Parental Consent by Mary Collins

Parental Consent
by Mary Collins

TeenScreen, a program advertised as a "free" psychiatric "service" to
prevent suicide, has caused an uprising all across the U.S. Citing the
dangers of psychiatric drugs and important issues of parental rights,
individuals and determined groups have spoken out against TeenScreen as
a harmful factor in the attempts to care for the problems of children
and teens.

TeenScreen’s aim is to locate more children that can be identified as
mentally ill and routed into "mental health" treatment. Many of these
would be "treated" with psychiatric drugs, ignoring the fact that many
of these very same drugs carry FDA-mandated Black Box warning labels
because they are known to cause violence and suicide.

The dangers of drugs

Internationally, more than 19 warnings have been issued on the dangers
of psychiatric drugs since October 2004. The U.S. F.D.A., the European
Medicines Agency Scientific Committee, The British Medical Journal, the
National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, Norwegian researchers,
the Pediatric Advisory Committee, the UN Committee on the Rights of the
Child, etc., have all contributed to the awareness campaign. Through
scientific research, the destructive nature of psychiatric drugs has
been brought to light.

At least eight of the last 13 U.S. school shootings were committed by
teens taking prescribed psychiatric drugs known to cause violent and
suicidal behavior. A prime example is Columbine High School, where
18-year-old Eric Harris and 17-year-old Dylan Klebold killed 13 and
wounded 23 others. Harris was taking an antidepressant drug known to
cause violent behavior. Klebold’s family has never revealed whether he
was also taking medication. Privacy laws prevent that information from
being disclosed without their permission.

The adverse effects of the drugs are known. It’s unfortunate that the
warnings had to come so late for many. Perhaps Eric Harris’ parents
would have made different decisions if they were given the full truth
about the dangers of these drugs.

How TeenScreen works

The biggest threat that TeenScreen poses may not be the drugs at all.
How does it affect a young person to be told by an "authority" that he
or she has a permanent, incurable brain disorder? After a child takes
the TeenScreen survey, a mental health "professional" reviews his
answers and speaks to the child. In this conversation, the
"professional" can make disturbing statements to the child. He may tell
the child, without any brain tests, that his brain is abnormal, that he
has a permanent and potentially disabling disease, that he is "damaged
goods." The child will then be sent on his way with the new "knowledge"
that he is not a normal, healthy teenager as he thought in the morning
but rather that he has a "mental disorder" that can ruin his life. The
child hears this news alone, without parental involvement or knowledge.
Often, the parents do not even know that their child was taking a test.

In a lawsuit filed in September 2005, Chelsea Rhodes of Indiana alleged
that she took the TeenScreen test and was told that she had two mental
disorders, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder and Social Anxiety Disorder.
The lawsuit alleges that the examination itself and the ensuing
diagnosis caused both Chelsea and her parents severe emotional harm.
Chelsea’s parents were not made aware of the test in advance and gave no
permission for their daughter to participate.

TeenScreen playing the numbers game on parental consent

Some TeenScreen sites use "passive consent", in which each and every
parent is assumed to have consented, unless they specifically state
otherwise in writing. This is done by sending a letter or printing a
notice in a newsletter, informing parents of the upcoming TeenScreen,
giving very little information about it, and providing a form for the
parents to sign if they will not allow their child to be screened. Of
course there is never any certainty that the parents actually see the
letter or notice and it is also possible that the letter rejecting
TeenScreen may be lost in transit back to the school. Leslie McGuire,
TeenScreen’s Director, states: "Unless we hear from you that we can’t
screen your child we assume we have your permission and we’re gonna
screen them."

For any parent that did not see the notice and did not know that their
child would be participating in a TeenScreen test, this is clearly "no
consent," not "Passive Consent." When parents find out, many are
outraged by the violation of their rights.

TeenScreen’s website states that all TeenScreen sites must obtain
parental permission before offering screening to youth. Yet, passive
consent, in which many parents will have no knowledge of the event and
thus will not have given permission, is acceptable to TeenScreen.
Passive consent is a way to increase the number of children that are
screened. In response to the wave of protests from parents and organized
groups, TeenScreen has changed the wording on their website several
times to attempt to distance themselves from passive screening. At the
time of this writing, the website claims that TeenScreen "strongly
advises" the use of active parental consent but passive consent (which
can mean "no consent") is still in use.

The actual number of passive versus active sites is difficult to
determine. Various percentages have been reported by TeenScreen, with
numbers sometimes swinging wildly from one day to the next. In September
2005, The British Medical Journal published an article by freelance
Journalist, Jeanne Lenzer, in which it was stated that 15 to 20% of
TeenScreen sites use passive consent. According to Ms. Lenzer, Laurie
Flynn, TeenScreen’s Executive Director, was asked to confirm the
information. As of Monday September 26th, Ms. Flynn did not object to
the number of 15-20%. Then on Tuesday September 27th, she wanted to
change the number to 4%, quite a shift for one day. TeenScreen’s own
website has been playing with the numbers as well. In September 2005,
the website reported that 85% of sites used active consent, In October
this was altered to 98.4%, then later to 98.2%. The next update was
January 2006, when the percentage was removed altogether. Leslie
MacGuire once reported that 25% of their sites use passive screening.

Evidently it’s quite a secret about how many students are taken into the
TeenScreen program by way of passive consent. One thing that is known is
that passive screening increases the number of children screened
dramatically. In an email from a Florida school official, he stated that
the use of passive screening could increase their participation rate
from 50% to 95%. The Philadelphia Enquirer reported that in one school
using active consent, only 4.2% of parents allowed their children to be
screened.

With no reliable numbers available, one can only make guesses and
calculations as to how many children are screened every year without
their parents being informed. In a simple example, let’s take four
schools. One school (25%) uses passive consent and the other three
schools (75%) use active consent. If each school has 1000 students, the
single passive-consent school could screen as many as 950 children. All
three of the active-consent schools combined could screen as few as 126
children (4.2%, as in the one school district reported by the
Philadelphia Enquirer). And of the 950 screened using only passive
consent, not one child will have a written consent from his or her
parents.

The four levels of parental consent

1. No consent

2. Passive consent

3. Active parental consent

4. Full informed consent

"No consent" is just what it sounds like, simply screening children with
no parental consent at all. Supposedly, no TeenScreen sites operate on a
"no-consent" basis but, in practice, many children are screened without
the parent providing consent or even knowing about the screening.
Without the parent’s consent or prior knowledge, their children are
asked introverting questions such as: "Has there been a time when
nothing was fun to you and you just weren’t interested in anything?"
"Have you often felt nervous when you’ve had to do things in front of
people?" or "Are you still thinking of killing yourself?"

Then, still without parental knowledge, the child is sent to a
"clinician" who decides which label to use. It could be "Panic
disorder", "Active suicide ideation" or "Social Phobia", all of which
are simply lists of behaviors voted into existence as "mental disorders"
by psychiatrists. The child is then told to seek help from "mental
health" workers. No minister, priest, rabbi, medical doctor,
nutritionist, allergist or any other alternative help is recommended to
the child.

And finally, at the complete whim of the "mental health" practitioner,
the child may be deemed a danger to himself and others and forcibly held
in a psychiatric institution for up to 72 hours for observation. The
first time the parent hears about the screening could be from a
policeman calling to say that their 14-year-old is locked in the back
seat, behind a metal grate and locked in by unbreakable glass on the way
to involuntary commitment in the psych ward. Then, of course, the parent
or insurance company will get the bill.

There is a law that is supposed to protect and help parents, the
Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA). This federal law states
that prior, written parental consent must be obtained before a child can
be given a survey, analysis or evaluation. "Passive consent" is an
illegal, deceptive method used by Teen Screen to bypass the requirement
for parental consent and increase the number of children screened.

"Active consent" describes those schools and school districts that
require a written consent to be given prior to screening. This method
may be preferable to "no consent" or "passive consent" but is still
sorely lacking when it comes to protecting parental rights.

There are many troubles with TeenScreen’s "active consent." One
consideration is the matter of whether or not the parent actually saw or
signed the consent. With TeenScreen sites offering free pizza coupons,
movie tickets, or $50 mall gift certificates for returning consent
slips, how many teens have arrived at school the day of the TeenScreen
test without having the form signed and simply signed it themselves?

Even more important is the matter of what information is given to the
parents. There are federal and state laws requiring "informed consent,"
meaning that before someone agrees to participate in any medical
procedure or experiment, they must be informed of and must understand
the medical facts and the risks involved.

"Full informed consent" for TeenScreen would be a consent given only
after having received and understood all the pertinent data involved.

This would include:

• The purpose of screening (TeenScreen sells their service as suicide
prevention but no study has even shown a reduction in suicide or proven
even one prevented suicide.)

• Who is performing the screening (The screening may be performed by
employees or agents of a for-profit "mental health" treatment facility
but this may not divulged to parents).

• That the screening has an 84% rate of false-positives (meaning that as
many as 84% of students can be falsely identified as "mentally ill")

• The screening questions (TeenScreen will not reveal the questions to
parents)

• The potentially bad effect of presenting suicide as something to be
considered

• A full understanding of the basic foundation of psychiatry’s
"diagnoses," since there are no scientific tests that show whether a
person has or does not have a mental disorder

• The fact that Psychiatry’s "Diagnostic Statistical Manual" has over
300 behaviors that have just been voted on, according to whim; not tests
or real facts

• The fact that the child may be diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder
with no objective medical testing, a label which can remain with that
child for the rest of his life

• That some career paths may be closed to the child because of the
diagnosis and/or psychiatric treatment

• That the parents may lose their parental rights or even be criminally
charged with neglect if they refuse to accept the diagnosis and give the
child psychiatric treatment

• A full understanding of the dangers and effects of the drugs that may
be given to children for these "mental disorders" including deaths,
violence and suicide

NO TeenScreen sites use full informed consent.

The folly of teen "assent"

According to the FAQ page on TeenScreen’s web site, youth must provide
written "assent" to participate in the TeenScreen program.

However, as stated in the Rhoades family’s lawsuit in Indiana, a
teenager has no legal standing to make such a statement, "Any execution
of the assent form by Chelsea was not knowing, effective, or valid
consent to the administration of the TeenScreen test upon Chelsea
because she did not have the legal capacity to consent and she was not
aware of the purpose of the assent, the nature of the test to be given,
or the purpose for which the test was being given."

What you can do

Communicate.

Call your local school board or high school today. Find out if they have
used or are even considering TeenScreen. If they are, make a formal,
written request for records and find out if they are providing full
informed consent in accordance with the law. Demand that your rights be
protected. Write letters to the school and the school board, show up at
meetings and speak up for parental rights, inform and organize your
friends to do the same. Demand full informed consent, always. It is the
only way to protect the rights of parents.

It is TeenScreen’s responsibility to protect parental rights yet its
personnel are not doing it. The government makes laws to protect the
public from having their rights trampled but so far laws have had little
effect on TeenScreen’s operation. Only a concerted, grass-roots effort
can restore and protect parental rights. Your voice is needed. Now.

Mary Collins is a 72-year-old grandmother living in New Hampshire. She
attained a BA in English Literature with a minor in History in 1954 from
Millsap’s College in Jackson, Mississippi and was involved in education
for over 20 years.

Email: marycollins_16_2@(NOSPAM)rushpost.com
Note: Remove (NOSPAM)