Crime and Mental Distress

A recent news report suggests that “Having a mental illness makes people more vulnerable to becoming the victims of a crime.”

We wondered about this, because it sounds just like the incessant and inane psychobabble coming out of the “psychology today” brain mill.

These results are suspicious because the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) lists “Victim of crime” as a mental disorder. So it’s hard to imagine that both “mental illness causes being a victim of crime” and “being a victim of crime causes mental illness.” It’s a no-win situation, and the fact that the DSM is a fraudulent machine used to sell psychiatric drugs does not make it more palatable.

The DSM-5 also has fourteen other diagnoses about being a victim in various abusive situations, and thirteen diagnoses about being the perpetrator of abuse or violence. It would seem that both victims and perpetrators are the focus of a lot of attention; so many ways to prescribe psychiatric drugs known to cause violence.

The study authors are using these questionable results to assert that people with mental illness are more likely to be victims rather than perpetrators of crime, giving the benefit of doubt to those who commit violence and further contributing to the perception of the “dangerous environment” so necessary to the existence of coercive psychiatry.

They are trying to prove that school shooters are not mentally ill, because this taint goes against the massive psychiatric public relations campaign to “stop the stigma of mental illness,” which is really a campaign underwritten by pharmaceutical companies to sell drugs.

The fact is, the real criminals here are psychiatrists and psychologists.

The soaring crime rate began to rise when psychiatrists and psychologists infiltrated the fields of education and law. When you put criminals in charge of crime, the crime rate rises.

If psychiatrists and psychologists actually knew what they were doing, the crime rate would drop. Instead, they conduct sham research about the relationship between crime and mental illness, instead of actually curing people and cementing the safety and security of society.

Real criminals would want to obfuscate the issues and point the finger away from themselves. Guess what? When the criminal mind accuses others, he is likely disclosing his own type of crime. And the fact is, psychiatric drugs cause violence, proven again and again as psych-drug-addled school shooters rage on.

Criminals think everyone else is a criminal, since they cannot envision people being decent. Psychiatrists and psychologists, focusing their attention on crime and illness, fail to observe human decency, and think there is nothing else but crime, deceit, and violence — all to be suppressed with harmful and addictive drugs, electroshock, psycho-surgery, involuntary incarceration, and restraints.

Recommendations

1. Legislative hearings should be held to fully investigate the correlation between psychiatric treatment and violence and suicide.

2. Toxicology testing for psychiatric and even illicit drugs should be mandatory in cases where someone has committed a mass shooting or other serious violent crime.

3. Train law enforcement officers, school security and teachers in the adverse effects of psychotropic drugs in order to recognize that irrational, violent and suicidal behavior in persons they may face could be influenced by these drugs.

4. No student shall be forced to take any psychotropic drug as a requisite of their education, in alignment with Title 20 of United States Code: Chapter 33, “Education of Individuals with Disabilities,” Subchapter II, (25) “Prohibition on mandatory medication.”

Psychiatric Drugs, School Violence, and Big Pharma Cover-Up

A study published June 12, 2018 from the University of Illinois at Chicago suggests that more than one-third (37.2%) of U.S. adults may be using prescription drugs that have the potential to cause depression or increase the risk of suicide.
[JAMA. 2018;319(22);2289-2298. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.6741]

Information about more than 26,000 adults from 2005 to 2014 was analyzed, along with more than 200 commonly prescribed drugs. However, many of these drugs are also available over the counter, so these results may underestimate the true prevalence of drugs having side effects of depression.

In other words, the use of prescription drugs, not just psychiatric drugs, that have depression or suicide as a potential adverse reaction is fairly common, and the more drugs one takes (called polypharmacy), the greater the likelihood of depression occurring as a side effect. “The likelihood of concurrent depression was most pronounced among adults concurrently using 3 or more medications with depression as a potential adverse effect, including among adults treated with antidepressants.”

Approximately 15% of adults who used three or more of these drugs concurrently experienced symptoms of depression or suicidal thoughts, compared with just 5% for those not using any of these drugs. Roughly 7.6% of adults using just one of these drugs reported a side effect of depression or suicidal thoughts during the study period, and 9% for those using two of these drugs. These results were the same whether the drugs were psychotropic or not. Depression was determined by asking nine questions related to the symptoms defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5).

“Commonly used depression screening instruments, however, do not incorporate evaluations of prescribed medications that have depression as a potential adverse effect.” In other words, so-called depression screening tests can register false positives when the person is taking one or more of roughly 200 prescription drugs.

We thought we should dig a little deeper into this phenomenon.

First, understand that there is no depression “disease”. A person can certainly have symptoms of feeling depressed, but this is not a medical condition in itself. An example of a medical condition with a symptom of depression would be a vitamin B1 (thiamine) deficiency. You don’t fix it with an antidepressant; you fix it with vitamin B1. There are hundreds of medical conditions that may have mental symptoms, just as there are hundreds of drugs that can cause or worsen these symptoms. Finding the actual causes with appropriate clinical tests and then fixing what is found is the correct way to proceed.

This leads to a topic known as CYP450, which stands for Cytochrome P450 enzymes. Cytochrome means “cellular pigment” and is a protein found in blood cells. Scientists understand these enzymes to be responsible for metabolizing almost half of all drugs currently on the market, including psychiatric drugs.

These are the major enzymes involved in drug metabolism, which is the breakdown of drugs in the liver or other organs so that they can be eliminated from the body once they have performed their function.

If these drugs are not metabolized and eliminated once they have done their work, they build up and become concentrated in the body, and then act as toxins. The possibility of harmful side effects, or adverse reactions, increases as the toxic concentration increases. The ballpark estimate is that each year 2.2 million Americans are hospitalized for adverse reactions and over 100,000 die from them.

Some people are deficient in CYP450 or have diminished capacity to metabolize these drugs, which may be a genetic or other issue. Individuals with no or poorly performing CYP450 enzymes are much more likely to suffer the side effects of prescription drugs, particularly psychiatric drugs known to have side effects of depression, violence and suicide.

These metabolic processes are immature at birth and up to three years old, and this may result in an increased risk for drug toxicity in infants and young children. Furthermore, certain drugs or certain excipients in vaccines may inhibit activation of CYP450 enzymes, again resulting in an increased risk for the accumulation of non-metabolized drugs and the resultant increase in adverse side effects such as depression, violence and suicide.

The side effects caused by a CYP450 deficiency and its subsequent failure to metabolize any one of hundreds of drugs can then be misdiagnosed as a mental illness, the patient then being prescribed more psychiatric drugs in a mistaken attempt to treat those side effects, further complicating the problems.

It is estimated that 10% of Caucasians and 7% of African Americans are Cytochrome P450 deficient.

The psychiatric and pharmaceutical industries have been aware of this phenomenon for some time, yet they have continued to push psychiatric drugs at an ever increasing rate, and the dramatic increase in symptoms of depression, suicide, and school violence is a direct result.

No one should be prescribed these types of drugs without adequate testing for a CYP450 deficiency, in order to determine their risk potential for adverse reactions. The test is not “standard of care” so one has to ask for it; but beware, they will still recommend an alternative drug if the original one cannot be easily metabolized. Better yet, stop prescribing all psychiatric drugs and find out with proper medical, clinical tests what the real problems are and treat those. Full informed consent is always indicated.

Any psychiatrist or pharmaceutical company that has knowingly withheld evidence about the relationship between CYP450 enzymes and drug side effects should be subject to both prosecution and litigation.

Medical students should be educated about these relationships.

For more information click on any of the links in this newsletter.

“Shoot ’em up” Is No Longer Just for Westerns

Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action.”
[with thanks to Charles Stross in The Apocalypse Codex.]

The Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR), a mental health watchdog that has investigated school and other mass shootings since the Columbine High School Shooting in 1999, warns about pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into more mental health services in response to the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting on Valentine’s Day.

An investigation into the shooting must include what psychotropic drugs the alleged shooter, Nikolas Cruz, has been prescribed and the fact that he had apparently undergone “behavioral health” treatment which did nothing to prevent the murderous outcome. A 2016 Florida Department of Children and Family Services report indicated that he was regularly taking “medication” for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD); these types of psychotropic drugs are known to have violence and suicide as potential side effects.

CCHR International’s investigation into school violence reveals that at least 36 school shootings and/or school-related acts of violence have been committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs resulting in 172 wounded and 80 killed.

At least 27 international drug regulatory agency warnings have been issued on psychiatric drugs being linked to mania, violence, hostility, aggression, psychosis, and homicidal ideation (thoughts or fantasies of homicide that can be planned).

Cruz, 19, charged over the Parkland, Florida shooting, is a prime example of the failure of the mental health system. Expecting better mental health treatment to solve these problems is a forlorn hope, since it promises something that has not and cannot be delivered.

Pouring more funds into a mental health system that keeps failing and continues to use “treatments” that may induce violent and suicidal behavior in a percentage of those taking them, is a recipe for future disaster. Recognize that the repeated violence caused by psychiatric drugging of school children is neither happenstance nor coincidence, and is in fact an enemy action, and the enemy is psychiatry.

The survivors of the Parkland shooting, the families of those killed and the community at large deserves answers and accountability. CCHR is calling on families with knowledge of a loved one who has experienced treatment abuse and for whistleblowers who have concerns about any behavioral facility to contact CCHR by reporting the abuse here.

For more information read this news release.

The Radical Permissiveness of Psychiatry

Permissiveness: Allowing or characterized by great or excessive freedom of behavior. A permissive person, society, or way of behaving allows or tolerates things of which other people disapprove.

Apparently the quote “DO AS THOU WILT because men that are free, of gentle birth, well bred and at home in civilized company possess a natural instinct that inclines them to virtue and saves them from vice. This instinct they name their honor.” [François Rabelais, 1534] has been shortened by the psychological and psychiatric industries to the first four words.

From where does this radical permissiveness come?

“The biomedical model [the biological underpinnings of mental disorders] currently dominates psychiatric clinical practice and research.”
“Psychiatry’s growth and power during the twentieth century also can be traced in part to its alliance with Western science’s goals of control and domination of nature. … For example, during this century, capitalism has simultaneously needed to increase consumption and the technical control of social reality in order to maximize profits. This creates a paradox in which morality is slackened to increase permissiveness, and consequently, consumption.”
“Biological psychiatry’s rush to transmogrify much of human life into clinical or biological entities has become increasingly suspect on scientific as well as sociopolitical grounds.”
[“The Biomedicalization of Psychiatry: A Critical Overview“, Carl I. Cohen, M.D., Community Mental Health Journal, Vol. 29, No. 6, December 1993]

The problem with the biomedical model is that psychiatrists attempt to explain environmental, behavioral, social and spiritual phenomena with strictly biological factors. This is called “biological reductionism.” It places a heavy emphasis on the chemistry of the brain instead of searching for root causes of mental distress in areas that have more effective treatments. This leads to dependence on psychotropic drugs which have been shown to be addictive and harmful.

The transformation of psychiatry into a purely medical model was driven primarily by third-party reimbursement (insurance), the pharmaceutical industry, and government funding.

Freudian theory developed in the 1890’s called for radical permissiveness in sexual mores and child rearing, and left parents in constant worry of unwittingly perpetrating untold psychological harm upon their children.
[Chapter 3, Psychiatry The Ultimate Betrayal, Bruce Wiseman, Freedom Publishing, 1995]

To this day, thanks to the large-scale Freudian indoctrination of teachers, doctors, social workers, and others, many a mother and father is filled with dread, fearing irreparable mental damage, whenever some minor or major trauma strikes their child.

When lawyers turn to “childhood trauma” as a defense for criminality, it is assumed that the jury and the public will understand this: “everybody knows” that psychological damage comes from one’s childhood.

“The indiscriminate, ‘nonjudgmental’ approach, of dubious value with neurotics, amounts to a frank condoning of crime when applied to offenders and threatens to undermine and eradicate social and moral attitudes. This is the more serious, since this psychiatric-social work approach combines with the ‘permissive’ or ‘progressive’ upbringing of the home and school and a very lax enforcement of justice by the police and the courts.” The statement was made in 1962 by psychiatrist Melitta Schmideberg, president of the Association for the Psychiatric Treatment of Offenders.
[ibid. Chapter 8]

In 1966, schools began to be used as an ideological platform for the abandonment of self-discipline and morality. The assault on social values came with the textbook called Values Clarification: A Handbook of Practical Strategies for Teachers and Students. Children were asked to abandon values instilled through family, home and church, and substitute new values which they were free to make up.

This “therapeutic education,” or “behavior modification,” gradually replaced academics in favor of feelings and emotions, eroding discipline and promoting permissiveness, redefining and replacing earned self-esteem with psychological doubletalk like “anger management” and “mental health.”

The undermining of traditional education and values can be traced to a German psychologist, Wilhelm Wundt of Leipzig University, who founded “experimental psychology” in 1879. Declaring that man is an animal with no soul, he claimed that thought was merely the result of brain activity — a false premise that has remained the basis of psychiatry until this day.

Wundt was a strong advocate of Gottlieb Fichte, head of psychology at the University of Berlin in 1810, who believed that “Education should aim at destroying free will so that after pupils are thus schooled they will be incapable of thinking or acting otherwise than as their school masters would have wished.”

Influential educational psychologist Ernst Friedrich Wilhelm Meumann, professor of philosophy and education at Leipzig University and student and assistant of Wundt, sought to radically change schools by the “oppression of the children’s natural inclinations.” His book discussing Mental Hygiene in the Schools became required reading for several generations of education students in Germany and he propagated the idea that schools should be used for “preventative mental health functions.”

For more information download and read the CCHR report Harming Youth — Psychiatry Destroys Young Minds — Report and recommendations on harmful mental health assessments, evaluations, and programs within our schools.

What Makes Special Education Special?

The Special School District in St. Louis County, Missouri has an annual budget over $400 Million for 7 schools, over 2600 teachers, and over 24,000 students.

The July 2002 President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education revealed the source of a deeply troubled Special Education system: 40 percent of kids are being labeled with “learning disorders” simply because they have not been taught to read. This finding leaves no doubt that the subjectivity of the term “learning disorder” must be a central point of Special Education reform.

Eighty percent of children (or 2.4 million) labeled as having a “specific learning disability” could be taught in a normal school setting but with greater emphasis on phonics and academic basics. We suspect that all children, not just special school district children, could benefit from this.

State and federal governments are already wasting $28 billion per year due to unscientific categories in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). This money would be better channeled into providing more teachers and workable educational methods that get actual results.

The DSM-5 lists these ridiculous items of “mental illness”:

  • “Academic or educational problem”
  • “Specific learning disorder”
  • “Specific learning disorder, With impairment in mathematics”
  • “Specific learning disorder, With impairment in reading”
  • “Specific learning disorder, With impairment in written expression”

The primary purpose of Congress’ original IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act) law in 1975 was to provide a free and appropriate education for children with hearing, sight, speech and other physical handicaps. When the term “handicapped” was changed to “learning disabled,” children who fidget, interrupt their teachers, or simply fall behind academically were suddenly considered “disabled.”

Over the ensuing years, the funding has been largely funneled, instead, to children with “learning disorders,” a term so subjective that children who fidget, butt into line or interrupt their teachers are so labeled. In most cases the children were subsequently prescribed cocaine-like, mind-altering drugs. Many of these children simply have never been taught to read. Clearly, there is a critical need to provide an objective, scientifically based definition of “learning disability,” and this must be the central point of reforming IDEA.

Labeling a child with these “disorders” led to school personnel threatening parents to place their child on a psychiatric drug as a requisite to remaining in class, or face the child being dismissed from school.

Due to the hazards of these drugs, in order to receive federal funds under the IDEA, the “Prohibition on Mandatory Medication Amendment” (H.R.1350) was signed into law by President George W. Bush on December 3, 2004 and requires schools to implement policies that prohibit schoolchildren being forced onto psychiatric drugs as a requisite for their education. The law states, “The psychological/psychiatric system should not be able to abuse Special Education by diagnosing childhood and educational problems and failure as ‘mental disorders.'”

Email Special School District Superintendent Don Bohannon at dbohannon@ssdmo.org and let him know what you think about this.

Click here for more information about mental health screening in schools.

Doctors in Schools

Through psychiatry’s stigmatizing labels, false explanations, easy-seizure commitment laws and often brutal, depersonalizing “treatments” and deadening, mind-altering drugs, thousands needlessly fall into psychiatry’s coercive system every day all over the world. It is a system which exemplifies human rights abuse.

“In the Australian state of Victoria, a state program kicked in at the beginning of 2017 to mandate that children as young as 12 should see a doctor in school at least once a week, to receive drugs and medical treatment without parental consent.”

“Select Victorian Government secondary schools will work together with local general practices to enable primary health care services to be delivered on school premises.

One suspects that this “Doctors in Schools” program is actually intended to consolidate government control over children and line the pockets of pharmaceutical corporations. You know that these doctors will be prescribing psychiatric drugs to these schoolchildren.

In his 1932 novel, Brave New World, Aldous Huxley depicts a “utopian” but totalitarian society, one that is insane and bent on control. It is a controlled civilization, using, as Huxley stated, the “technique of suggestion – through infant conditioning and, later, with the aid of drugs.”

In 2003 the release of the U.S. New Freedom Commission on Mental Health Report recommended that all 52 million American schoolchildren be “screened” for “mental illness,” claiming – without proof – that “early detection, assessment, and links with “treatment” could “prevent mental health problems from worsening.” “Treatment” ultimately means drugs – usually the most expensive ones that effectively create lifetime mental health patients – for which the government and insurance agencies can be billed.

Children worldwide are under extremely dangerous assault. Today, parents and teachers are also deceived in the name of improved mental health and better education.

In the U.S. alone, 1.5 million children and adolescents on antidepressants are at risk of known, drug-induced violent or suicidal side effects.

In Missouri, Medicaid spends $16 Million per year on psychiatric drugs for roughly 20,000 children in state foster care. Foster care babies less than a year old are being given barbiturates to make them sleep. The side effects of barbiturates include addiction, depression, disorientation, hallucinations, kidney disease, and liver disease.

This information is not easy, comfortable reading. Ultimately the harshest reality you will have to face is that children urgently need our help and protection. Without that, the future for one and all is at serious risk.

For more information on harmful mental health screening, assessments, evaluations and programs within our schools, go to http://www.cchrstl.org/screening.shtml.

Migrant Children, a New Psychiatric Patient Pool?

Migrant Children, a New Psychiatric Patient Pool?

While we hesitate to comment on the controversy surrounding the federal government’s amnesty program for illegal immigrants, we do see a potential effect of interest to the concerns of CCHR and those who recognize the potential for psychiatric fraud and abuse.

The Wall Street Journal reported that “Such students [illegal aliens, or “migrant children”] often require a variety of services, including subsidized meals, English-language instruction, tutoring and psychological counseling…”

It’s that last phrase, “psychological counseling”, that caught our attention.

Could migrant children be considered a new pool of patients to be abused by the psychiatric and psychological industries?

There are already research articles being published on the “mental health of migrant children.” Look out for a proliferation of media, studies, and requests for funding for this expanding population as a new pool of “mental health care” patients.

Contact your local, state and federal officials and your school boards to be on the lookout for psychiatric fraud and abuse within the migrant population.

State of Fear

State of Fear

The following extended quote is from the author’s appendix to the novel State of Fear by Michael Crichton. Stay with us here, we’re sure you’ll get the importance of it quickly.

“Imagine that there is a new scientific theory that warns of an impending crisis, and points to a way out.

“This theory quickly draws support from leading scientists, politicians, and celebrities around the world. Research is funded by distinguished philanthropies, and carried out at prestigious universities. The crisis is reported frequently in the media. The science is taught in colleges and high school classrooms.

“I don’t mean global warming. I’m talking about another theory, which rose to prominence a century ago.

“These efforts had the support of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Medical Association, and the National Research Council. It was said that if Jesus were alive, he would have supported this effort.

“All in all, the research, legislation, and molding of public opinion surrounding the theory went on for almost half a century. Those who opposed the theory were shouted down and called reactionary, blind to reality, or just plain ignorant. But in hindsight, what is surprising is that so few people objected.

“Today, we know that this famous theory that gained so much support was actually pseudoscience. The crisis it claimed was nonexistent. And the actions taken in the name of this theory were morally and criminally wrong. Ultimately, they led to the deaths of millions of people.

“The theory was eugenics, and its history is so dreadful—and, to those who were caught up in it, so embarrassing—that it is now rarely discussed. But it is a story that should be well known to every citizen, so that its horrors are not repeated.”

There is a lot more the author has to say about this; we highly recommend it.

He reaches some conclusions:

“First, … there was no scientific basis for eugenics. … Second, the eugenics movement was really a social program masquerading as a scientific one. … Third, and most distressing, the scientific establishment in both the United States and Germany did not mount any sustained protest. … And that is why the intermixing of science and politics is a bad combination, with a bad history. We must remember the history, and be certain that what we present to the world as knowledge is disinterested and honest.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The psychiatric profession, the original perpetrators of eugenics, purports to be the sole arbiter on the subject of mental health and “diseases” of the mind. The facts, however, demonstrate otherwise. Psychiatric “disorders” are not medical diseases. Psychiatrists deal exclusively with mental “disorders,” not diseases. Psychiatry has never established the cause of any “mental disorders.” The theory that mental disorders derive from a “chemical imbalance” in the brain is unproven opinion, not fact. The brain is not the real cause of life’s problems.

In 1883, British psychologist Francis Galton created the term “eugenics,” from the Greek word eugenes, meaning “good stock,” and defined certain racial groups as “inferior.” Through their history of invented racial “diseases,” psychiatry and psychology have not only legitimized modern racism, but also provided the justification for outright genocide.

In 1879, German psychologist Wilhelm Wundt of Leipzig University provided the ultimate scientific “proof” for eugenics and racism, by arrogantly declaring that as man’s soul could not be measured with scientific instruments, it did not exist.

In 1895, Alfred Ploetz, a Swiss-German psychiatrist, published his race inferiority theories. Hitler and his Nazi regime would use this to promote their brand of eugenics.

Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood of America and a eugenicist, planned to exterminate the Negro population by sterilization.

1n 1994, Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein’s book The Bell Curve arrogantly and audaciously claimed that African-Americans and Hispanics are genetically disabled.

In the last few months, violence erupted across the U.S. as racial tensions were fueled by conflicts with police. Police department Crisis Intervention Teams across the country are being taught by psychiatrists and psychologists how to “handle” people with mental trauma.

If you think these attitudes have been purged from society, think again.

And who is it that claims to be able to ease these conflicts? Why of course, get some counseling from your local psychologist and get some anti-anxiety drugs from your local psychiatrist. They should know; after all, their professions created the attitudes in the first place.

OK, yes, we know that there was undoubtedly racial tension prior to 1883. We know you might have been rankled at the phrase “their professions created the attitudes in the first place.” But we’re not the Boston Fern here, tracing our ancestry back to the Garden of Eden. (To make a racially suspect joke about it.) We’re trying to make a point, and we think belaboring that point is necessary, because so many people around the country are simply not being allowed to get it.

The point is, racism is alive today because it is being continually created and reinforced by psychiatry and psychology, as it has been for at least the last 132 years.

The U.S. President’s Commission on Excellence in Education revealed that 40% of children in Special Education were falsely labeled with learning disorders simply because they weren’t taught to read.

For minorities, Special Education is covert psychiatric racism; a means of getting millions of children hooked on mind-altering psychiatric drugs.

For many years, schools have employed destructive psychological curricula, and are constantly pushing for compulsory “depression screening” of schoolchildren.

The psychiatric profession has a profit interest in ensuring that racist ideas continue to influence us — in our educational institutions, religious institutions, and other areas of society. The way to ensure freedom from their consequences is to continue to identify and limit the influence of the exact source of this social poison—psychiatrists and psychologists.

For more information about racism, download and read the CCHR booklet “Creating Racism – Psychiatry’s Betrayal – Report and recommendations on psychiatry causing racial conflict and genocide.”

Common Core Gores Education

Common Core Gores Education

[The quotes are from “Common Core – A Look Behind the Wizard’s Curtain” by Karen Hadley, in The Hard Truth Magazine, Issue 4, 2014. We highly recommend it.]

We have written previously (here and here) about the dangers of the Common Core State Standards Initiative. If you have children in school, you may want to find out more about this, and take some action to stop it.

“The players behind Common Core have worked hard to create the impression that this project will be the salvation of education in America. But it is always a liability to lie in PR … this national restructuring of American education was embedded in President Obama’s 2009 stimulus package called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 … [which] was used to bribe the states to commit to new standards of education — sight unseen.”

“Nor is it any surprise that the primary creators of the curriculum refer to the Common Core competencies as ‘cognitive and psychological aptitudes’. In short, we’ve finally turned our educational system over to the psychologists lock, stock and barrel.”

“It is only a short step to the Guidance Counselor or psychiatrist on staff who can diagnose the child with ADHD (using the test developed by a company that was recently acquired by Pearson, the Common Core curriculum publisher) and prescriptions may be written and dispensed on the spot, without parents ever knowing.”

It is not just the psychiatric industry in collusion here; it is also the psychology industry. Psychiatric drugs are not the only harmful danger with respect to Common Core. “…there are two characteristics to this initiative that make it among the most serious and fearsome: 1. its utter pervasiveness and 2. its ability to mold the minds and opinions of our children and destroy any concept of sexual morality, as well as their will to learn and succeed.”

Children worldwide are under extremely dangerous assault. Today, parents and teachers are being deceived in the name of improved mental health and better education. The results are devastating. From the beginning of the 20th century in Germany, psychologists and psychiatrists have targeted education to destroy free will. Psychological intervention in schools promotes harmful behaviorist programs such as embodied in Common Core. Academic, knowledge-based curricula have been jettisoned in favor of psychological manipulation that places emotions and beliefs above educational outcomes.

As if that were not enough, the current psychiatric push for mandatory “mental illness screening” of all schoolchildren has Nazi roots that parents and teachers ignore at their own peril. These psychological programs have trampled on the rights and roles of parents and have provided society with rising crime, drug abuse and suicide rates.

Using “gun violence” as its cover, the Obama administration has quietly unleashed a cache of federal dollars that will be used for testing students for signs of mental health issues in K-12 schools.

On Sept. 22, Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia M. Burwell announced $99 million in new federal grants to school districts for mental health services. On Sept. 23, the U.S. Department of Education announced another $70 million in “School Climate Transformation grants;” more than half of the money to be used for “behavioral outcomes.”

These governmental “mental health” programs and “Common Core should strike deep terror into the hearts of every parent, grandparent and American.” Find Out! Fight Back! Contact your state board of education, your legislators, your school principal, superintendent, and school board and let them know what you think. Let us know what you have done.

Download and read this free CCHR publication for more information: “Harming Youth — Psychiatry Destroys Young Minds — Report and recommendations on harmful mental health assessments, evaluations, and programs within our schools.

Typical or Troubled? School Mental Health Education Program

Typical or Troubled?

School Mental Health Education Program

The American Psychiatric Foundation (APF), the philanthropic and educational arm of the American Psychiatric Association (APA), provides grants to fund the implementation of the Typical or Troubled?™ mental health education program in schools throughout the United States. Contributors to the funding include Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson and Shire Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

They say that the curriculum has been presented so far in 2,000 schools. It is available in English and Spanish; it includes APA mental health disinformation and role-playing exercises — pushing the typical psychiatric misinformation about warning signs, mental disorders, treatments, and referrals for mental health treatment. One of its aims, of course, is connecting teens to “treatment.”

The “educational” program spouts the fraudulent psychiatric party line: “1 in 5 children has a mental health disorder;” “1 in 10 kids have ADHD;” and a dissection of the “teen brain” that looks like this:

Close to home, this program has been done in the Rockwood School District (Eureka, Missouri).

If you have young children or teens in school, you might want to check if this program is in your school and pull your children out of the program. Contact your school Board of Education, your state Board of Education, your Parent-Teacher organization, your school administrators and counselors, and let them know what you think about this.

We think this is just another way to get away with mental health screening in schools, and get more kids onto psychiatric drugs.

Mental health screening aims to get whole populations on drugs and thus under control. The kinds of drugs used create further medical and social problems, and these subsequent complications require additional taxes and laws to handle them. The net result is a sick and fearful population dependent on the government to “solve” all their problems.

Recognize that the real problem is that psychiatrists fraudulently diagnose life’s problems as an “illness”, and stigmatize unwanted behavior or study problems as “diseases.” Psychiatry’s stigmatizing labels, programs and treatments are harmful junk science; their diagnoses of “mental disorders” are a hoax – unscientific, fraudulent and harmful. All psychiatric treatments, not just psychiatric drugs, are dangerous, and can cause crime.

Psychiatrists, psychologists, psychotherapists, psychiatric institutions, and other medical doctors prescribing psychiatric drugs and treatments must be made fully accountable for their funding, practices and treatments, and their results, or lack thereof — including prescribing antidepressants whose only results are harmful side effects.

Click here for more information about mental health screening.