Illinois: Lawmakers concerned that Children's Mental Health Plan involves potential drug company involvement

[Guest guest]

> SSRI-Research

> Tue, 17 Aug 2004 21:03:33 -0400

 

> [sSRI-Research] Illinois: Lawmakers

> concerned that Children's Mental Health Plan

> involves potential drug company involvement

>

> Paragraphs 18 & 19 read: " Additional concerns about

> the Children's Mental Health Plan involve potential

> drug company involvement. The Children's Mental

> Health Act 2003 is the tip of an insidious iceberg, "

> said Allen Jones, a former investigator in the

> Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Office of Inspector

> General and the Bureau of Special Investigations " .

>

>

http://www.illinoisleader.com/news/newsview.asp?c=658

>

> IL Children's Mental Health Plan gives legislators

> headache

>

> Tuesday, August 17, 2004

>

> By The Leader-Springfield Bureau

>

>

> SPRINGFIELD -- Illinois recently gained national and

> international attention as the first state to put

> into law a template for mental health screening that

> could become a national model for government

> mandated " evidence-based practices screening " for

> emotional and social disorders for the state's

> children.

>

> But now, some state legislators are expressing

> concern that those putting the law into practice are

> either over-reaching its original intent, or the

> language of the law is problematic.

>

> Last August, Governor Rod Blagojevich signed the

> Illinois Children's Health Act of 2003. It stated in

> part:

>

>

> The State of Illinois shall develop a Children's

> Mental Health Plan containing short-term and

> long-term recommendations to provide comprehensive,

> coordinated mental health prevention, early

> intervention, and treatment services for children

> from birth through age 18.

>

>

> The Act stipulated the creation of the Illinois

> Children's Mental Health Partnership, which is to

> submit a preliminary plan of action to the Governor

>

> on September 30. The Partnership reports directly to

> the governor.

>

> Last month, the Partnership held a series of public

> hearings around the state to unveil its plan.

> Recommendations included screening all pregnant

> women for depression, with in-home visit follow-up.

>

> It is the Partnership's recommendations that began

> raising red flags.

>

> State Rep. Patti Bellock (R-Wheaton), a co-sponsor

> of the original legislation, spelled out some

> concerns with the plan to IllinoisLeader.com in a

> prepared statement:

>

>

> After reviewing the Children's Mental Health Task

> Force recommendations from the preliminary report, I

> have serious reservations about some of the ways the

> partnership is translating the intent of the bill.

> There is considerable misunderstanding about the

> intent..

> I have strong objections to some of the

> recommendations:

> 1. I do not agree that all women should be

> screened for depression during pregnancy and

> following the birth of a child up to one year

> postpartum. I also do not agree with extending the

> Medicaid coverage beyond the 60 days postpartum.

> There is no mention of pregnant women in SB 1951 at

> all.

> 2. I do not agree that all children birth to age

> five receive periodic developmental screens. I also

> do not agree with a data reporting state system to

> track who is screened. This is a violation of

> privacy.

> 3. I do not agree with requiring social-emotional

> development screens with all mandated school exams

> (K, 4th, and 9th) or a major transition time.

> 4. I do not agree with report cards on children's

> social-emotional development, either.

>

>

> State Sen. Chris Lauzen (R-Aurora), who along with

> all 59 members of the Illinois Senate voted for the

> final version of the bill, said today, " If this

> negative interpretation of the Act is accurate, it

> is personally discouraging to me that this bill

> could have gone through the hearing process with

> everybody voting it forward, and none of the true

> implications of what this bill was all about were

> understood by many of voting on it. "

>

> Lauzen added, " I believe that the last people who

> should be defining what is normal and abnormal are

> Springfield politicians, including myself! "

>

> Additional concerns about the Children's Mental

> Health Plan involve potential drug company

> involvement.

>

> " The Children's Mental Health Act 2003 is the tip of

> an insidious iceberg, " said Allen Jones, a former

> investigator in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

> Office of Inspector General and the Bureau of

> Special Investigations.

>

> Jones is now a federal whistleblower who monitors

> mental health initiatives throughout the country.

>

> " The pharmaceutical industry is gaining back door

> access to all of our children by compromising key

> decision makers and by gaining rubber stamped

> endorsements of groups like the Illinois Children's

> Mental Health Partnership, " said Jones.

>

> The Plan was based upon the report, " Children's

> Mental Health: An Urgent Priority for Illinois " by

> the Illinois Children's Mental Health Task Force, a

> group sponsored by Ounce of Prevention and funded by

> The Robert Woods Johnson Foundation, the charitable

> arm of Johnson & Johnson and Janssen

>

> Pharmaceutica. The Irving B. Harris Foundation is

> also credited with start up contributions.

>

> This new initiative if enacted, would make Illinois

> the first state to ratify policies that align

> systems of care with President Bush's New Freedom

> Report.

>

> The New Freedom Report recommends universal mental

> health screening of all United States citizens, with

> an emphasis on school children.

>

> © 2004 IllinoisLeader.com -- all rights reserved

>

> ______

>

> What are your thoughts concerning the issues raised

> in this story? Write a letter to the editor at

> letters and include your name and

> town.

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been

> removed]