|Periodically we let you know the progress of various proposed legislation making its way through the Missouri General Assembly and suggest ways for you to contribute your viewpoint to your state Representative and state Senator.|
The Missouri General Assembly is the state legislature of the State of Missouri and is composed of two chambers: the House of Representatives and the Senate. The General Assembly is responsible for creating laws for governing the State of Missouri. The Revised Statutes of Missouri (RSMo) are electronically available on this site: http://revisor.mo.gov/.
You can find your Representative and Senator, and their contact information, by entering your 9-digit zip code here.
The Second Regular Session of the 100th General Assembly convened on January 8, 2020, and will end May 15, 2020.
This time we’d like to discuss two Joint Resolutions which we’d like you to write your legislators about. Please write from your viewpoint as an individual or professional, and not as a representative of any organization. Let us know the details and any responses you get.
The full text of each Resolution can be found here:
House Joint Resolution 105
Senate Joint Resolution 55
Check out our handy discussion about How to write to a legislator.
If you are not a voting resident of Missouri, you can find out about legislation in your own state and write your own state legislators; also, we are looking for volunteers to monitor legislation in Missouri and the states surrounding Missouri — let us know if you’d like to help out.
HJR 105 and SJR 55
Provides for parents’ exclusive right to control the upbringing of their children
This constitutional amendment, if approved by the voters, declares that every parent has a fundamental right to exercise exclusive control over all aspects of their minor children’s lives without governmental interference, including, but not limited to, decisions regarding their minor children’s custody, upbringing, education, religious instruction, discipline, physical and mental health care, and place of habitation.
We think this is a good idea because the psychiatric mental health care industry is known to interfere in parental rights regarding their minor children.
For example: Parents of millions of schoolchildren worldwide have been told that their children have a “mental disorder” that requires them to be chemically restrained by powerful mind-altering, addictive and harmful psychiatric drugs; or even worse, electroshocking them when the drugs don’t “work.”
Children are human beings who have every right to expect our protection, care, guidance, and the chance to reach their full potential. They will be denied this if they are trapped in the verbal and chemical strait-jackets of psychiatry’s invented labels, mind-altering drugs, and other harmful “treatments.”
There has been a persistent lobbying effort, funded by pharmaceutical companies, to increase the number of psychiatric drugs prescribed to even more children. A universal mental health screening program is the stated goal of these lobbyists. Mental “screening” of school children aims to Leave No Child Unmedicated.
Please express your personal concerns to your Missouri State Representative and Senator, along with your support for HJR 105 and SJR 55.
The Missouri attorney general’s office convinced a Jasper County jury that an 86-year-old former minister is still at risk of sodomizing teenage boys, even after he completed a 15-year prison sentence for doing so. He was sentenced to involuntary commitment in a secure state psychiatric facility essentially for the rest of his life.
The Sex Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment Services (SORTS) program in Missouri has been criticized since it started in 1999. It currently costs Missouri taxpayers $36.5 million per year to fund additional life sentences disguised as treatment for 257 patients after they have already completed their normal criminal prison terms.
Missouri Statutes 632.480 and 632.484 define a sexually violent predator as someone who suffers from a mental abnormality which makes the person more likely than not to engage in predatory acts of sexual violence if not confined in a secure facility — as determined by either a psychiatrist or psychologist.
The Pot Calling the Kettle Black
The fact is, when a psychiatrist or psychologist points the sexual predator finger at a person, they are likely doing so to remove suspicion from themselves or their profession. Research shows that between 10% and 25% of mental health practitioners sexually abuse their own patients. To cover up their crimes, psychiatrists have used drugs or electroshock in an effort to eliminate the patient’s memory of the rape, and use the involuntary commitment of others convicted of sexual predation to take the heat off themselves.
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) labels child sexual abuse as a mental disorder, when it is actually an ethical failure. With the DSM, psychiatry has taken countless aspects of human behavior and reclassified them as a “mental illness” simply by adding the term “disorder” onto them. While even key DSM contributors admit that there is no scientific or medical validity to the “disorders,” the DSM nonetheless serves as a diagnostic tool, not only for individual treatment, but also for child custody disputes, discrimination cases, court testimony, education and more. As the diagnoses completely lack scientific criteria, anyone can be labeled mentally ill, and subjected to dangerous and life threatening “treatments” and forced incarceration based solely on opinion.
Contact your Missouri State Senator and Representative and ask them to remove all references to the DSM from Missouri State Law.
In the case of SORTS, the person has paid their debt to society as determined by a criminal court, and further enforced incarceration by civil commitment is clearly a violation of Constitutional rights.
The fact that civil commitment is couched in such doublespeak as “for his own good,” or “to prevent him from committing harm,” is unfortunate, for it obfuscates the actual intention, which is to harm in the name of help.
With health care eating up vast amounts of our national budget, the first cut to make is the cost of “treating” people who have paid their societal debt and prefer not to be further mentally treated. Involuntary commitment laws hike federal, state, county, city and private health care costs under the strange circumstance of a patient-recipient who cannot say no.
The crime rate, including sexual violence, is on a long-term increase, and has reached epidemic proportions. The fact that most criminals pass through psychiatry’s portals before the crime speaks for itself. The number of mentally ill, per the statistics of psychiatric bodies themselves, continues to rise each year — which serves to point out the ironic existence of a profession which must constantly advertise its failures in order to gain greater government funding.
Psychiatrists’ own conduct, their interest in easy seizure of people, their inhuman acts and torture committed in the name of “treatment” and their fraudulent and failing “science,” is at complete variance to their public facade of “mental health.”
If a dangerous offense is committed by a person, then the fact remains criminal statutes exist to address this. As the late Dr. Thomas Szasz stated, “All criminal behavior should be controlled by means of the criminal law, from the administration of which psychiatrists ought to be excluded.”
Contact your Missouri State Senator and Representative and ask them to remove the SORTS program from Missouri law.
A Human Rights Watch report found that many nursing homes are sedating their dementia residents by misusing antipsychotic drugs.
Former nursing home administrators admitted doling out drugs without having appropriate diagnoses, securing informed consent or divulging risks.
Having observed this personally for myself in a local St. Louis elder care facility, it is no surprise.
The report estimates that each week more than 179,000 elderly people living in U.S. nursing homes are fraudulently given antipsychotic drugs, without an approved psychiatric diagnosis, to suppress difficult behaviors and ease the load on overwhelmed staff.
This abusive practice benefits drugmakers to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, largely at the expense of the U.S. government.
Furthermore, the FDA has not deemed antipsychotic drugs an effective or safe way to treat symptoms associated with dementia. In fact, the FDA cautions that these drugs pose dangers for elderly patients with dementia, even doubling the risk of death.
Missouri’s antipsychotic use rate has remained around 18.5% or higher since 2016, and at 18.6 percent it’s now fifth worst in the nation.
Current research indicates that the fewer nurses available per patient, the more likely antipsychotics are to be improperly prescribed.
The shocking truth is that one in five seniors in the U.S. suffers from abusively prescribed psychoactive drugs. The psychiatric industry gets away with this abuse because they have fraudulently redefined old age as a “mental illness” in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) and the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11).
Examples of diagnoses that could be age-related
DSM-5: Phase of life problem, Problem related to living in a residential institution, Insufficient social insurance or welfare support, Alzheimer’s disease; and of course the catch-all Unspecified mental disorder
A For-Profit Disease
To psychiatrists old age is a “mental disorder,” a for-profit disease for which they have no cure, but for which they will happily supply endless prescriptions of psychoactive drugs or electro-convulsive therapy. In most cases, the elderly are merely suffering from physical problems related to their age; for which psychiatry’s answer is to label them “depressed” or having “dementia.”
Through these fraudulent diagnoses, psychiatrists can involuntarily commit the elderly to a psychiatric facility, take control of their finances, override their wishes regarding their business, property or health care needs, and defraud their health insurance.
If an elderly person in your environment is displaying symptoms of mental trauma or unusual behavior, ensure that they get competent medical care from a non-psychiatric doctor. Insist upon a thorough physical examination to determine whether an underlying, undiagnosed physical problem is causing the condition.
For more information, download and read the CCHR booklet “Elderly Abuse – Cruel Mental Health Programs – Report and recommendations on psychiatry abusing seniors.”
In 1976 Dr. Thomas Szasz, the co-founder of CCHR, published an article in The British Journal of Psychiatry called “Schizophrenia: The Sacred Symbol of Psychiatry,” in which Szasz argues that there is no such disease as schizophrenia.
Schizophrenia — the most common and most disabling of the so-called mental illnesses — has become the poster disease for psychiatry, the psychiatric symbol of why we need psychiatrists.
However, Szasz recognized that there are no clinical tests for such a “disease,” and that labeling the symptoms was rather psychiatry’s attempt to control deviant behavior rather than to cure disease.
Szasz stated that “schizophrenia is defined so vaguely that, in actuality, it is a term often applied to almost any kind of behavior of which the speaker disapproves.”
Psychiatrists today remain committed to labeling “schizophrenia” a mental disease despite, after a century of research, the complete absence of objective proof that it exists as a physical brain abnormality.
The unfortunate aspect of this is that psychiatry clings tenaciously to antipsychotics as the treatment for “schizophrenia,” despite their proven risks and studies which show that when patients stop taking these drugs, they improve.
Psychiatry is Enamored of Symbols
This deserves a more complete examination of the subject of “symbols.” We name, or label, objects and ideas, which in itself is not a bad thing, as long as we realize that the symbol is not the thing itself.
A symbol is something which has mass, meaning and mobility. An example is a body. We label a body with a name which we then use to mean the person; the body moves, carrying its mass and meaning around for others to see and experience.
On top of that, we label it “schizophrenic”, so we have a symbol of a symbol. Now we don’t have to directly confront the painful symptoms; we just label it “a schizophrenic.” We no longer have to cure it, since now we “know” what it is.
Psychiatry insists that one have a label, which is one way to trap and keep a person located. Using and being slaves to symbols is basically a substitute for just knowing. We no longer have to really know what it is, because we “know” it is “a schizophrenic.” So psychiatry has operated on this basis for over a hundred years, never really finding out what schizophrenia is so it can be cured. People just have to live with it, and take psychiatric drugs which are highly profitable and which suppress the symptoms but do not actually fix it.
Psychiatry Uses Other Symbols As Well
The psychiatric or psychological analysis of symbols in dreams has been a fruitless red herring for many centuries. It can certainly be interesting and fun to imagine all the ways dreams could be interpreted; but really, it doesn’t actually lead to cures. Dreams are mostly puns on words and situations. Thiamine (vitamin B1) has been used successfully at doses of 250 mg/day to treat patients having nightmares. B1 at roughly $20 per bottle beats any anti-anxiety or anti-psychotic drug currently being prescribed for bad dreams, since one of the possible side effects of these drugs is (wait for it…) nightmares!
Now think of the Rorschach Ink Blot Test, originally developed in 1921 by Swiss psychologist Hermann Rorschach as a tool for the diagnosis and labeling of schizophrenia. Over the years several different scoring systems were used, including pure subjective judgment; one present day scoring system wasn’t developed until the 1960s, and another scoring system was published in 2011. There are naturally many critics of these systems, including some court cases calling the results bogus.
Given the fraudulent nature of psychiatric “diagnosis” in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) and the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11), we are calling the Rorschach symbol test a total hoax.
And Speaking of the DSM and the ICD
Of course, the names of so-called mental disorders in the DSM and ICD are the ultimate in misleading symbols. They appear to designate actual mental states, but upon close inspection they are empty of scientific meaning.
With these tomes, psychiatry has taken countless aspects of normal human behavior and reclassified them as a “mental illness” simply by adding the term “disorder” onto them. As the diagnoses completely lack scientific criteria, anyone can be labeled mentally ill, and subjected to dangerous and life threatening “treatments” based solely on opinion.
Though the DSM weighs less than five pounds, its influence pervades all aspects of modern American society: our governments, our courts, our military, our media and our schools.
Using it, psychiatrists can enforce psychiatric drugging, seize your children and even take away your most precious personal freedoms. It is the engine that drives a $330 billion psychiatric industry.
Missouri law explicitly names the DSM as the official reference for mental illnesses. Contact your State Senator and Representative and ask them to remove all references to the DSM from State Law. We should not support symbolism that hits you over the head; a symbol should not be a cymbal.
We still see regular news stories about one criminal or another being sentenced to the state’s mental health system after pleading mental incompetence.
“Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity” (NGRI) is an aspect of criminal procedure, defined in the Missouri Revised Statutes Chapter 552 Section 30 as “A person is not responsible for criminal conduct if, at the time of such conduct, as a result of mental disease or defect such person was incapable of knowing and appreciating the nature, quality, or wrongfulness of such person’s conduct.”
The normal result of the court’s acceptance of an NGRI plea is the involuntary commitment of the accused to the Department of Mental Health for custody in a secure state mental health facility.
CCHR has documented many thousands of individual cases that demonstrate that psychiatric drugs and other brutal psychiatric practices actually create insanity and cause violence. Particularly, the neuroleptic [nerve seizing] drugs forced onto patients in institutions and in the community not only create the sort of violence or mental incompetence that would give apparent cause for involuntary incarceration, they also place the patient at greater risk mentally and physically.
When psychiatry entered the justice and penal systems, it did so under the subterfuge that it understood man, that it knew not only what made man act as he did, but that it knew how to improve his lot. This was a lie. Psychiatry has had opportunity to prove itself. The experiment has been a miserable failure.
In the 1940s, psychiatry’s leaders proclaimed their intention to infiltrate the field of the law and bring about the “re-interpretation and eventually eradication of the concept of right and wrong.”
[Canadian Psychiatrist G. Brock Chisholm]
A 1954 decision by the Federal Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. held that a mentally defective person is not criminally responsible for unlawful acts. This, and the psychiatric industry jumping on the NGRI bandwagon, has lead to a massive erosion of public confidence in the justice system’s ability to mete out swift and equitable justice.
Once there was the idea that a person is responsible for his own actions; so how is it that we face the absurd situation of psychiatrists testifying to excuse the wrongdoers’ actions?
It all started in 1812, when psychiatrist Benjamin Rush claimed that crime was a mental disease, curable by psychiatry.
Today, psychiatric “expert witnesses” are paid an average of $3,600 per day to testify for whomever is willing to foot the bill.
The late Dr. Thomas Szasz said, “Crimes are acts we commit. Diseases are biological processes that happen to our bodies. Mixing these two concepts by defining behaviors we disapprove of as diseases is a bottomless source of confusion and corruption.” If a dangerous offense is committed by a person, then the fact remains criminal statutes exist to address this. As Szasz also said, “All criminal behavior should be controlled by means of the criminal law, from the administration of which psychiatrists ought to be excluded.”
Compassion decrees that the criminal must be given the opportunity to face up to what he has done and reform himself to become a productive member of the group. In this way justice benefits the individual and society.
Psychiatry’s attempt to eradicate the concept of right and wrong and thereby destroy personal responsibility by inventing excuses for the most flagrant misconduct, undermines the justice system.
1. First and foremost it should be recognized that every person is responsible for his or her own actions and must be held accountable for their actions.
2. State and federal legislators should repeal any laws permitting the insanity defense and diminished capacity pleas.
3. Judges, attorneys and law enforcement officers need to ensure that psychiatric evidence is removed from the courts and that psychiatrists and psychologists are no longer afforded “expert” status.
4. Remove psychiatrists and psychologists as advisors or as counselors from police forces, prisons and criminal rehabilitation and parole services. Because psychiatrists have no scientific foundation for their claims, do not permit them to render opinions about or to treat drug addiction, criminal behavior and delinquency, or to probe for alleged dangerous behavior.
5. Prosecute as a criminal offense any and all cases of physical damage caused through psychiatry’s use of electroshock, brain surgery or abusive drug “treatment.”
For more information and the full history of psychiatry’s corruption of justice, download and read the CCHR booklet “Eroding Justice – Psychiatry’s Corruption of Law – Report and recommendations on psychiatry subverting the courts and corrective services“.
A class action federal lawsuit [Case No. 2:17-cv-04102-NKL] against the Missouri Department of Social Services alleging the overdrugging of foster children with harmful and addictive psychotropic drugs was given preliminary approval for settlement by U.S. District Court Judge Nanette Laughrey (Western District of Missouri) on Monday, July 15, 2019.
The case was first filed in June 2017 by national non-profit organizations Children’s Rights and the National Center for Youth Law (NCYL), the Saint Louis University School of Law Legal Clinics, and pro-bono counsel Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP.
The lawsuit claimed that children in Missouri foster care are at increased risk of being improperly or unnecessarily administered psychotropic drugs, leaving the children vulnerable to various serious adverse effects, including hallucinations, self-harm and suicidal thoughts.
Roughly 13,000 children are in Missouri’s foster care system. More than 30% of them are prescribed these harmful drugs, and 20% are taking two or more drugs at the same time. Medicaid pays for a majority of the healthcare services that children in foster care receive, including psychotropic drugs.
Most psychotropic drugs have not been FDA approved to treat children, who are at great risk of serious harm from these drugs because the drugs play Russian Roulette with neurotransmitters in the brain.
The settlement calls for multiple reforms, although without any of the defendants admitting any liability concerning any of the claims or allegations in the complaint. Objections, support, or comments by Class members or their legal representatives (or other interested parties) can be provided by October 23, 2019 per the “Notice of Proposed Class Action Settlement in M.B., et al. v. Tidball, et al.”
The Missouri Department of Social Services, on behalf of the Missouri Children’s Division of the Department of Social Services, has contracted with the University of Missouri-Columbia to constitute a Center for Excellence within its Department of Psychiatry to undertake various responsibilities regarding this settlement, for roughly $3.8 million through July 31, 2021, although this contract is not specifically part of the settlement. While we applaud the Missouri government for taking action to address the abuse of foster children in their care, we must note that having psychiatrists oversee psychiatric abuse is like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse.
Specific commitments of the settlement include (these provisions are only briefly summarized here; refer to the actual settlement for full details):
1. Children’s Division (CD) shall maintain a full-time employee responsible for overseeing the implementation of policies and procedures concerning the use of psychotropic drugs for children in CD foster care.
2. Provisions for CD Case Management Staff Training.
3. Provisions for Resource Provider Training.
4. Provisions for training in the child welfare community serving children in Missouri.
5. CD shall maintain sufficient Case Management Staff to perform functions of the agreement.
6. Every child shall have a mental health assessment prior to being prescribed a psychotropic drug.
7. Every child prescribed a psychotropic drug shall have medical examinations.
8. Every child prescribed a psychotropic drug for ongoing use shall have monitoring appointments.
9. Every child prescribed a psychotropic drug shall receive concurrent nonpharmacological treatment.
10. Defendants are committed to developing and operating one or more statewide systems for maintaining medical records and/or medical information of each child in the custody of CD.
11. Defendants are committed to developing and operating one or more systems whereby pertinent medical records and/or medical information of the child will be made available to appropriate members of the child’s treatment team.
12. CD will implement and maintain a system for conducting secondary reviews of prescriptions of psychotropic drugs prescribed to children in the legal custody of CD.
13. CD shall maintain a policy governing informed consent and informed assent for psychotropic drugs, including a process for parental disagreement. The difference between consent and assent is basically that consent comes from the case manager and assent comes from the child.
14. Provisions for emergency administration of psychotropic drugs.
15.Defendants will appoint and maintain a psychotropic drug Advisory Committee to provide professional and technical consultation and policy advice.
16. Provisions for excessive dosage guidelines.
There are other provisions for data validation, enforcement, reporting, and exit criteria from the agreement. Refer to the actual agreement for these details.
A new report (“St. Louis Regional Mental Health Data Report“, May, 2019) outlines mental health trends in the St. Louis, Missouri region.
The St. Louis County Department of Public Health and the City of St. Louis Department of Health prepared the report for System of Care St. Louis Region.
One significant finding is that “…intentional self-harm (i.e., suicide) was the sixth leading cause of death for children under 18 years of age and the third leading cause of death for ages 18 to 24 years in St. Louis County, and it is the tenth leading cause of death for all age groups in both the United States and the state of Missouri.”
Unfortunately, the report fails to notice that there is overwhelming evidence that psychiatric drugs cause suicide and violence.
While there is never one simple explanation for what drives a human being to commit such unspeakable acts of violence, all too often one common denominator has surfaced in hundreds of cases—-prescribed psychiatric drugs which are documented to cause mania, psychosis, violence, suicide and in some cases, homicidal ideation. To date, there has been no federal investigation of the link between psychiatric drugs and acts of suicide and violence.
Mental disorder is not a predictor of aggressive behavior, but rather the adverse effects of the drugs prescribed to treat it. Drug proponents argue that there are many shootings and acts of violence that have not been correlated to psychiatric (psychotropic) drugs, but that is exactly the point. It has neither been confirmed nor refuted, as law enforcement is not required to investigate or report on prescribed drugs linked to suicide and violence, and media rarely pose the question.
Those with a vested, financial interest will continue to champion the use of such drugs, as the psychiatric-pharmaceutical drug industry rakes in an average of $35 billion a year in sales in the U.S. alone. It is that vested financial interest which may be preventing a thorough investigation of the link between prescription psychoactive drugs and increased suicide and violence, especially considering that there have been calls for such investigations since the Columbine High School massacre in 1999.
The theory that a person is violent because he “stopped taking his medication” is misleading and omits the fact that it is more likely to be the withdrawal from a drug of dependence that is experienced—-not the return of the person’s “untreated mental illness.” Numerous studies and expert opinions support this. Psychotropic drug withdrawal destroys mental faculties and creates impulsivity.
It is long past time that government agencies answered that call with an investigation. Legislative hearings should be held to fully investigate the correlation between psychiatric treatment and violence and suicide. None can argue against the fact that disclosure of the facts would serve the public interest.
Click here for more information about the link between suicide, violence, and psychiatric drugs.
Jefferson City, Missouri – February 6, 2019
Citizens Commission on Human Rights, founded in 1969 by the Church of Scientology and the late psychiatrist Dr. Thomas Szasz, has been vigilant in exposing the lack of science behind psychiatry’s diagnostic methods and treatments that, left unquestioned for years by authorities and insurance companies, led to soaring increases in both health care costs and the prescription of dangerous and addictive psychiatric drugs.
It is time for the Missouri legislature to put an end to this lucrative scam and thereby help protect our citizens. Instead put our citizen’s money into proven physical health care and education, where it will produce real results. An example of a real positive result would be: patients recovering and being sent, sane, back into society as productive individuals. The introduction and passage of legislation designed to curb psychiatric fraud and abuse can contribute much to this effort.
To this end, CCHR St. Louis once again visited the Missouri State Capitol in Jefferson City February 5 and 6, 2019, and set up a display in the Capitol Building, talking to legislators and their aides about fraud and abuse in the mental health care system.
Volunteers personally visited with many Representatives and Senators, distributing packages containing the CCHR documentary DVD “Making A Killing – The Untold Story of Psychotropic Drugging” (MAK) and explanatory materials about harmful electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and the over-drugging of foster children.
The MAK documentary exposes the problem of psychotropic drugs, the profits they generate and the harm they do. CCHR recommends investigating the link between psychotropic drugs and the sharp rise in violence and suicide.
Claims that ECT is safe and effective are not supported by clinical science and its use remains a theoretical practice with no conclusive mechanism determined to prove how ECT works. CCHR recommends outlawing this barbaric practice.
In Missouri as well as nationwide, there is a significant problem over-drugging foster care children with harmful and addictive psychotropic drugs. CCHR recommends legislation to develop explicit foster children’s rights.
Legislators welcome the contact, so contact them, let them know you appreciate what they do, and make specific suggestions to correct the egregious abuses of the psychiatric industry in Missouri. Subscribe to the CCHR STL newsletter so you receive our legislative take-action alerts.
The January 18-24 2019 edition of the St. Louis Business Journal extolled the virtues of making lots of money from medical marijuana.
Yes, we know that medical marijuana is now legal in Missouri; and yes, we know that the Business Journal‘s interest in local businesses motivates its attention.
On the other hand, a convincing argument can be made that, while legal and profitable, promoting marijuana is decidedly unethical.
“The Missouri Medical Cannabis Trade Association estimates $500 million in total economic benefit for the first year of the program.”
There are countless arguments for “medical benefits”; but those arguments seem to take second place after the arguments for how much money can be made.
There are also arguments for medical harm. Let’s take a look at the medical disadvantages, to get a sense of how promoting marijuana could be unethical.
Marijuana is a Drug
Make no mistake, marijuana (often called cannabis in an attempt to avoid the negative connotations of weed) is a drug.
Regardless of the name, this drug is a hallucinogen — a substance which distorts how the mind perceives the world.
THC (tetrahydrocannabinol), the principal psychoactive component of marijuana, stays in the body for weeks, possibly months, depending on the length and intensity of usage. THC damages the immune system. In 2005, 242,200 emergency room visits in the U.S. involved marijuana. Nationwide, 40% of adult males tested positive for marijuana at the time of their arrest for a crime. Multiple studies have linked years of heavy marijuana use to brain abnormalities and psychosis. Cannabis is one of the few drugs which causes abnormal cell division which leads to severe hereditary defects.
Because a tolerance builds up, marijuana can lead users to consume stronger drugs to achieve the same effects.
People take drugs to get rid of unwanted situations or feelings. The drug masks the problem for a time, but when the “high” fades, the problem, unwanted condition or situation returns more intensely than before. Marijuana can harm a person’s memory — and this impact can last for days or weeks. Marijuana smoke also has all of the detrimental effects previously attributed to tobacco.
The use of marijuana is not only harmful to the person himself; he can also become a risk to society. Research clearly shows that marijuana has the potential to seriously diminish attention, memory, and learning. Users have more accidents, more injuries, and absenteeism than non-users.
Some will tell you that CBD (cannabidiol) is harmless because it does not contain THC. However, note that CBD and THC are structural isomers, which means they share the same chemical composition but their atomic arrangements differ. The proponents of CBD ignore the fact that it messes with the neurotransmitter serotonin when making claims for its safety and usefulness. There are very little long-term safety data available, but there is a lot of money riding on making this legal and ubiquitous; any bad effects are not going to be advertised or promoted. At higher dosages, CBD will deactivate cytochrome P450 enzymes, making it harder to metabolize certain drugs and toxins, particularly psychiatric drugs, leading to a toxic build-up of drugs and their subsequent adverse side effects.
How Drugs Work in the Body
Drugs are essentially poisons. The amount taken determines the effect. A small amount acts as a stimulant. A greater amount acts as a sedative. An even larger amount poisons and can kill. This is true of any drug.
Drugs block off all sensations, the desirable ones along with the unwanted ones. While providing short-term help in the relief of pain, they also wipe out ability and alertness and muddy one’s thinking.
Drugs affect the mind and destroy creativity. Drug residues lodge in the fatty tissues of the body and stay there, continuing to adversely affect the individual long after the effect of the drug has apparently worn off.
The Psychiatric Connection
In 2013 the American Psychiatric Association said, “There is no current scientific evidence that marijuana is in any way beneficial for the treatment of any psychiatric disorder.” The research was starting to show significant harm from cannabis use.
However, the psychiatric industry today has jumped on the cannabis bandwagon for several reasons. Psychiatrists are embracing all things marijuana because they are getting so many patients with marijuana-related problems such as addiction and psychosis. Marijuana addiction is such a significant problem that there are 31 entries in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) related to this addiction. Unfortunately, the last thing any psychiatric treatment has achieved is rehabilitation from addiction.
Since the 1950’s, psychiatry has monopolized the field of drug rehabilitation research and treatments. Its long list of failed cures has included lobotomies, insulin shock, psychoanalysis and LSD.
To the psychiatric industry, when they are not prescribing it as a “treatment”, cannabis use merely represents another pool of potential patients for other coercive and harmful treatments.
The history of psychiatry makes it clear that over many, many years they have been pushing dangerous drugs as “medicines.” We didn’t originally know about the long-term destructive effects of LSD, heroin, ecstasy, benzodiazepines, ritalin, and so on when psychiatrists first pushed them onto an unsuspecting society. Cannabis is no exception, as more and more psychiatrists are prescribing “medical” cannabis in spite of (or because of) the addiction problem. We think it’s the latter; the pool of potential psychiatric patients is increased by increasing cannabis use.
The Ethics of Promoting Marijuana Use
Ethics consists simply of the actions an individual takes on himself. A high level of ethics enhances one’s survival across all areas of life; it embodies rationality towards the greatest good for the greatest number. A low level of ethics, on the other hand, would be one’s irrationality toward bringing minimal survival, maximum harm or destruction, across all areas of life — or the least good for the fewest. An individual whose actions are harmful in society becomes subject to Justice. We leave it to each individual to observe for themselves the degree to which they and their associates are surviving well or poorly, and how marijuana may contribute to or obstruct the quality of their life.
In a statement issued January 13, 2019, the Cleveland Clinic announced that it will not be recommending medical marijuana to its patients. Dr. Paul Terpeluk, medical director of employee health services at the Cleveland Clinic, said, “There is little verified, published research that supports marijuana…as a medical treatment. … However, there is a significant amount of scientific literature that unequivocally shows that marijuana use has both short- and long-term deleterious effects on physical health.”
In November 2018, the St. Louis Business Journal wrote, “The Missouri Department of Mental Health was awarded a $425,000 federal grant to fund expansion of a state project to expand access to mental health care for children.”
“The Health Resources and Services Administration recently awarded $7.9 million combined to 18 states to integrate behavioral health into pediatric primary care.”
This effort targets young children by integrating the efforts of physicians, nurse practitioners, behavioral health clinicians, community health workers, home visitors, and other health care providers to funnel children into the mental health care system.
The Child Psychiatry Access Project in Missouri provides child psychiatry phone consultation to primary care providers in several counties, with a goal of providing these services statewide by October 2020.
The U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration of the Department of Health & Human Services says, “State or regional networks of pediatric mental health teams will provide tele-consultation, training, technical assistance and care coordination for pediatric primary care providers to diagnose, treat and refer children with behavioral health conditions.”
Participating agencies are: University of Missouri School of Medicine, Behavioral Health Network, Assessment Resource Center, Behavioral Health Response, Washington University Pediatric and Adolescent Ambulatory Research Consortium, and the National Alliance for Mental Illness.
Why Do We Think This Is Bad?
No one denies that proper mental health care for children is a good thing. Unfortunately, the current state of mental health care for children is mostly prescribing them harmful and addictive psychotropic drugs for fraudulent “mental illnesses.”
Health care providers do not require informed consent from the family to call and discuss a case with these behavioral health consultants.
The trouble is that psychiatric propaganda on the subject of children has thoroughly duped well-meaning parents, teachers and politicians alike, that “normal” childhood behavior is no longer normal; that it is a mental illness. And further, that only by continuous, heavy drugging from a very early age, can the “afflicted” child possibly make it through life’s worst.
Contrary to psychiatric opinion, children are not “experimental animals,” they are human beings who have every right to expect protection, care, love and the chance to reach their full potential in life. They will only be denied this from within the verbal and chemical straitjackets that are psychiatry’s labels and drugs.
Through massive promotion and marketing campaigns, psychiatric drugs are increasingly prescribed as the panacea for life’s inevitable crises and challenges. 17 million schoolchildren worldwide have now been diagnosed with so-called mental disorders and prescribed cocaine-like stimulants and powerful antidepressants as treatments.
Teen suicides have tripled since 1960 in the United States. Today, suicide is the second leading cause of death (after car accidents) for 15 to 24 year-olds. Since the early 1990s, millions of children around the world have taken prescribed antidepressants that U.K. and U.S. authorities have now branded as suicidal agents. In September 2004, a U.S. Congressional hearing into these drugs found that not only do studies show the drugs are ineffective in children; they can drive them to suicidal behavior and hostility.
Psychiatrists are still telling governments that they can deliver the world from delinquency – at a huge cost. Psychiatry remains long on promise and short – in fact empty – on delivery.
Support legislative measures that will protect children from psychiatric interference. Write your legislators about this. In Missouri find your legislators here.