Psychiatric Drug Facts via breggin.com :

“Most psychiatric drugs can cause withdrawal reactions, sometimes including life-threatening emotional and physical withdrawal problems… Withdrawal from psychiatric drugs should be done carefully under experienced clinical supervision.” Dr. Peter Breggin
Showing posts with label Medicaid Fraud. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Medicaid Fraud. Show all posts

Apr 25, 2014

Dr. RICO Child Psychiatrist

updated April 25, 2014 first published May 20, 2012


Dr. RICO
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act

I am disappointed by the lack of integrity that permeates the psychiatric profession. I see no evidence of any effort to be responsible or accountable for the harm done to patients. Bio-medical psychiatry has a foundation reliant on dishonesty. Psychiatrists who falsely reported of research results, fraudulently obtained FDA approval for drugs, and participated in illegally marketing of psychiatric drugs, help formulate public policy. It is plain that these psychiatrists are continuing to participate in what is a widespread ongoing criminal enterprise that continues to pick America's pocket and continues to harm thousands of patients. These doctors see nothing wrong with failing to warn other professionals away from corrupt 'evidence.' Psychiatrists don't petition medical boards to take away the medical licenses of the criminals among the APA and AACAP membership who have lied about 'the medicine;' not even those who have disabled and killed patients in drug trials and clinical practice. Doctors who buried the evidence of their wrongdoing, along with the bodies of their patients are considered 'Key Opinion Leaders.' Some are teaching in Institutions of Higher Learning using texts filled with their corrupt work. Discredited and fraudulent research remains in psychiatry's so-called 'Evidence-Base.' Coercive and manipulative social control strategies are standard clinical practices; this is social/political control by use of torture under color of law; if psychiatry is in fact an ethical medical specialty, I'm Mary Poppins...


At a Senate hearing that took place on December 1, 2011 Senator Tom Carper said the hearing was the culmination of the third investigation into the prolific use of psychiatric drugs particularly those prescribed off label then fraudulently billed to the Federal Medicaid program. What I want to know is WHY has there been no effort to prosecute obvious criminal activity, or better yet, STOP unethical pseudo-medical, i.e. fraudulent, standard practices? Psychiatrists adopting the bio-medical model by a political process have effectively functioned as social architects who willingly partnered with pharma and sold out their patients for financial and academic reward. Don't fool yourselves, psychiatrists are acting as eugenicists; psychiatrists have abused medical privilege, forgot ethical medical principles, lied about what is and is not known about psychiatric diagnoses---it is not the first time psychiatrists have done this. Psychiatrists have blatantly lied about the efficacy and the safety of prescribed drugs and their direct teratogenic mechanisms of action...Apparently lacking insight into the horrific human toll of their professional conduct, blinded to the iatrogenic harm inflicted on their patients, seemingly, absent any ability to truly empathize with or understand the meaning and the nature of their own tortured patients; psychiatrists determined by consensus that what they BELIEVE to be true about their patient is a fact, regardless of what their patient states. No need to ask the patient if they feel "effectively treated;" unless of course the patient is treatment compliant, i.e. successfully treated...

Somehow shared opinion is magically transformed it into scientific evidence by psychiatry. This 'evidence' is used by psychiatrists to 'practice medicine,' abusing their medical privilege to have noncompliant patients adjudicated as mentally ill in Courts of Law; while using subterfuge and coercion as 'medical instruments.' Psychiatrists are doctors treating 'brain diseases' but are not honest with their patients or the general public. Psychiatrists do not conform to ethical medical standards and violate the Human Rights of their patients as a matter of course. As a result, Human Experimentation has become the Gold Standard in clinical psychiatric care standards. The vast majority of psychiatric drugs are prescribed to people on Medicaid. When prescriptions are not FDA-approved, they are "off-label prescriptions;" e.g. prescribed experimentally. If the prescription is not supported by DRUGDEX, or another compendium of approved drugs recognized by Medicaid, both the prescriber and the pharmacist who cause a claim to be submitted for payment to Medicaid, are filing a fraudulent claim, it's a crime. This criminal activity continues unabated, and continues to cost billions; the human toll is inestimable.

The APA and AACAP professional associations are not regulatory bodies, both appear to be unable to accurately assess any ethical deficits in the "science" or the "medical practice" of psychiatry.  Albert Einstein said, “You cannot solve a problem from the same consciousness that created it. You must learn to see the world anew.” Psychiatry's ethical failure is the antithesis to medicine in the Hippocratic tradition, made more pronounced by it's consistent failure to recognize or respect the human rights of psychiatric patients. It is indeed criminal medical negligence for an individual, let alone almost an entire profession to abdicate any and all responsibility for the iatrogenic harm done to psychiatric patients; patients who are disabled and killed, without regard for the fact disability and death are consistent, if not desired outcomes. Willful blindness to obvious iatrogenic harm done by psychiatric drugs, including homicide is evidence of psychiatry's non-medical nature. Thomas Insel crowing about the need for using psychiatry's "evidence base" and recommending psychiatry implement even more reckless prescribing "standards" through "Translational Science;" is indicitive that Insel doesn't seem to realize there has to be actual 'ethical, medical science' to translate.

In reality, any actual medical science is too often obscured with the APA's pseudo-democratic manner of gathering "evidence" to validate the APA consensus driven diagnostic and treatment standards. Consensus is no substitute for ethical medical research. The willful blindness to a wide variety of cognitive, neurological, and metabolic iatrogenic damage inflicted on psychiatric patients is compounded by the medical neglect of psychiatric patient's iatrogenic injuries. Society is paying for the mentally ill to be legally compelled to be "medically treated" with neuroleptic and other psychoactive drugs; sometimes in combinations known to be fatal. Psychiatrists recklessly abuse prescription privileges off label prescribing is NOT license to prescribe for no good reason, without any evidence.... Psychiatry's psychopharmacological pseudo-medical treatments with or without electro-shock are potentially fatal. The fact some people subjected to psychiatric treatment describe it as torture, should not be ignored. Far too many people "medically treated" in reality, have been tortured. One never hears of the APA or the AACAP validating survivors and victims of iatrogenic drug induced disabilities much less honoring the memory of victims of iatrogenic fatality.
 
Psychiatrists who willingly participated in research that effectively served as a marketing tool for pharma and published 'peer-reviewed' articles in support of marketing agendas are considered 'KOLs;' BMOC basically. The APA and the ACAAP membership fail to value ethical medical standards. As a whole, the profession has functioned without ethical integrity. Lead researchers have actively and passively participated in an ongoing criminal enterprise that is subverting science and defrauding the American people while using medical fraud as a standard clinical practice. It is little surprise that these geniuses who are so called KOLs are recommending that nothing in the practice of psychiatry change.

via AACAP The Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry

FAQs on Child and Adolescent Depression

"What causes depression in children?

"Depression has no single cause. Both genetics and the environment play a role, and some children may be more likely to become depressed. Depression in children can be triggered by a medical illness, a stressful situation, or the loss of an important person. Children with behavior problems or anxiety also are more likely to get depressed. Sometimes, it can be hard to identify any triggering event."

The claim that depression is caused by a 'chemical imbalance' is no longer being made; paltry evidence of what should be a concerted effort to start providing factual information to the public. It is apparent to me that these professionals do not appear to concerned about regaining the public trust that has steadily eroded due to a serious lack of integrity in academic research, fraudulent marketing and abdication of ethical duty to patients. and . However, after reading this: "Are medications safe? Do they increase risk of suicide? When prescribed and monitored carefully, medications are both safe and effective ways to treat of depressed youth. Fluoxetine or Prozac, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, is the medicine that so far has proved most safe and effective. There are times, however, when other medications can and should be used. While medications have been associated with a small increase in thoughts of suicide, there is no evidence that antidepressants actually increase the risk of suicide. For moderate to severe depression, the potential benefits from medication treatment seem to outweigh the potential risks. Click here for a complete discussion of the use of medication in childhood depression." I realized that no real changes are planned (to actually become ethical or evidenced-based medicine) Psychiatric drugs will continue to be recommended as a "First-Line" treatment for depression; and apparently, other drugs as well. I also realized (once again) that psychiatrists in positions of leadership at the ACAAP, seem to have no problem at all flat out lying about the drugs they are using.

The use of SSRI antidepressants on children and adolescents is based on the TADS Drug Trial. In the trial there were a total of 18 suicide attempts all but one was a kid who was on Fluoxetine, or Prozac, and there was an obvious attempt made by the researchers to present the data in a way that would misrepresent the suicide data in journal articles. Robert Whitaker reported, "The TADS study has been used to justify the prescribing of Prozac—and really, by extension—other SSRIs to children and adolescents. The TADS researchers reported that the drug treatment was effective and didn’t increase the risk for suicidal events, as compared to placebo. Adding CBT to medication “enhances the safety of medication,” the TADS researchers wrote.

"All the while, the real suicide data was being hidden. The TADS investigators weren’t disclosing the number of suicide attempts, and they weren’t reporting that all but one of the suicide attempts were in fluoxetine-treated youth. Instead, they made it appear that a similar number of suicidal events had been seen in the placebo group, and, at one point, even wrote that 15 in this group had attempted suicide." read here

Dr. David Healy reports, "The FDA became party to a myth that somehow Prozac was ok where other antidepressants given to children weren’t.

"Because FDA had licensed Prozac for depression before the 2004 suicide controversy blew up, they became party to a myth that somehow Prozac was ok where other antidepressants given to children weren’t. Prozac in fact shows no more efficacy than other antidepressants for children and has just as bad a suicidality profile, along with a range of other harms such as sexual dysfunction, inhibited growth, and other problems, as other antidepressants. emphasis mine

"This is not an argument against Prozac. Suicidality can be anticipated and forestalled by warning patients. I once thought that an appeal to patient safety would get doctors on board." here

In a large NIMH trial of 4,041 “real-world” outpatients, only 108 patients remitted and stayed well and in the trial during the one-year followup. Efficacy and Effectiveness of Antidepressants. Pigott, H. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 79 (2010), 267-279.

Retract Study 329 from 1Boring Old Man

photo credit sciencephoto.com

Aug 29, 2013

Seventh Circuit Rules Psychiatrists Commit Medicaid Fraud By Prescribing Psychiatric Drugs Off-Label to Children


via PsychRights:
cid:image001.jpg@01CEA479.591A7FB0
In a Decision issued yesterday, sending the case back to the trial court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (7th Circuit) held that psychiatrists commit Medicaid fraud when they write off-label prescriptions for psychiatric drugs to children for uses that are not "supported" by any of three drug references, known as "compendia."
At page 4 of its Decision the 7th Circuit first stated:
Under the applicable interlocking provisions of the False Claims Act and laws governing Medicaid, the federal government generally will not pay for medications prescribed for purposes not approved by the FDA or "supported" by any of several pharmaceutical reference books (called "compendia").
at page 12:
A reasonable jury could plausibly interpret the evidence Watson assembled to show that King-Vassel recklessly disregarded the fact that N.B. received Medicaid assistance, and that claims for payment for his prescriptions would be submitted to Medicaid.
and then at p. 15:
In short, we do not think a jury needs expert testimony to understand that writing a prescription to a person insured by Medicaid will likely cause a claim to be filed with Medicaid.
The lawsuit, ex rel Watson v. King-Vassel, was brought under PsychRights' Medicaid Fraud Initiative Against Psychiatric Drugging of Children & Youth. by Dr. Toby Watson, a Wisconsin psychologist, to support the Law Project for Psychiatric Rights' (PsychRights®) effort to try and stop the tremendous harm caused by off-label psychiatric drug prescriptions to poor children on Medicaid for uses that have no recognized scientific support.  Dr. Watson, said, "I am pleased the 7th Circuit ruled in our favor even though I inadvertently used the authorization for release of information form developed for my clinical practice."
Jim Gottstein, president of the Law Project for Psychiatric Rights and the attorney who handled the appeal, explained that "Congress limited Medicaid coverage to uses approved by the FDA or supported by one of the compendia, which is defined in the statute as a 'medically accepted indication.'  This is one of the things the 7th Circuit confirmed.  Another is that psychiatrists commit Medicaid Fraud when they write prescriptions for psychiatric drugs to children that are not for a medically accepted indication."  Mr. Gottstein went on to say, "the government has gone after and recovered billions of dollars from the drug companies for illegally pushing these drugs for use on children who are upset and acting out, but the psychiatrists are still prescribing these extremely harmful drugs to children."  The Drug Companies' Fraudulent Scheme can be depicted as follows:
cid:image004.jpg@01CEA47B.6206F980
PsychRights' Medicaid Fraud Initiative Against Psychiatric Drugging of Children & Youth is designed to discourage doctors from continuing to prescribe psychiatric drugs to children that are not for a medically accepted indication.  Each off-label prescription that is not for a medically accepted indication carries a minimum penalty of $5,500.
Rebecca Gietman, Dr. Watson's trial counsel said, "With this remand, we are one step closer to addressing issues involved with the psychotropic drugging of children. Kudos to the 7th Circuit."
The Law Project for Psychiatric Rights is a public interest law firm devoted to the defense of people facing the horrors of forced psychiatric drugging and electroshock.  Additionally, given the massive, growing prevalence of psychiatric drugging of children and youth, and the fact that minors have little to no influence on these adult-instituted decisions, PsychRights has made attacking this unfolding national tragedy a priority.  PsychRights is further dedicated to exposing the truth about psychiatric interventions and the courts being misled into ordering people to be subjected to these brain and body damaging drugs against their will Extensive information about these dangers, and about the tragic damage caused by electroshock, is available on the PsychRights web site:http://psychrights.org/.

PsychRights represented Dr. Toby Watson for the appeal, but not in the trial court.   The attorney who did represent Dr. Watson in the trial court was unfairly lambasted by the judge, and we feel it best for the case if I started representing Dr. Watson in the trial court.  That is going to involve considerable travel expense and so it will be greatly appreciated if you can make a donation to PsychRights to support this important effort.

Donations can be made online through Network for Good, or PayPal.   Checks can be sent to:

Law Project for Psychiatric Rights
406 G Street, Suite 206
Anchorage, Alaska  99501  USA

Thank you for your consideration and support.

May 1, 2013

I am without hope at the moment; I hope to have hope again soon...



I have been avoiding writing about the results of the Administrative Law Judges's determination, mostly because things seem somehow more real when I write about them...Sometimes reality can have not only a bite, but it seems to chew me up at times. It took me almost two months to realize that I was stuck. In fright. Absolute terror. Reliving. By then, it was Christmas, and I've never liked holidays---suffice to say, going through the motions for others wasn't possible and there was no money to spread Christmas cheer. 

These are the things I miss the most: my innocence, naiveté, the ability to trust, a belief that people are basically good and the justice system is based on truth.

The two people who offered to write letters of support, didn't. The Administrative Law Judge's decision was not the one I wanted; but it is not as bad as it could have been. I don't know how much longer I will be blogging, or doing anything online. The truth is I may have to sell everything we own that can be sold to survive. I don't care about things, but I do care about how all of this is going to further negatively impact my son. I care that I don't know if we will be able to afford the nutritional supplements that ameliorate some of the adverse effects of the fucking drugs that are continuing to take a devastating toll on his cognitive abilities and his physical health.  I see my son, he has yet to be "seen" by any mental health "professional." Professionals fail to show compassion, fail to recognize his trauma, his fear, his need to be respected and validated. They refuse to see the iatrogenic injuries they are inflicting with callous disregard with the multiple teratogenic drugs they prescribe.  I wonder, do they believe my son is not worthy of positive regard? Do they not see that in effect, my son has been so thoroughly and repeatedly traumatized that he has effectively been stripped of his ability to trust? It is understandable, all things considered, that clinical settings of any kind sometimes  fill him with so much fear that he can't stay.  When I point this out, it's met with confusion, and  a refusal to even consider my son's inability to stay in an appointment is a natural, fear-driven response; it is a symptom of PTSD.  My son deserves respect, compassion; professionals need to EARN his trust and stop acting as if it is their due just because they are "professionals."

I care that I know of no ethical mental professionals that are not believers in the mental illnesses are biological diseases illusion that are within driving distance that accept Medicaid. Supposedly, ethical treatment providers must obtain Informed Consent for treatment and provide  "client and family directed" mental health services to comply with Medicaid guidelines. I don't believe the so-called professionals we have to deal with even know what Informed Consent is; much less, believe that my son should be listened to or treated with respect---and have no problem disrespecting me while demanding that I respect them. 

Washington State doesn't even investigate felony crimes committed by mental health professionals that victimize clients of the publicly funded mental health system even when the crimes are well-documented and reported.  At least none of the crimes I have reported in which my son was harmed have ever been investigated---not when he was a child, and not as an identified vulnerable adult---no crimes committed by State's employees or contracted service providers that I have filed complaints with the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) about have ever been referred to Law Enforcement for criminal investigation; even though it is required by law for "mandated reporters" to file such reports. Complaints must first be filed with DSHS, which means the complaint is first "investigated" by social workers without training in criminal investigation or preserving any individual Constitutional Rights. Every single time, these  mandated reporters have opted to commit the gross misdemeanor crime of Failure to Report; and then to become accessories after the fact by committing further crimes to effectively cover up the crimes reported that they are supposed to refer to Law Enforcement.  Obviously, this is done to protect the state from being held legally liable.  The so-called "broken social service system" is broken due to this obvious Conflict of Interest that is entrenched within both the Child Welfare and the Adult Protective social service systems. 

Discriminatory mental health public policies are implemented by a unethical public mental health system with impunity since fraud and perjury can be the basis of Court Orders for Involuntary Treatment.  In 2010, felony crimes were committed by Nancy Sherman, a Designated Mental Health Professional and Jeffrey Jennings, a psychiatrist; both of whom were employed at Central Washington Comprehensive Mental Health, (CWCMH) the local community mental health clinic when my son sought to be hospitalized.  CWCMH shredded the original court record---another crime that went without investigation.  Rick Weaver, the CEO of CWCMH told me there was nothing wrong with shredding the record saying, "We do it all the time." I care that the only option is to continue to get Isaac's care from mental health "providers" who are dishonest, unethical, not supportive, and at times, criminal. I care that one of the people who offered to write a letter for the hearing after stating the State's plan put forth by Jackie Klingele, "would be devastating for Isaac;" didn't actually write a letter. The person has failed to write about what my son's needs are after offering to do so twice now---obviously, this is no way to earn a person's trust.   

In 2010, I promptly filed a complaint on my son's behalf reporting the fraud and perjury committed in Yakima County Superior Court and that CWCMH had criminally shredded the Court Record to be told by the DSHS Division of Behavioral Health and Recovery's complaint manager, Ronald Moorhead, that the State had no duty to investigate these felony crimes that traumatized my son and violated his Constitutional Rights. A state employee, David Reed  claimed there had never been any complaints to his knowledge about rights violations in civil commitment proceedings when I spoke to him---he flat out lied, the man had been appointed by Christine Gregoire, who was the governor at the time to investigate the complaints.  

I was given the same answer by Health and Human Services Civil Rights office, and the protection and advocacy office, Disability Rights Washington.  The State Attorney General's office ultimately recommended that I get an attorney to compel the AG to do his job in December of 2012.  What is even stranger, is in the email sent by AAG, Eric Nelson, states he is responding to my communications with the AG's office since September 18, 2012; a full year after I first contacted the AG's office. 

More than a year after I had filed an even more thorough (more thorough than those filed with DSHS, HHS, Disability Rights Washington and YPD ) complaint with the Department of Justice, I was informed that they don't investigate the types of crimes I had reported!  I sent the complaint overnight express mail after talking with a DOJ employee at length, who informed me that the Office of Civil Rights, Criminal Division was the appropriate section to receive the complaint. I called again after it was delivered to the Office of Civil Rights Criminal Division. I was told the complaint was in the correct department, and that it would be several months and up to two years before the complaint would be investigated. I was also told that if I ever had further information, to be sure and call back. 

The reason I called the DOJ in December of 2011 was to provide further information about the complaint.  When I called, I was put through to a person who knew exactly what I had reported, who informed me it had yet to be assigned to an investigator, and asked why I was calling. I said I had further information and was asked what it was. I said the psychiatrist and federally funded researcher, Jon McClellan who had  drugged my son into a state of disability while conducting Drug Trials identified in the complaint I filed had testified in a US Senate Hearing on December 1st, and that he had, in my opinion, committed perjury at the hearing when he claimed to have no idea why kids are being drugged off label for emotional and behavioral problems---The reason I believe Jon McClellan's testimony is perjured is the man WROTE treatment guidelines and practice parameters for virtually every psychiatric diagnosis given to children; in virtually every one, he in fact RECOMMENDS prescribing neuroleptic and other psychotropic drugs off label to children; including prescribing the drugs in combination, called polypharmacy. This being the case, it is obvious that no reasonable person could believe that McClellan has no  clue why the drugs are being prescribed singularly and in combination to children off label. I wonder, does he have any idea why he prescribed so many neuroleptic and other psychotropic drugs to my son off label concomitantly without Informed Consent? Why did he treat my son as if he were less than human and disable him? 

The crimes I reported in 2010, were committed by agents of the state who were acting Under Color of Law. What does the Office of Civil Rights Criminal Division do if not  investigate and prosecute Civil Rights crimes committed Under Color of Law??? 

It is extremely difficult, no it's impossible,  to accept all of this without crying. I don't have any idea how I'm going to pay the bills I owe, much less the ones that will be coming in. It would be nice if the State would comply with the Law and pay me the back pay owed to me with interest like the  Washington State Supreme Court ordered, I doubt this will happen though.  I am without hope at the moment; I hope to have hope again soon...

Owly Images

Apr 10, 2013

Wide awake but soon to be in the dark: Washington State's failure to follow Medicaid Guidelines and to comply with a State Supreme Court Order


The State of Washington owes me several thousand dollars in back-pay, plus interest. For three years and eight months the Department of Social and Health Services Home and Community Care office through S.E. Washington Aging and Long Term Care took between 9 and 20 hours of pay out of my paycheck each month in violation of Federal Medicaid Guidelines; and in contempt of a Washington State Supreme Court Order.  Today, the power is going to be turned off, my phone has already been turned off. None of the programs that help people in a crisis has any funds to help keep our power on. I have been without an income since being wrongfully terminated from my contract as my son's care provider on October 30, 2012 by DSHS employee, Dirk Bush, who told me he didn't need a reason. This occurred when I pointed out he had slandered me when he falsely told a client that I was ineligible to be a care provider; he claimed that I had been convicted of a felony for abandoning a client---Bush knew this was not true; he had a copy of my background check. I have been without a paycheck for months. I managed to stay afloat thanks to my tax return; it is now totally gone.

The same person who claimed there is nothing wrong with the State violating Medicaid Law and being in contempt of a Washington State Supreme Court Order and illegally refusing to pay me for all of the hours assessed as necessary for my son's care, Jackie Klingele, represented the department in the Administrative hearing held because we are disputing the wrongful termination of my contract as my son's care giver. The Administrative Law Judge's decision is due to be mailed on April 19, 2013.   

Apr 5, 2013

A MadMother responds to professionals who complain of my "lack of respect"



My response to the State’s Claims
Narrative of events leading up to the termination of my contract:


The department is being dishonest about the circumstances leading up the termination of my contract as an individual care provider.  I was verbally informed on October 30, 2012 by Dirk Bush at the HCS office.  I was at the office because I had received a call from a woman that I had applied to be an individual  in home care provider for, she told me that Dirk Bush, from the Home and Community Services Office, had informed her she could not use me as a care provider. Bush told her that I was disqualified due to a felony conviction for abandoning a client, and that my license was revoked. I knew that my license had never been revoked, and I do not I have a felony record.  


I am not surprised by these events; I am traumatized by them.  It has been my experience that this sort of abuse of power and authority is typical of the Department. I turned in a background authorization form to the ALTC office on the 24th of October, it is the first time the department had requested the authorization since I have been Isaac’s individual care provider in December of 2008. I submitted an identical BCCU authorization to the HCS office on the same day in order to complete the process of becoming a provider for the aforementioned client.  The BCCCU report was downloaded by ALTC the following day, the 25th; it has a handwritten notation on it that says, "11/17/2006 Wapato HCS" next to the highlighted sentence that reports  I answered "yes" to question 13 which is also  highlighted.  The BCCU report returned to HCS is dated October 26, 2012.  Significantly, the BCCU  reports, both the one containing an error and the amended BCCU report have no felony arrests or convictions or negative findings/actions from any source listed.  


After talking receiving the phone call from the client, I called Dirk Bush’s office but could not reach him. I then called the BCCU unit and spoke to Carrie, I told her that I had been denied a job based on the inaccurate report that had been issued. She told me to fax the information she required to issue an amended background report which she promised to generate immediately upon receipt of the requested information.  


I then went to the HCS office to speak to Dirk Bush.  When I arrived, I was told he was out of the office, so I said I would need to speak to his supervisor, and that I would wait.  I waited a short time and a man came out accompanied by two women who stayed behind the counter and behind the partial walls separating the reception area from the office area; only the man came through the door to speak to me.  I didn’t  know who he was, as I had never met Dirk Bush before and the man didn’t introduce himself, I assumed he was a Dirk Bush’s supervisor. The man was obviously not happy that I was there questioning the behavior of a department employee.  He was barely civil, and  proceeded to give me three different excuses for why I had been denied the contract for Margaret’s care.

When I refuted the first excuse he offered, he immediately came up with a second excuse; as soon as he  spoke, I knew for sure he was lying.  I informed him that I knew the second excuse he offered was also not a justification for denying a contract. Immediately after stating this, I had the impression that Dirk Bush seemed very angry. As a care provider, I am supposed to know what is and is not allowed; so naturally, I know what actually does prevent a person from working with vulnerable people. Bush was angry that I had the temerity to question his “authority” and refute his implausible excuses to defend myself. He seemed to be exerting a great deal of effort to remain calm.

I was not.  I was angry, for good damned reason. Bush had not introduced himself, so I pointedly asked him, “who are you? and why didn’t you introduce yourself to me?” As I explained earlier, I had been told Bush was out of the office, so I didn’t know if the man in front of me was Bush, or his supervisor.  When I asked why he hadn’t introduced himself to me, it appeared to make him angrier. He was rude and condescending, it was obvious to me that he had no respect for me whatsoever; and it was plain he felt no need to hide his contempt.  

Bush seemed to become be even more upset when I pointed out that before he had followed the procedures outlined in the WACs; he had misinformed a client that I have a criminal record that I in fact do not have; and he had denied me a job for the same reason.  I pointed out that what he had done is unethical, and  maybe even illegal. I asked if he believed there was anything wrong with how he had failed to inform me of a problem, or give me a copy of the BCCU report as required by law, before he had proceeded to misinform a client; and that because of his failure to follow procedures, he had slandered me. He had a copy of my background report so he knew I have no felony arrests or convictions; and he knew there was never a finding that I had ever abandoned anyone.  He responded by claiming he had done nothing wrong.  

I find it more than a little strange that in the 4 and 5 days between the time that HCS and ALTC respectively had each printed BCCU reports requested  and Dirk Bush falsely informing a client that I  had been disqualified as a care provider; neither ALTC or HCS made any effort to inform me that the department  had decided I was legally no longer qualified to be a state paid care provider, for any reason. They in fact have a duty to inform care providers of such determinations. Dirk Bush, is employed by the State of Washington as a Social Worker 3 for the Department of Social and Health Services, Home and Community Services office in Yakima; in his official capacity as an agent of the State of Washington Dirk Bush slandered me, denied me a 29 hour a month contract based on falsehoods. When I defended myself, he ultimately declared, “I just decided you’re not qualified based on character, competence and suitability, and I don’t need a reason.”  

The next day that I received the formal notification from the HCS office in the mail and  Joel Howell, the case manager at ALTC, called to inform me over the phone that my contract was terminated effective immediately.  Later that afternoon, I went to the ALTC office to pick up the paperwork.  Both notices were dated 10-31- and listed the reason for my termination as the inaccuracies listed on the BCCU report. Two days later,  on November 2nd, I received two more notices that my contract had been terminated, one from ALTC and the other from HCS.  I thought it was more than strange, how could a contract that had already been terminated be terminated a second time for a different reason?  More importantly, why did the second termination not have a state employee listed? The stated reason for the second termination was the one that Dirk Bush had used, “character competence, and suitability”; but the bases was not given in the space provided, and there was no department employee listed for who to contact with any questions.

I drove to the HCS office and I asked Joel Howell’s supervisor the basis of this second  notice terminating my contract when it was already terminated. I was told  by the supervisor, that she didn’t know what information had been used stating, “I wasn’t at the meeting.”  I can only assume she is referring to a meeting that must have taken place after the amended BCCU report was accessed by ALTC on November 1st at 7:12 pm and the termination notice dated November 2nd was mailed in time to be delivered by mail on November 2nd...

It is apparent from the time frame in which these events in fact occurred, that the second termination was issued before any formal determination about my character, competence and suitability was performed. This type of determination has a written protocol, and I can only assume it was not followed since it was not submitted as evidence that my "character, competence and suitability" demands immediate termination of my contract to be my son's care provider. I suspect the second termination was issued in a misguided attempt to cover up Dirk Bush’s unethical conduct since the department is liable for both civil and punitive damages resulting from Dirk Bush’s unethical actions . Dirk Bush exceeded his authority when he verbally terminated my contract on the October 30th; it was a punitive act of retaliation for defending myself when he slandered me.

None of  this explains why Dirk Bush did what he did.  There is nothing on the flawed  BCCU report that would have disqualified me as a care provider---Dirk Bush knew this since he had a copy of the BCCU report.  I believe the fact that I told him that what he had said about me was unethical, and probably illegal, and I suggested that denying a client their choice of a provider without cause is also highly unethical which enraged him.  

At this point, Dirk Bush’s actions and department’s failure to hold him accountable and mitigate the risks of further harm being caused by his unethical conduct, have placed Isaac and I at risk of having utilities shut off or being evicted. I have been deprived of my only income, March will be the fourth month for which I will not be paid, due to Dirk Bush’s actions.  

Once again, State employees have made decisions which have had an adverse effect on my son and myself.  It is not surprising to me that Dirk Bush and ALTC took actions that are not in compliance with the RCWs and WACs; in my experience with the department, it is not unusual for DSHS employees to violate the Law, violate individual rights and refuse to give any reasonable explanations to justify their actions.  

I was told by Joe Howell’s supervisor that only Jackie Klingele could release the information that had been used to determine my “character, competence and suitability” were grounds to immediately terminate my contract, and that only Isaac could sign the release for this information to be given to me.
via DSHS Manual Chapter 7A page 10:
a. Send a Provider Notification (16-198)letter to the provider when you are informing them of a denial and reason. You must terminate the provider with a ten-day notice, unless you believe the client is in imminent jeopardy, in which case termination is immediate, or the IP has a conviction for a disqualifying crime or negative action.  

Chapter 7A page 15:
Advance Notice Termination:
a.    Send the client a 10-day notice when taking action to terminate the IP contract. You must provide a 10-day notice unless you:
·         Have been notified by BCCU that the IP has been convicted of a disqualifying crime;
·         Have been notified by BCCU that the IP has a negative action/is on a registry; and/or
·         Believe the client is in imminent jeopardy.
In each of these situations, taking action to terminate must be immediate.

Immediate Termination/Summary Suspension:
a.    Provide a notice to the IP that the effective date is immediate when you have:
o   Been notified by BCCU that the IP has been convicted of a disqualifying crime;
o   Been notified by BCCU that the IP has a negative action/is on a registry;
o   Reasonable cause to believe that the client’s health, safety, and well being are in imminent jeopardy.

NONE of the above situations that require as immediate termination are applicable.
It is my only income, it is how I pay the bills and take care of my son... The supervisor at ALTC claimed that only my son, who is the client had a right to the information and that he must request it in writing himself.  ALTC staff and the department are aware (or should be since they have been informed more than once) that I have both general and medical Powers of Attorney for my son.  I can only conclude the supervisor was either mistaken, or purposely deceptive---neither of which is acceptable.

The department has a legal duty to inform individuals when a determination has been made that they are not qualified to work with children or vulnerable adults due to a finding of abuse neglect, or exploitation of a child or vulnerable adult. The notification is to be delivered along with a notice of the individual’s Due Process Rights, including the Right to a Fair Hearing.  The supervisor was  correct that I had no Fair Hearing Rights for even the wrongful termination of my contract; however, her assertion that I had no right to be informed of the information used in making the determination, is not accurate. The department had a legal duty to inform me of both the determination and the bases of such a stigmatizing determination. It is ludicrous to claim my son’s written permission is required! Even if it had required Isaac’s permission, the department is aware that I have Isaac's legal and medical Powers of Attorney, when I pointed this fact out, she then claimed only Jackie Klingele could inform me of the information used against me.

I did not find out the bases for the termination until Friday, March 15, 2013 when I received that information from Jackie Klingele by certified mail. When I read the packet of information, I realized that it appeared that the second termination was issued without any evidence that supports or substantiates the department’s actions. Not one allegation that I have ever abused, neglected or abandoned anyone, ever; which is no surprise to me.

The state's evidence consists of two pages of medical records one is the first page of a two page case note from an appointment on January 18, 2012 that has been in the possession of ALTC since June 5, 2012 and the other is the first page of a four page discharge summary written 2 days after Isaac was discharged, dated June 3, of 2011 that the ALTC has  had since August 23, 2011 The other “evidence” submitted that is supposedly grounds for my immediate termination the fact that I have failed to show the ALTC staff any time sheets. this is true, it is also true that both case managers have led me to believe that they are not required. 

I have been perceived as hostile, and perceived to not be respectful enough of department employees and mental health providers; which is understandable, although an unfair characterization, all things considered. The transcript of the phone call on January 12, 2012 is not accurate. I was not asking for ALTC staff to make an appointment, I was questioning why I had never received any response to my repeated requests for assistance with transportation to take my son to his mental health provider in Richland. My car was no longer capable of going on the highway; and because I was deprived of pay every month I could not afford to repair it.  The department and ALTC case manager, Joe Howell and the previous case manager, Peggy Latham, both know exactly why Isaac does not go to CWCMH. The state is implies that my comment, "I would not take a dog to CWCMH" is inappropriate for me since I am the care taker for a person with a psychiatric diagnosis. The fact is, the department is well aware that felony crimes committed by that mental health clinic's employees in Superior Court would perhaps explain WHY I would not take a dog there. The fact that my son gets mental health services in the nest County blamed on me, as if I made the decision that Isaac will no longer go to CWCMH, is absurd---In truth, if it had been up to me, Isaac would have not gone to CWCMH after the first appointment he had there with psychiatrist, Philip Rodenberger, the Medical Director of Central Washington Comprehensive Mental Health; but it was not my decision to make.

I have a long history with the department, more often than not, the RCWs and  the WACs are barely even paid lip-service; my Civil Rights and my son Isaac’s Civil Rights have been violated on a regular basis with impunity for over eighteen years. It is impossible to quantify the harm done to my son Isaac, and to my family by the illegal conduct of employees of the department. These crimes violate State, Federal and International Laws. Not once has any crime including physical assault, that I have reported to appropriate authorities in the department EVER been investigated by Law Enforcement.

It is true that I have cursed when upset. It is also true that I point out when a person who is a public servant, i.e. works for my son, Isaac; is in my opinion, incompetent.  A person who does not perform their job with ethical integrity; invariably, in my experience, will also lie to me, and will cover up harm done to my son---that is why such individuals have earned my contempt; particularly those who fail to file reports with Law Enforcement they are mandated by law to file--it is a job requirement. This failure is a Gross Misdemeanor Crime, and it is the reason there has never been a criminal investigation of crimes I have reported that were committed by state agents or designees who harmed my son. Not one of the people who have carelessly, or recklessly physically harmed my son, and worse, individuals who have violently assaulted or otherwise neglected and traumatized my precious son have ever been held accountable. It is no coincidence that every single instance when my son has been traumatized, assaulted, medically neglected and tortured, the crimes were perpetrated by employees of the department or it’s contracted providers.  I have not found a way to pretend that I have any respect for public employees and mental health professionals who are now complaining I don't show them enough respect. these people have never shown my son the respect, or the compassion he needs so very badly. The refusal to acknowledge the harm their ethical failures have caused, continues to exacerbate the harm already caused and validates my family's mistrust of the department.

Once again, the department has purposely allowed the unethical conduct of an employee to put my son at further risk---I can only assume it is because I challenged what is clearly unethical behavior,  including slander. It is insulting, it is horrifying, it is traumatizing. I am now be confronted with the need to not only defend my name, and fight being labeled as a person who is dangerous to children and vulnerable adults without any evidence I have ever abused or neglected anyone being offered to support this assertion. I am fighting to protect my son from further harm; my son has been harmed every single time the department has had a duty and the responsibility to care for and protect my son; indeed it is the department's consistent negligence in fulfilling it's duty to my son that is the direct cause of my son's iatrogenic injuries that have disabled him. The same negligent department that has NEVER protected my son from any harm, but has repeatedly and carelessly put my precious son in harm’s way. 

Arbitrary and capricious decisions that are made “in my son’s best interests” by idiots who actually seem to believe such a thing is even possible without ever speaking to my son, or consulting those who know him. People who love Isaac and care enough about him to know it is impossible to act in his “best interests” without involving him in REAL LIFE---I am disgusted by the hubris and lack of insight into the harm that has been done to my son by the repeated instances of the department’s employees presuming that such a thing is even possible; it is a truly stunning that "professionals" can even believe making decisions about what is in Isaac's "best interests" without involving Isaac, is ethical or advisable.  The damage done to my precious son by those who have for the past twenty years done that very thing is incalculable. Jackie Klingele, a woman who has never met my son, has made decisions that will if carried out, have a profound and devastating impact on my son; I am more than outraged she has done this WITHOUT even asking Isaac for his input.  In all likelihood, Jackie Klingele does not even realize  how disrespectful it is for her to have proceeded in the manner she has. Her plan is basically to tell Isaac where he should live, to in effect, invalidate Isaac as a human being who is WORTHY OF CONSIDERATION.  

It is not possible to act in another person’s "best interests" without even considering the person’s history, day to day life, spiritual values and beliefs---Without asking the person what their interests are, any discussion and any decisions made, are not done out of consideration of a person’s “best interest;” it is done out of a desire to control the person, while ignoring the person's "interests" altogether.  

I am a MadMother, who has a son that in agony has asked me questions that are impossible for me to answer. Having to bear witness to some of the experiences that have caused my son so much agony is a heartache that is indescribable. It is an honor to know he trusts me enough to express his pain. I have a visceral need to protect my son from ever having to experience the type of disrespect and invalidation that continue to cause him so much pain and fear.  The question: “How could they take so much from me mom? The people that were supposed to be helping me had no compassion for me.”  
I now fiercely protect my son from t
he profoundly harmful effects of individuals who act with callous disregard, and lack compassion.



Mar 7, 2013

Antipsychotic Use by Medicaid-Insured Youths: evidence of criminal prescribing practices




Average rate of gray matter loss: evidence of neuroleptic drug-induced brain damage.
The more drugs you've been given, the more brain tissue you lose. What exactly do these drugs do? They block basal ganglia activity. The prefrontal cortex doesn't get the input it needs and is being shut down by drugs. That reduces the psychotic symptoms. It also causes the prefrontal cortex to slowly atrophy. 
~ Dr. Nancy C. Andreasen, New York Times, Sept. 16, 2008

Both the older and the atypical neuroleptics shrink brain tissue during routine clinical exposure.
~ Dr. Peter R. Breggin, Brain Disabling Treatments in Psychiatry (2008) 

ARTICLES   |    
Antipsychotic Use by Medicaid-Insured Youths: Impact of Eligibility and Psychiatric Diagnosis Across a Decade
Julie Magno Zito, Ph.D.; Mehmet Burcu, M.S.; Aloysius Ibe, Dr.P.H.; Daniel J. Safer, M.D.; Laurence S. Magder, Ph.D.
Psychiatric Services 2013; doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201200081
Author and Article Information
Dr. Zito and Mr. Burcu are affiliated with the Department of Pharmaceutical Health Services Research and Dr. Magder is with the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Maryland, 220 Arch St., Room 01-216, Baltimore, MD 21201 (e-mail: jzito@rx.umaryland.edu).Dr. Ibe is with the School of Community Health and Policy, Morgan State University, Baltimore.Dr. Safer is with the Department of Psychiatry, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.
Copyright © American Psychiatric Association
a couple of excerpts:
Conclusions
"The expansion of antipsychotic medication use from 1997 to 2006 among Medicaid-insured youths was most prominent among those qualifying with low (SCHIP) and very low (TANF) family incomes. This was the case even though the most impaired youths—those in foster care or those receiving SSI—had distinctly higher levels of antipsychotic drug use within each study year. Factors contributing to this antipsychotic use pattern included the expanding SCHIP and TANF populations, the increased use of antipsychotics among youths enrolled in SCHIP and TANF, and the increased use of antipsychotic medication for behavior disorders over the decade. Likewise, although youths with diagnoses of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders and pervasive developmental disorders had the highest rates of antipsychotic medication use, youths with externalizing behavior disorders far outnumbered those with these less common conditions and constituted the largest group of utilizers of antipsychotic medications."
"Methods: The authors analyzed computerized administrative claims data for 456,315 youths aged two to 17 years who were continuously enrolled in Medicaid in a mid-Atlantic state in 1997 (N=159,171) and 2006 (N=297,144)."

In 1997 a total of 615 kids with no diagnosis were prescribed neuroleptic drugs in this sample. More than twice as many kids, a total of 1,481 were prescribed a neuroletic drug in 2006, despite the fact they had no psychiatric diagnosis which would indicate a need for such a prescription!

What the above represents is only a small percentage of the number of fraudulent claims which were submitted to Medicaid for payment, i.e. fraud. Obviously, the civil and criminal penalties paid by the pharmaceutical industry for illegally marketing these drugs is not going to stop the fraud. The unethical medical practitioners are defending their "professional privilege" to use these drugs absent evidence the drugs "treat" the conditions the drugs are prescribed off label for. It is the prescribers whose unethical prescribing of these teratogenic drugs to children are guided by the APA and AACAP practice parameters and treatment algorithms who must be stopped.  Standard practices originally protected patients, now they serve to protect the unethical behavior of the professionals who use them as an affirmative defense for what is not only medical malpractice, but Human Experimentation; the current standard in mental health care for kids on Medicaid.  



hat tip: Allen Frances, M.D.










House Hearing,  2009

Special thanks to Methodius Isaac Bonkers of Bonkers Institute of Nearly Genuine Research for the graphic and the quotes at the beginning of this post.


FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted
(C) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted
(C) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.