency has existed throughout modern US history and has reimbursed local emergency care institutions for IMMIGRANT as well as low-income citizens who could not paid emergency care bills. We have known CA was ground zero for health industry frauds as with all industry frauds and we want to know WHERE DID THESE EMERGENCY FUNDS GO?
Federal Reimbursement of Emergency Health Services Furnished to Undocumented Aliens
To reimburse eligible providers for their otherwise un-reimbursed costs associated with furnishing emergency health services to undocumented and certain other aliens.
General information about this opportunity
Last Known Status
Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Office: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Type(s) of Assistance Offered
DIRECT PAYMENTS FOR A SPECIFIED USE
Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, Public Law 108-73, Section 1011; Medicare Modernization Act (MMA).
Who is eligible to apply/benefit from this assistance?
From the allotments made for a State, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall pay an amount (subject to the total amount available from such allotments) directly to eligible providers located in the State where emergency services were incurred to the extent that the eligible provider was not otherwise reimbursed. An eligible provider defined under the statute is a hospital, physician, or provider of ambulance services including an Indian Health Service (IHS) facility whether operated by the IHS or by an Indian tribal or tribal organization).
The amounts of money set aside for each State will be paid directly to hospitals, certain physicians, and ambulance providers for the costs of providing emergency health care required under EMTALA and related hospital inpatient, outpatient, and ambulance services (including those operated by the Indian Health Service and Indian tribes and Tribal organizations) furnished to undocumented aliens, aliens paroled into the United States at a United States port of entry for the purposes of receiving such services, and Mexican citizens permitted temporary entry to the United States with a laser visa.
Final policy guidance was released on May 9, 2005 regarding the implementation of section 1011 of the MMA. This notice establishes the general framework and procedural rules for submitting an enrollment application and payment requests, establishes general statements of policy, and provides CMS' interpretation of section 1011. It is posted in the "downloads" section of the following web address: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/UndocAliens/02_policy.asp#TopOfPage. This program is excluded from coverage under 2 CFR 200, Subpart E - Cost Principles.
What is the process for applying and being award this assistance?
Preapplication coordination is not applicable. Environmental impact information is not required for this program. This program is excluded from coverage under E.O. 12372.
This program is excluded from coverage under 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. Not applicable
Approval/Disapproval Decision Time
How are proposals selected?
How may assistance be used?
Sections 1866(a)(1)(I), 1866 (a)(1)(N), and 1867 of the Social Security Act (the Act)impose specific obligations on Medicare-participating hospitals that offer emergency services. These obligations concern individuals who come to a hospital emergency department and request examination or treatment for medical conditions, and apply to all of these individuals, regardless of whether or not they are beneficiaries of any program under the Act. Section 1867 of the Act sets forth requirements for medical screening examinations of medical conditions, as well as necessary stabilizing treatment or appropriate transfer. In addition, section 1867(h) of the Act specifically prohibits a delay in providing required screening or stabilization services in order to inquire about the individual's payment method or insurance status.
What are the requirements after being awarded this opportunity?
No program reports are required. No cash reports are required. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has designated Novitas Solutions (formerly Highmark Medicare Services) as the national contractor for Section 1011 and Federal Reimbursement of Emergency Health Services Furnished to Undocumented Aliens.
Novitas Medicare Services will enroll eligible providers, assist providers with enrollment and billing questions, calculate provider payment amounts, and serve as the compliance contractor.
Novitas Medicare Services will send CMS periodic reports on the payments and they can also found be on their website at www.novitas-solutions.com/section1011/index.html. Periodic reports are due to CMS in accordance with the timeframes established by CMS. No performance monitoring is required.
No audits are required for this program.
Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other records pertinent to the project shall be retained for a period consistent with the information contained in the final payment methodology.
Other Assistance Considerations
Formula and Matching Requirements
Statutory formulas are not applicable to this program.
This program has no matching requirements.
This program does not have MOE requirements.
Length and Time Phasing of Assistance
This project is authorized beginning in FY 2005 until all appropriated funds have been exhausted. Method of awarding/releasing assistance: lump sum.
Who do I contact about this opportunity?
Regional or Local Office
Lorraine Zicha, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244 Email: Lorraine.Zicha@cms.hhs.gov Phone: (410) 786-0048
(Formula Grants (Apportionments)) FY 14 $5,649,016; FY 15 est $2,251,560; and FY 16 est $2,000,000
Range and Average of Financial Assistance
Regulations, Guidelines and Literature
This information can be found in the Final Policy Notice at the following link:
Examples of Funded Projects
When our immigrant citizens are led to believe they have no other health options without DACA then those NGOs pretending to help them are working against these 99% of immigrants getting what access to health care they have had most of last century----here we see CA getting that bulk of funding while reading an article stating a young immigrant citizens was charged $10,000 for emergency care after being hit by a car.
WHERE ARE THOSE PESKY JUSTICE RIGHTS LAWYERS -----
So, from maternity and birth-----to access to public school nurse's offices-----to emergency room care----health care access for our immigrant 99% has historically been very broad.
WHY ALL THIS EMPHASIS ON DACA TIED TO TRANS PACIFIC TRADE PACT?
The quality of health care access for immigrants inside US will actually DECLINE WITH AFFORDABLE CARE ACT just as for our low-income US citizens so global 1% CLINTON/OBAMA are simply trying to sell this idea that whether immigrant or US citizens-----LESS ACCESS IS ACTUALLY MORE.
Medicaid Helps Hospitals Pay For Illegal Immigrants’ Care
By Phil Galewitz February 12, 2013
Federal law generally bars illegal immigrants from being covered by Medicaid. But a little-known part of the state-federal health insurance program for the poor has long paid about $2 billion a year for emergency treatment for a group of patients who, according to hospitals, mostly comprise illegal immigrants.
The lion’s share goes to reimburse hospitals for delivering babies for women who show up in their emergency rooms, according to interviews with hospital officials and studies.
The funding — which has been around since the late 1980s and is less than 1 percent of the cost of Medicaid — underscores the political and practical challenges of refusing to cover an entire class of people. Congress approved the program after lawmakers required hospitals to screen and stabilize all emergency patients regardless of their insurance or citizenship status.
Some groups say the services encourage people to cross the border for care, while advocates for immigrants say the funding is inadequate because it doesn’t pay for prenatal care and other vital services.
“We can’t turn them away,” said Joanne Aquilina, the chief financial officer of Bethesda Healthcare System in Boynton Beach, Fla., which sees many illegal immigrants because of its proximity to farms where they harvest sugarcane and other seasonal crops.
Nearly one-third of Bethesda Hospital East’s 2,900 births each year are paid for by Emergency Medicaid, the category that covers mainly illegal immigrants. The category includes a small proportion of homeless people and legal immigrants who’ve been in the country less than five years.
Hospitals can’t ask patients whether they’re illegal immigrants, but instead determine that after checking whether they have Social Security numbers, birth certificates or other documents.
“We gather information to qualify patients for something and through that process, if you really hit a dead end, you know they are illegal,” said Steve Short, the chief financial officer at Tampa General Hospital.
A 2007 medical article in the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that 99 percent of those who used Emergency Medicaid during a four-year period in North Carolina were thought to be illegal immigrants.
The Federation for American Immigration Reform, which seeks to limit immigration, said the funding led more women to give birth in the United States, especially since they knew that children born here would be American citizens. The group believes that tens of thousands of “anchor babies” are born each year to illegal immigrants who hope that giving birth to children recognized as citizens will help the women gain legal status themselves.
Anyone born in the United States is a U.S. citizen. It’s unclear how many mothers later get green cards or become citizens.
The Federation for American Immigration Reform doesn’t dispute hospitals’ right to be reimbursed for care they’re required to provide.
“Our focus should be that you could save this money if you prevent the illegal immigration from happening in the first place. You can’t do it after the fact,” said Jack Martin, the special projects director for the organization.
Groups that advocate for immigrants say it’s foolish for Medicaid to pay only for the births and not for the prenatal care that might prevent costly and long-term complications for American children.
“It’s a lose, lose, lose,” said Sonal Ambegaokar, a health policy lawyer at the National Immigration Law Center, which advocates for low-income immigrants. She said denying broad insurance coverage to legal immigrants hurt doctors and hospitals financially, prevented patients from getting needed care and increased costs for the health system.
“There is no evidence that Emergency Medicaid is the cause of migration,” Ambegaokar said. “Immigrants migrate to the U.S. for job opportunities and reunifying with family members.”
Data that Kaiser Health News collected from seven states that are thought to have the highest numbers of illegal immigrants show that the funding pays for emergency services delivered to more than 100,000 people a year.
California hospitals get about half the $2 billion spent annually on Emergency Medicaid. The rest is spread mainly among a handful of states.
In 2011, for example:
- New York spent $528 million on Emergency Medicaid for nearly 30,000 people.
- Texas reported 240,000 claims costing $331 million. (One person could be responsible for multiple claims.)
- Florida spent $214 million on 31,000 patients.
- North Carolina spent $48 million on about 19,000 people.
- Arizona spent $115 million. It couldn’t break out the number of people.
- Illinois spent $25 million on the cost of care to nearly 2,000 people.
Legal immigrants who’ve been in the United States less than five years aren’t eligible for regular Medicaid coverage, though states have the option of extending it to children and pregnant women.
Despite the surge in overall Medicaid spending in the past decade, Emergency Medicaid costs have been remarkably stable. A 2004 study by the Government Accountability Office that looked at data from the 10 states with the highest expected Emergency Medicaid costs, reported $2 billion in spending. State officials say spending varies depending on immigration patterns and that during the economic slowdown, the number of illegal immigrants dropped.
The definition of emergency care and the scope of services available through the Medicaid programs vary by state. For example, in New York, Emergency Medicaid may be used to provide chemotherapy and radiation therapy to illegal immigrants. In New York, California and North Carolina, it may be used to provide outpatient dialysis to undocumented patients.
Other states have tried to narrow the definition of “emergency” to limit what’s covered. “Each state has its own interpretation,” said Jane Perkins, the legal director of the National Health Law Program, which advocates for the working poor.
Last year, for instance, Florida changed its policy to pay for emergency services for eligible undocumented immigrants only until their conditions had been “stabilized.” Previously, its policy was to pay for care that was “medically necessary to relieve or eliminate the emergency medical condition.”
Many hospitals — particularly those in the immigrant areas of Miami and Tampa — feared the change would cut millions of dollars in funding. An administrative law judge ruled in December that Florida had enacted the change improperly because it didn’t go through a public hearing process; the state is appealing.
Short, the chief financial officer at Tampa General Hospital, said the $10 million the hospital collected each year to treat illegal immigrants was “very important to us.” He noted that Medicaid pays the hospital about $1,500 for each day a Medicaid patient is in the hospital.
Jackson Memorial Hospital in Miami collects about $50 million a year in Emergency Medicaid funding, according to the state Agency for Health Care Administration.
What we see is the movement AWAY from these FEDERAL EMERGENCY FUNDS giving broad access to care under MEDICARE AND MEDICAID TRUSTS to creating this SEPARATE DACA FUNDING which went Trump kills DACA will leave no Medicare/Medicaid pathway for these health care supports. Remember, Obama and Clinton neo-liberals gutted funding for Medicare and Medicaid by over a $1 trillion dollars and here is where those losses show.
Notice cancer treatments, dialysis and all the most needed ordinary health treatment vectors are those being lost when Federal Medicare/Medicaid lost that Federal agency funding for emergency care for those not able to pay.
'The definition of emergency care and the scope of services available through the Medicaid programs vary by state. For example, in New York, Emergency Medicaid may be used to provide chemotherapy and radiation therapy to illegal immigrants. In New York, California and North Carolina, it may be used to provide outpatient dialysis to undocumented patients'.
This is true for our US low-income citizens as well---it is tied to ending FEDERAL MEDICARE/MEDICAID and replacing it with what comes after DACA----WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION PREVENTATIVE HEALTH CARE FOR ALL.
Why one-third of hospitals will close by 2020
David Houle and Jonathan Fleece | Policy | March 14, 2012
For centuries, hospitals have served as a cornerstone of the U.S. health care system. During various touch points in life, Americans connect with a hospital during their most intimate and extraordinary circumstances. Most Americans are born in hospitals. Hospitals provide care after serious injuries and during episodes of severe sickness or disease. Hospitals are predominately where our loved ones go to die. Across the nation, hospitals have become embedded into the sacred fabric of communities.
According to the American Hospital Association, in 2011 approximately 5,754 registered hospitals existed in the U.S., housing 942,000 hospital beds along with 36,915,331 admissions. More than 1 in 10 Americans were admitted to a hospital last year.
Hospitals make a substantial imprint on local economies. In many communities, hospitals represent one of the largest employers and economic drivers. Of the total annual American health care dollars spent, hospitals are responsible for more than $750 billion.
Despite a history of strength and stature in America, the hospital institution is in the midst of massive and disruptive change. Such change will be so transformational that by 2020, one in three hospitals will close or reorganize into an entirely different type of health care service provider. Several significant forces and factors are driving this inevitable and historical shift.
First, America must bring down its crippling health care costs. The average American worker costs their employer $12,000 annually for health care benefits, and this figure is increasing more than 10 percent every year. U.S. businesses cannot compete in a globally competitive marketplace at this level of spending. Federal and state budgets are getting crushed by the costs of health care entitlement programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid. Given this cost problem, hospitals are vulnerable as they are generally regarded as the most expensive part of the delivery system for health care in America.
Second, statistically speaking hospitals are just about the most dangerous places to be in the United States. Three times as many people die every year due to medical errors in hospitals as die on our highways — 100,000 deaths compared to 34,000. The Journal of the American Medical Association reports that nearly 100,000 people die annually in hospitals from medical errors. Of this group, 80,000 die from hospital acquired infections, many of which can be prevented. Given the above number of admissions that means that 1 out of every 370 people admitted to a hospital dies due to medical errors. So hospitals are very dangerous places.
It would take about 200 747 airplanes to crash annually to equal 100,000 preventable deaths. Imagine the American outcry if one 747 crashed every day for 200 consecutive days in the U.S. The airlines would stand before the nation and the world in disgrace. Currently in our non-transparent health care delivery system, Americans have no way of knowing which hospitals are the most dangerous. We simply take uninformed chances with our lives at stake.
Third, hospital customer care is abysmal. Recent studies reveal that the average wait time in American hospital emergency rooms is approximately 4 hours. Name one other business where Americans would tolerate this low level of value and service.
Fourth, health care reform will make connectivity, electronic medical records, and transparency commonplace in health care. This means that in several years, and certainly before 2020, any American considering a hospital stay will simply go on-line to compare hospitals relative to infection rates, degrees of surgical success, and many other metrics. Isn’t this what we do in America, comparison shop? Our health is our greatest and most important asset. Would we not want to compare performance relative to any health and medical care the way we compare roofers or carpet installers? Inevitably when we are able to do this, hospitals will be driven by quality, service, and cost — all of which will be necessary to compete.
What hospitals are about to enter is the place Americans, particularly conservative Americans cherish: the open competitive market. We know what happens in this environment. There are winners and losers.
A third of hospitals now in existence in the United States will not cross the 2020 finish line as winners.