Insel's assumptions are biased beliefs predicated on a hypothetical etiology that is reminiscent of eugenics

via NIMH The Director's Blog

Transforming Diagnosis

an excerpt: 

NIMH has launched the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) project to transform diagnosis by incorporating genetics, imaging, cognitive science, and other levels of information to lay the foundation for a new classification system. Through a series of workshops over the past 18 months, we have tried to define several major categories for a new nosology (see below). This approach began with several assumptions:

A diagnostic approach based on the biology as well as the symptoms must not be constrained by the current DSM categories,

Mental disorders are biological disorders involving brain circuits that implicate specific domains of cognition, emotion, or behavior, (emphasis mine)

Each level of analysis needs to be understood across a dimension of function,

Mapping the cognitive, circuit, and genetic aspects of mental disorders will yield new and better targets for treatment.

Apparently, Thomas Insel is unaware that in order to ethically determine the direction and the focus of scientific research requires an open mind; not a pre-determined agenda. Insel's announcement that the NIMH will no longer use the DSM is a political decision. Insel acknowledges the NIMH adopted a biological research focus based on assumptions; instead of using ethical scientific principles, and allowing the existing empirical data to guide the direction of psychiatric research; he says, "because we lack the data"!? What a crock! Insel knows there is little to no scientific basis in his assertion that "Mental disorders are biological disorders."

It is an assumption that is and has been embedded in the language of psychiatric diagnosis and treatment, an assumption that was entrenched along with the eugenic theories that spawned it. Eugenic theories which are still used in an attempt to justify the inhumane "standards of care" that are without empirical support, standards without empirical support should not be considered "standards of care" since by definition, standards are theoretically to be derived from the evidence base; instead, psychiatry validated their standards of care by consensus,  a quasi-democratic political process, not using ethical medical judgement and empirical data from psychiatric research.  By consensus, psychiatry effectively determined that some people with certain  psychiatric diagnoses don't need their Human Rights protected; people of all ages are effectively stripped of their Human Rights by psychiatry, based on a belief that a diagnosis of mental illness is evidence the person has an incurable brain disease, that requires life-long treatment with teratogenic drugs. Without any definitive evidence to validate the brain disease hypothesis, it's simply a hope-filled belief in a hypothesis that is still seeking validation; it's not even a theory...let alone an actual disease.

Insel's assumptions are beliefs reminiscent of eugenics.  The eugenics movement in this country also proceeded without any empirical evidence to validate it's ignorant assumptions. 

The NIMH will assume that the brain disease hypothesis is a brain disorder or disease in the absence of  empirical evidence that would validate the hypothesis. According to Thomas Insel, the NIMH is going to proceed as if an assumption, i.e."Mental disorders are biological disorders," is a sufficient substitute for using critical thinking skills, and for relying on the existing research data on "mental disorders" exercising sound judgment to determine what the focus and direction for psychiatric research should be. I wonder, if the best interests of those who experience cognitive, emotional and behavioral symptoms were even considered? Is there empirical data that supports Insel's use of biased assumptions that are without empirical support to justify this biased and myopic focus on brain biology for psychiatric research? Insel's announcement that the NIMH will focus on seeking evidence that "mental illness" is caused by a brain disease is not 'news;' the NIMH has been focused on seeking the evidence which would validate the brain disease hypothesis for decades...Insel's announcement that research funded by NIMH will no longer be guided by the DSM, due to it's lack of validity; is long overdue. The irony is, in the same blog post, Insel uses biased assumptions as if bigotry-based assumptions are a sufficient substitute for valid information when making mental health research policy decisions (theoretically) in the public interest. There is no ethical justification for the NIMH to continue to fund research looking for the still illusive genetic defects, brain diseases and bio-markers as it's  main agenda. The pre-occupation with proving schizophrenia and/or any other psychiatric diagnosis, is caused by a biological defect or disease seems to purposely exclude research on known and suspected social and environmental risk factors that cause cognitive and emotional difficulties; worse it neglects the cognitive/behavioral/psycho/social/ therapeutic treatments that can help people right now in real world practice, if the treatments were actually available...

In effect, Insel is announcing all cognitive and emotional symptoms of distress, including undesirable, or disapproved of behavior, is caused by a yet to be identified, biological disorder or disease process---while simultaneously ignoring the overwhelming evidence of environmental causal factors such as  sexual, physical, and emotional abuse and neglect, poverty, malnutrition, environmental violence, socio-economic-political status and intra- and inter-personal conflicts are highly correlated with, and known to exacerbate (if not cause) what Insel 'assumes' are biological disorders...

Allen Frances, had a OP-Ed published in New Scientist, which concludes with the statement, "Anything that goes into the manual should already have passed rigorous research testing; the manuals are far too important to include untested hypotheses. DSM-5 is not, and cannot be, an appropriate guide to future research." 

I agree. I would add that assumptions about the scientific validity of a hypothetical, neuro-biological cause for any psychiatric diagnoses (or anything else) is also inappropriate. An assumption is not an ethical scientific basis for psychiatric research; it is not an ethical foundation for a new nosology either.  

I wonder if Insel can explain why dangerous neuroleptic, or "antipsychotic" drugs that are minimally effective for a minority of people diagnosed with schizophrenia, are prescribed off label, to children? 

Human Experimentation is "effective psychiatric treatment." 

It's the standard of care used in psychiatric practice. 

via National Advisory Mental Health Council 219th Meeting September 18-19, 2008 

NIMH Director's Report: 

an excerpt:

"Results from the NIMH-funded 6-year multisite Treatment of Early Onset Schizophrenia Study (TEOSS) found no significant differences in outcomes with first- or second-generation antipsychotic medications. There was a striking difference in side effects, but there was no evidence that any of the medications was the best choice for the entire group of people being treated. Similar results were obtained in the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) trial, the Cost Utility of The Latest Antipsychotics in Severe Schizophrenia (CUtLASS) trial from the United Kingdom, and the large-scale Veterans Administration trial. Despite the lack of a clear superiority in overall effectiveness of the second-generation drugs, they account for more than 90 percent of the market and cost about 20 times more than the first-generation compounds." Thomas Insel 

via National Institutes of Health:

The NIH Public Access Policy ensures that the public has access to the published results of NIH funded research. It requires scientists to submit final peer-reviewed journal manuscripts that arise from NIH funds to the digital archive PubMed Central upon acceptance for publication. To help advance science and improve human health, the Policy requires that these papers are accessible to the public on PubMed Central no later than 12 months after publication.

photo credit:Psychiatry is junk science

My connection to my children is all that I have that is real and true

Start new day with a strong heart.
Oshimaru Kung

It has been a struggle over the last twenty years to access appropriate care and services for my son who is now twenty-five.  I am a different person than who I once thought I was, or hoped to become. And my son, is not only a grown man; but he is altered in ways that I have not yet found a way to accept gracefully. The lack of acceptance is due to the disparity between what I thought and believed at one time to be true; and what I now know to be true as a result of twenty+ years of experience with the publicly-funded mental health and social service systems. Experiences with psychiatrists and mental health professionals altered what I believe about life, social justice, my Country and my fellow man. 

I can't help but continue to believe that the values I once thought were guiding principles that public institutions rely upon, are still important; I am saddened to not have evidence these principles are valued today in actual practice. My continued belief in the importance of the ethical principles of Justice are borne from my desperate hopes for my son's safety and recovery. I will do everything in my power to protect him from further harm, and to sustain my belief that there will come a day he will be safe from further harm being inflicted by the systems that have harmed him so very badly already. 

My connection to my children is all I have that is real and true.

It is what it is.  There are no words that can accurately describe my visceral pain or explain the intellectual dissonance that permeate the events my family has had to withstand. What was done to my little boy to "treat" his emotional and behavioral difficulties have caused so much harm to him; to all of us.  It is impossible to escape the negative effects of his (mis)treatment on all of us; much less, it is impossible to justify the unethical and even illegal means that were used with impunity. The Real Word Outcome for my son from the "mental health treatment" provided by Washington State's Child Welfare and mental health systems resulted in profound iatrogenic disability. 

My son's "best interests" were never a primary focus; or even considered, his needs were callously ignored. 


It is hard for me to breathe sometimes remembering.  It is even harder when I am confronted with the reality that 'mental health treatment' still consists only of the drugs that caused my son his profound iatrogenic injuries---Psychiatry's reliance on the neuro-biological disease hypothesis makes a mockery of ethical medical practice.  For my son, this "treatment" has been, and continues to be, ineffective and harmful. 

An adverse effect of a drug's mechanism of action is NOT a "side-effect." The direct adverse effects from psychotropic drugs are rarely, if ever, given the consideration necessary to realistically, or ethically assess whether the possible benefits outweigh the potential disabling, fatal risks. In Psychiatry, a primary measure of treatment effectiveness is treatment compliance; outcome is a secondary measure. If psychiatry were practiced ethically, a patient's real world outcome would be paramount.

When my son feels threatened in any way, he retreats inside himself; into his safe place. It is how he survived what were horrific conditions. I am clear in my understanding of why he does this.  It's how he coped and how he continues to cope; it serves the purpose of granting him a feeling of safety--He tells me it is how he 'works things out.'  He first started using this coping strategy when he came to the realization that he had been betrayed, and that those who were supposed to be helping him were not listening to, or helping him; but simply continuing to drug him in a maniacal attempt to prevent symptoms. No mental health professional ever addressed my son's initial trauma; every one I asked refused to even try. Mental health professionals then refused to believe their lack of compassion and respect coupled with the direct adverse effects of psychotropic drugs only compounded the harm and inflicted additional trauma on my precious son. His symptoms of anger and aggression were a reaction to what he believed were threats to his life. What my son perceived as threats, may not have been actual lethal threats, but to my son, with severe PTSD, they were lethal threats. Naturally, he fought as if he were fighting for his life---in his mind he was. It is well established that severe early childhood trauma alters how young children's brains process information; mental health professionals consistently refused to help process the initial trauma that caused his PTSD.  By misinterpreting my son's anger and aggression, they in effect, blamed a victim for his injuries.  Ultimately, my son came to believe that the "only safe place left" for him to be was inside his own head shortly after going to Child Study and Treatment Center in October of 2000.  


He wasn't safe, he wasn't respected, or protected; he was used and abused. In effect, he was traumatized and tortured--these are the words he used to describe being at Child Study and Treatment Center to me; and that's what it looked like was happening to me. I have no difficulty believing Isaac when he shares what it felt like for him. I am outraged that these experiences are, and have always been, consistently unrecognized by mental health professionals as traumatic experiences.  He was there to get help. All of us were betrayed from the beginning---ultimately, what we had been led to  believe, and what in reality happened, is totally incongruous; irreconcilable and unacknowledged for the harm it caused all of us.  As Isaac has said, "The people who were supposed to be helping me, had no compassion for me."  CSTC was not a safe place, it was not even a therapeutic place. CSTC is in fact licensed as a research facility; it is not a hospital, as I had been led to believe.  The four plus years he spent in that place are a blur of devastating inhumane treatment that he does not want to think about or remember---I can't say that I blame him. It was a place to survive, and Isaac survived.  

I'm a witness, with overwhelming grief and loss that is always with me. I am haunted by the abject terror I felt when I realized I'd been betrayed, and effectively stripped of my parental rights to protect my son and to provide parental consent for his treatment. From the beginning, I was repeatedly told I had no say in any medical decisions on behalf of my son by Jon McClellan, the unethical federally funded psychiatric researcher who is still Medical Director of the State of Washington's only psychiatric research facility for children. Allowed only to bear witness to the trauma that McClellan ruthlessly inflicted upon my precious son; the memories still manage to take the wind out of me... 


Events that all but obliterated my confidence in my fellow man, thankfully did not rob me of my family. We have been blessed; we have survived intact as a family; it is a testimony to the unbreakable bonds forged by the profound love we have for one another. Isaac has told his brother and I that it is because we know what happened to him, and have confidence in him, that he can recover. This simple statement is a testimony of the innate need we human beings have to be connected to people who love and accept us unconditionally. It is also evidence of Isaac's profound insight. I know having this fundamental need fulfilled is critical to his well-being. I'm a MadMother humbled by these events, and humbled by both of my sons' utter confidence in me. Their confidence is a testament of the power of a mother's love for her children. I hold onto hope with a tenacity that is borne out of my profound love for my sons. Isaac suffered horribly and sustained profound disabling iatrogenic injuries. I nurture my hope, so I that I may sustain Isaac's hopes when he feels discouraged and afraid. It is an honor. It is a bittersweet privilege. I sustain hope in order to validate the confidence both my sons have in me. 

I am a witness, I am MadMother still haunted from having borne witness when my beloved son was traumatized and disabled by the teratogens mental health experts called "necessary medical treatment." 

Without hope, I am a only a MadMother crushed by a cruel truth: 

I didn't rescue my son nearly soon enough. 

And now these three things remain: faith, hope and love.
But the greatest of these is love. 

1 Corinthians 13:13

"all that I have that is real and true" first posted August 22, 2011 rewritten and reposted in April 2013

One of my Heroes

"Contempt has something in common with respect; 

much like respect, contempt can only be earned." 

A MadMother quote

Isaac on my birthday June 1990 

My son has endured mistreatment, abuse, and civil rights violations virtually his entire life at the hands of mental health professionals and child welfare workers. He has even been told he can not go swimming at the YMCA and a Yakima City pool by himself as an adult. Yakima School District gave him a half day of school from the first through sixth grade. The local DSHS office Children’s Administration staff had an attitude that can best be described as unprofessional; in truth, hateful.

Federal guidelines state a person cannot be denied federally funded Medicaid medical services by virtue of needing them for long periods, by virtue of needing them in the past, or because their condition requires a high level of care. The disrespectful unprofessional attitude of Child Welfare staff was evident from my first contact with the local Children’s Administration office and prevelant the entire time I was forced to deal with them. The first time I had any contact was when the Seattle office asked the Yakima office to make a “courtesy” home visit to a new home that Isaac and I had moved to. The caseworker who performed this "courtesy visit" stated with a sneer upon her arrival, "If it were up to me, you wouldn’t have got your son back.” My son was in the room.

The local children's Administration office referred to Isaac as, “A Seattle Dump Job.” My son, was severely behaviorally disturbed due to having been beat up and locked in a closet by a foster parent. A crime that by Law should have been reported to Law Enforcement; but was covered up by Children's Administration instead. For having the audacity to aggressively seek appropriate treatment and services for my severely traumatized child, I was given a psychiatric diagnosis; and of all the things I've been called, this one is my favorite. I was labeled with "Dependent Personality Disorder." 

I believe the State of Washington has a duty to help my son recover from his injuries. I also believe that once Isaac was victimized by a violent crime in foster care, the State was unwilling to ethically perform any duty it owed my son. The State does whatever it can, legal or illegal doesn't matter, as long as it can abdicate it's duty to those victimized in state paid care settings; and it does so with impunity.

When I brought Isaac home from foster care he was 5. I was asked, “If you can’t take care of him, why did you take him back?” by a Children's Administration Supervisor. The same supervisor, Gary Peterson, later lied about what had taken place at a team meeting held to discuss Isaac's needs; he lied about what was recommended by the treatment team for Isaac's care. Isaac's needs were unchanged, his condition had not improved; he continued to need a great deal of help. Peterson's lie resulted in services being terminated. My son was hospitalized yet again; a hopitalization that cost the taxpayers $30,000 for a three week hospital stay. The services that were terminated cost $2,200. a month.

 All of the treatment and supports that were recommended for Isaac that I begged, pleaded, and ultimately screamed about him needing; were supposed to be available under EPSDT; on paper, in the contract the  local mental health clinic had with the State, the County and the RSN, the services were available; mandated by the contract, and State Law; in reality, they were nonexistent. The services that were provided as a substitute were federally funded "Family Preservation Services" which are supposed to be used in crisis situations; and were never intended to be used long-term, and not as a substitute for providing the necessary treatment for chronic mental health conditions. The fact that Family Preservation Services were supposed to be short-term is something I was constantly being reminded of by Child Welfare staff; staff blamed Isaac and myself for his "failure to recover" (my  "failure as a parent" was merely implied) without recommended treatment. The fact is, my son and I were being traumatized by the manner in which we were treated by professionals who were failing to perform their jobs as public servants, people who in effect, worked for us...


I was ultimately forced to give custody back to the state, Children's Administration claimed it was required, that it was the only way Medicaid would pay for his ongoing care. I found out later when I was doing my research to rescue him from CSTC, this claim was in fact a lie. Isaac already had Medicaid; and there was then, and there is now, no such requirement that a child must be in State custody in order for Medicaid to cover the cost of their Medical care. My court appointed attorney advised me to sign the “consent” for an "Agreed Order" to place my son in the custody of the system that had harmed him so very badly in the first place. I wanted it put on the record the real reason, we were even there. (the failure to provide  recommended treatment and in-home services that his psychiatrist said were necessary to treat his injuries)

I found out years later, that at that particular hearing, was the only opportuntity the law allows to have entered into the Court's record my own understanding of why the State of Washington was in effect, "legally" kidnapping my son. I was never properly informed of this parental right by my Court-appointed attorney, or by the Case Worker with Children's Administration. In effect, my attorney, the Social Worker with Children's Administration, and Isaac's Team Child attorney worked together to coerce me into signing the "Agreed Order" by reassuring me it was the only "responsible" thing for me to do. They told me if I didn't sign the "Agreed Order," the State's attorney would simply claim I was refusing to act in my son's "best interest," and the Order would be granted anyway.  

I remained unaware of the how badly my parental rights were violated for years, it was not until I was researching in order to rescue my son, that I found out on my own, how badly I had been betrayed by my legal advocate.  It is my belief the reason for the charade was so that the State of Washington could defraud the Federal Child Welfare program, to help pay for the cost of Isaac's care. The State could only claim child welfare funds if he was a ward of the State. So they violated State and Federal Law and made him a ward of the State. I was robbed of my parental rights, and I was assured that I retained my parental rights to provide Informed Consent for Isaac's medical treatment. What the law stated my rights were, and the rights I in reality was allowed, are not even close... For an "Agreed Order for a Consent to Place" to be a valid legal document, is to be signed without coercion.  I was in fact coerced.  The only reason I signed it is because I was told that if I did not sign it, the State would tell the Court I was not willing to act in my son's best interest; and I was assured by my attorney that I retained my parental rights to provide Informed Consent for Isaac's medical treatment. I was lied to, I was betrayed. It is, and has been, a nightmare that is made worse by the prospect that my precious son's death from iatrogenic injuries will in all likelihood, will precede my own.

Initially, he was placed in a group home here in town for 10 months, at a cost of $5,000. a month. 4 times in those 10 months he left the group home without the staff on duty being aware he was gone. 2 of these occasions, he hitchhiked to our home, and I was legally obligated to return him to the group home; even though the staff person on duty was unaware he had even been missing! Can you imagine, the horror of being obligated by law to return your child to a place where  you know for a fact he is neglected and abused?! On another occasion, he broke his foot so severely, it required surgery to repair, and he walks with a limp to this day. After breaking his foot, he hitchhiked to the hospital and I was contacted by the ER and informed that my son was injured and that he was alone. I called the group home, and the staff on duty lied to me, telling me Isaac was asleep in his bed. The staff person was unaware he had jumped out of a 2nd floor window, and was not even at the group home. When I asked if they would please check on him so I could tell him gooodnight if he was still awake; the staff person was rude to me, and only agreed to do so when I insisted.

While the local DSHS Child Welfare office provided services when I forced the issue, the services were NEVER what was recommended for Isaac's injuries and his diagnoses of PTSD and Left Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. The system should have bent over backwards to provide the help he needed since his injuries are a direct result of the State's negligence; Children's Administration placed him in the foster home where he was victimized. He was placed in a home that had several credible reports filed with CPS asking the state to stop placing children in the home.  12 reports were in fact filed prior to Isaac being placed in the foster home, a pediatrician, a minister and the social worker that had recommended the foster parent to the state in the first place, among them.

If the local DSHS Children's Administration staff had a problem with the Seattle office, it was an administrative issue; it certainly was not grounds for the abusive and negligent manner they "provided services" to "help" my son and my family. Some of these people still have State jobs as public servants; some have been able to retire and now receive State pensions. It is not "the system" that is broken. What happened to my son was not due to a "broken child welfare system."

The initial crime occurred because state employees failed to follow guidelines. He was placed in a home that a State licencor had recommended only infants and toddlers be placed in, due to the foster parent's lack of parenting skills. Going even further the licencor alleged a child average intelligence over he age of a oddler would soon outwit her...

The fact that Isaac had been victimized was covered up by state employees who then blamed both of us when Isaac's condition did not improve. The treatment recommended by every single psychiatrist was never provided and state employees in effect said it was our fault his condition not only didn't improve but worsened over the years. Public servants who failed to act with ethical integrity and in effect, blamed a crime victim for his injuries which only adds insult to injury. Not a day has went by that I have not remembered that I placed him in foster care. I am responsible for placing him in harm's way; I don't believe it's possible for me to ever forgive myself for that fact. he was harmed because of it.

After the group home, my son spent over 4 years at Child Study and Treatment Center, the state-run psychiatric research facility for children. The picture below was taken on the grounds of CSTC and Isaac is leaning on the tree to keep himself from falling down. Heavily drugged, he would stumble and fall to the ground, much like a child first learning to walk. He is smiling in this picture, he couldn't really smile like he had before, it looked more like grimace; it's a direct adverse effect of the drugs he'd been forced to take.

He was 15 when this picture was taken:  

My son has recently felt safe enough to tell me what it felt like to be him growing up. He told me he felt like nobody who was supposed to be helping him, had any compassion for him. When he talks about the heavy doses of neuroleptic drugs, and the “side effects” which in reality, are the direct, adverse effects; in agony, he asked me, “how could they take so much from me mom?” Referring to the staff at CSTC, that had traumatized him, "over and over and over" he said, “To tell you the truth, I pity them. I feel sorry for their morality.”

Isaac was still in the custody of the state when he went to an inpatient psychiatric hospital for the first time, the month before he turned 7 years old. A few weeks later, a Children's Administration social worker purposely misinformed the court by stating that Isaac was doing well because he as receiving the services he needed at home in order to have Isaac's dependency dismissed. The case was closed, the record sealed. I had spoken with the social worker less than a week after Isaac was admitted to the hospital stating she was just finishing up paperwork and was calling to ask how he was doing. I told her he was in the hospital and that it did not look good; the psychiatrist was saying he would need to be hospitalized for a long time. It ended up being ten months.

I told her he kept talking about someone named Margaret and what had been done to him. Less than an hour later, I got a call from a Seattle Police Homicide Detective, named Don Cameron. The foster parent who victimized him was suspected of killing babies placed in her care. Just a few months prior to Detective Cameron calling me, she had apparently killed a fourth baby. Detective Cameron wanted to talk to Isaac about what had happened to him in the foster home; I was advised by the psychiatrist not to allow it. I now know following the psychiatrist's advice was a serious mistake.  I have wished at least a million times over the years that I had not listened to that psychiatrist. It is a burden knowing I took the wrong person's advice I bear it without any grace; it is another consequence of having put my son in foster care in the first place.

I had to fight for almost 2 years after the CSTC staff put on paper he no longer needed to be in the hospital, before I was finally able to bring my son home; it was less than 3 months before his 17th birthday.

Isaac lives at home with me and I am his Medicaid personal caregiver. (see The story of a background check for current info) His current assessment is inaccurate and flawed, due the fact that the assessment tool was developed to assess physical disabilities, not the cognitive disabilities that my son has. Isaac chooses to live at home and I am grateful.  I would be stupid (and negligent) to trust a system that has given me compelling reason to have no trust in it. It is a system that abdicates all responsibility when wrongs occur, does nothing to investigate crimes committed against vulnerable people it serves, and does nothing to ameliorate any harm sustained once they have been victimized.  In fact these “service systems” and some of the “public servants” employed by them, have caused so much more harm unnecessarily in their attempts to cover up ethical and criminal failures. Crimes committed both by employees of the State of Washington and by contracted service providers are not reported as required by law to Law Enforcement, and are neither investigated nor prosecuted. There is no accountability for the grievous errors made and outright abuse and neglect (and the harm done to my son) that employees of the State of Washington and contracted service providers who failed to perform their jobs ethically, or legally. It is apparent to me that some of these "public servants" have no conscience, and no compassion whatsoever for my seriously traumatized son. The chief concern continues to be to abdicate all responsibility for failing to perform their duties with integrity; and when they fail to help, to keep from harming the people whom they purport to serve.

I am utterly disgusted by State employees whose abject individual failures are minimized and dismissed by other State employees who attribute criminal failures to the fragmented and broken system. It is individuals who are failing the system, and it is individuals that are broken; not the system. The failure to hold individuals who commit crimes accountable for the crimes they commit as State employees and contracted care providers is systemic failure; but "the system" can only be as functional as the people who are employed by it. Attributing the failures to "the system" is why the system is "broken."  The failures are caused by individuals who lack the fortitude required to perform their jobs with ethical integrity. It is individuals who fail our children in the foster care system, and they will continue to do so with impunity for as long as we continue to attribute their individual failures to "the system."  The system will remain "broken" as long as we fail to hold individuals accountable for failing to perform their jobs with ethical integrity. Children will continue to be grievously harmed, children will continue to have their lives destroyed. Children will continue to be killed until the adults that we, as a society, entrust to care for them, to act in their best interests are held accountable for their negligent and careless criminal behavior.
  

It is a very conservative estimate that a million dollars of Medicaid and Child Welfare fraud was committed by Washington State to pay for my son's "care."  It is by defrauding of my neighbors and my family members that the criminal mistreatment of my son was paid for. I have no respect whatsoever for the mental health and social service systems employees who perpetrated these crimes; I have no respect for people whose  corrupt behavior and fraudulent billing practices I have borne witness to for almost twenty years.

My son has survived, a miracle many times over again. It is an honor and a priviledge to do for him those things he can not do, because of his iatrogenic injuries. It is a blessing to be a mother. I will be eternally grateful for being blessed with my children; I am proud of the adults they have become. Isaac knows that recovery is possible, because he says, "My family knows what happened to me, and they believe in me." 

Isaac deserves so much more than to simply to recover from his iatrogenic injuries, but due to the nature of his injuries, he doesn't remember what he once wanted to be; have any aspirations for a job or career, to finish school. He knows the reason he has lost some of his abilities, and knows he can regain what he has lost. I tell him he's doing great, because he is. He has no hate or animosity for the people who have caused him so much harm; to me, that is admirable. 

It is one of the many reasons he is a hero to me.  

Portions of post were first published 7-11-2011

I'm certain my soul has turned into steel...

It is difficult, if not impossible, to reconcile the impact of so-called, psychiatric 'medical treatment' on my son. The neuroleptic and other psychotropic drugs have had, and continue to have, a devastating impact on his over-all health and functioning. I don't believe it is, or ever was, right or good treatment; nor do I believe any longer that the treatment was ever intended to be for his benefit.  I am only a mother, not a doctor or social worker.  I know that harm is not 'help;' it never was.  My son's "treatment" was inhumane, it never seemed that the primary focus of any psychiatrist prescribing drugs was doing what was in my son's best interest.  My precious son, Isaac, was first a victim of violent crime; then a Risperdal victim, which caused him further trauma; ultimately, he was used in Federally funded neuroleptic Drug Trials and disabled before he was an adult...

I was never asked if I wanted to sacrifice my traumatized son on the altar of corporate greed. No one asked me if Jon McClellan could use my son as a guinea pig. Quack Master Jack said he didn't need my approval or consent, he told me repeatedly I had NO SAY, because my son was 13 and that talking to me at all was a "courtesy."  Quack Master Jack needed only his own approval when he was an co-investigator funded by NIMH in the TEOSS seeding trials. The TEOSS drug trial was conducted to support FDA approval, in order to expand the neuroleptic drug market, but failed to support the use of any of the drugs trialed. Quack Master Jack didn't have time to quack to me in order to obtain my Informed Consent for my son to be used in the TEOSS drug trials. McClellan sure didn't seem to know what human rights are or even care that he was inflicting additional trauma on a trauma victim. I wonder if Jon McClellan cares that my son describes his "care" as "torture?"  I somehow doubt that he does.

FDA AERS

Year	Death	Serious
2000	19,445	153,818
2001	23,988	166,384
2002	28,181	159,000
2003	35,173	177,008
2004	34,928	199,510
2005	40,238	257,604
2006	37,465	265,130
2007	36,834	273,276
2008	49,958	319,741
2009	63,846	373,535
2010	82,724	471,291

"Johnson & Johnson worked closely with NAMI and other advocacy groups in order 

to integrate pro-atypical information into their literature and speaking engagements."

Craig Malisow in Down the Hatch

My son is ill again, physically. This is the third time in less than a year and a half. He so rarely got sick, that it seemed like he never got sick when he was a kid...It is so very hard to accept the reality of why it is so different now. He has a much better attitude than I. He pities those who did this to him. A couple days ago, he told me, "I know I'm sick because of the drugs, and I'm ok with it." I think he was trying to make me feel better. I can't help but to be utterly and completely grief-stricken and so very, very angry. Seeing my son's health continue to decline, with no way of stopping it; I have no hope of getting anything close to adequate medical care for the iatrogenic cognitive impairment and neurological damage that the drugs continue to cause my precious son. There's nothing fucking thing right about it. 

via Nature.com
US bioethics panel urges stronger protections for human subjects
Present regulations are adequate but not optimal, report says.
Meredith Wadman 15 December 2011

"The report says that individual subjects should be compensated for their medical care if they are harmed during research, and that the government should study whether “a national system of compensation or treatment for research-related injuries” may be required. The idea is not new a new one: in 2002, the Institute of Medicine, part of the US National Academies in Washington DC, also called for compensation of research-related injuries. For some, the Bioethics Commission report does not do enough to advance the issue.

“No recommendation is made for the sponsor to pay or for the government to pay, just a recommendation to study the issue. This simply shelves the issue of compensation to collect dust,” says Vera Hassner Sharav, the president of the Alliance for Human Research Protections in New York.

"Gutmann says that the commission “unequivocally states that there is a strong ethical case” for compensation, a practice that is common to almost all other developed nations. But, she adds, “we also think it’s very important that the federal government study how best to create a system that would ensure such compensation. We want the government to get it right.” read the entire article here.

via HoustonPress

Down the Hatch: The Rothman Report
A scathing, 86-page report called out doctors who "subverted scientific integrity" for money.
Craig Malisow Wednesday, Dec 14 2011
"In its quest to quantify the collusion between Janssen and the proponents of the Texas Medication Algorithm Project, the Texas Attorney General commissioned David Rothman, a professor of social medicine at Columbia University's medical school, to produce an expert witness report. The resulting analysis, completed in October 2010, is an 86-page bitch-slap of doctors who Rothman says "subverted scientific integrity" in their rush to line their own pockets. Some highlights are listed below." read the rest here. 

I'd say, more than a 'bitch slap' is warranted...

but then, I am biased by experience... 

I'm certain my soul has turned into steel...

"Not Dark Yet"

Bob Dylan

Shadows are fallin' and I've been here all day

It's too hot to sleep and time is runnin' away

Feel like my soul has turned into steel

I've still got the scars that the sun didn't heal

There's not even room enough to be anywhere

It's not dark yet but it's gettin' there.

Well, my sense of humanity has gone down the drain

Behind every beautiful thing there's been some kind of pain

She wrote me a letter and she wrote it so kind

She put down in writin' what was in her mind

I just don't see why I should even care

It's not dark yet but it's gettin' there.

Well, I've been to London and I been to gay Paris

I've followed the river and I got to the sea

I've been down on the bottom of the world full of lies

I ain't lookin' for nothin' in anyone's eyes

Sometimes my burden is more than I can bear

It's not dark yet but it's gettin' there.

I was born here and I'll die here against my will

I know it looks like I'm movin' but I'm standin' still

Every nerve in my body is so naked and numb

I can't even remember what it was I came here to get away from

Don't even hear the murmur of a prayer

It's not dark yet but it's gettin' there. 

God help me...help me to help my son. Amen

first posted 12-16-2011

photo credit 

Trauma Can Cause Symptoms of Mental Illness

2003

He is bracing himself on the tree, and trying to smile---

I can't really tell you what it was like to see my son at 15 and 16 years old stumble to the ground like a toddler---because he was so drugged---or how horrifying it was leaving him in a place I dreamed of hiring mercenaries to rescue him from...and the obvious---well, let's just say one of the hardest things I've had to learn to deal with---is how unkind and not fully human people can be.

Psychiatric Drugs As Agents of Trauma

Dr. Charles Whitfield's article concludes that trauma is the cause of most symptoms which are used for psychiatric  diagnoses of mental illnesses, alcoholism, and addiction. The symptoms are treated with psychotropic drugs almost exclusively; in spite of the lack of empirical evidence to support this Standard Practice. Which begs the question, is it even an ethical standard of care being used by psychiatry?  How did using psychotropic drugs to treat symptoms  become standard for any condition or symptom without empirical support?  I would say it is definitely not ethical, therapeutic or medicine in the Hippocratic tradition.  The focus is solely on an attempt to control symptoms; even if the patient does not believe it is a "need" to  control the identified symptoms...

We knew what the primary cause of his PTSD symptoms was; why mental health professionals refused to provide the recommended treatment that was in their own practice parameters; or even listen to us. he professionals used brain damaging drugs in their futile attempts to control behavioral symptoms. Doing so, they committed Medicaid fraud; but worse that that, the treatment repeatedly traumatized and eventually disabled my precious son. My beautiful son Isaac had an IQ of 146 at the age of seven; and today at twenty-four, cannot do the things he did at the age of seven...

My son was as a victim of horrific abuse in foster care and as a result, had trauma-induced PTSD; he also has Left-Temporal Lobe Epilepsy, which is caused by a traumatic head injury.  Instead of the recommended treatment, he was repeatedly traumatized by pseudo-medical mental health treatment. His longest hospitalization was for over 4 years where a psychiatric researcher, Jon McClellan, further traumatized him and disabled him in the TEOSS drug trials. It is illegal what he did to my son; forcing drugs upon him, over my protests. Jon McClellan used my son like a guinea pig in Washington State's only state-run psychiatric facility for children, Child Study and Treatment Center. Quack Master Jack is a "lead researcher" for childhood schizophrenia; and the Medical Director of CSTC; the man had no right to play God, he had no right to use my son in the way he did.  The effects of trauma were ignored, minimized, or misidentified as symptoms of whatever diagnosis was subjectively determined to need the massive amounts of teratogenic drugs to "treat" it. Permission, i.e. "Informed Consent," was not needed; Jon McClellan needed only his own permission apparently.  The deleterious effects of the drugs on the patient; irrelevant.

Dr.Whitfield used data from over 300 studies; in writing this article.  Some are the same ones I had read and used in my futile attempts to advocate for my son.  I can assure you, there truly are circumstances when there is no comfort in being right.  Using data from, "the work of numerous psychiatrists and psychopharma-cologists" and his own experience in private practice, Dr. Whitfield provides the evidence supporting his conclusions; he additionally explains, "most common psychiatric drugs are not only toxic but can be chronically traumatic."  Dr. Whitfield's article in, "The International Journal of Risk and Safety in Medicine" concludes that trauma, and the PTSD symptoms which result, are often misdiagnosed; the symptoms are almost always treated exclusively with drugs. Dr. Whitfield states for some people, this "medical treatment" traumatizes them further; exacerbating, instead of alleviating their distress.   (I have noticed in ten+ years of doing research, research like this that questions, or is not supportive of drugging symptoms of distress is seldom published here in the US)

Both my son and I have been saying he was traumatized, not treated.  Quack Master Jack, Jon McClellan lied to me; and failed to follow legal and ethical standards; his "medical treatment" mainly consisted of using my son as a guinea pig trialing drugs that were not approved for pediatric use. Drugs not approved for use in children, some of the drugs were not approved until years after my still traumatized son no longer was a child; some still are not approved for children.  Neuroleptic drugs are known to cause brain damage, heart damage and be potentially fatal.  "Off label" means experimental use, according to the FDA.  He never obtained Informed Consent; in fact, he claimed, he didn't need it.

In the Psychiatric Summary from May of 2004, which is in a previous post, he implies that my son was taking the drugs "willingly."  The report in this same post, is from 2001, the year my son turned 13 and the age of consent law is one of the excuses this "researcher" used as an excuse to not need my consent.  Given the condition my son was in, there is no way in hell anyone, even a young child, would have thought Isaac had the capacity to give consent.  Quack Master Jack knows that both he and other staff members told my son if he did not take the drugs; he would never get to leave the hospital.  To be Informed Consent, there can be no coercion, my son could have assented, but was in no condition to provide "Informed Consent" just because he was thirteen!   My son had no choice, as an adolescent in a locked facility, he naturally wanted to leave, and if you want to leave, you have to do what you are told.  I was forced to pretend to buy this thug's diagnosis and "treatment" in order to have any chance in hell of rescuing my own son.  Jon McClellan's care was obviously heavy on the (drug)study, negligent, fraudulent and abusive in the extreme.  Isaac has said he thought he was kidnapped; and I have no problem understanding why he would have thought or believed this.  Jon McClellan ignored the Hippocratic Oath, the US Constitution, the Ethical Guidelines for Informed Consent and the Nuremberg Code in the "treatment" he inflicted upon my son.

"Whenever a doctor cannot do good, he must be kept from doing harm." 

Hippocrates 

Read Dr. Whitfields article here...
Originally posted  January 16, 2011 "Can Trauma Be A Cause of Mental Illness?"

Let's Be Real: there is ample data

Let's be real, there already exists ample data---there is no need for further 'study' of the drugs, no need to continue conducting unethical seeding trials.  Seeding trials are trials conducted primarily as a function of a marketing agenda; to expand the market for the drug being trialed.    It is unethical to not inform trial participants of the purpose for the trial. Failing to inform trial participants the purpose for the trial violates their Human Rights; violates the AMA's guidelines for Informed Consent;  and it violates the Office of Human Subjects Research Human Research Protection Guidelines.


The Veterans Administration continued allow testing of  dangerous Neuroleptic Drugs which are known to have a risk of fatality particularly when given to elderly patients---on elderly Veterans with dementia.  The FDA issued a Black Box warning in 2005 warning that this class of drug causes elderly patients to die precipitously; yet the NIH funded a Drug Study in 2006 for Seroquel, one of the drugs given a Black Box warning, to be tested on elderly veterans with dementia; patients who cannot give informed consent for participation in the drug study. 


Why in the hell are Veterans being used as guinea pigs in Drug Trials?  Who are the geniuses on the Institutional Review Board that approved this unethical marketing strategy disguised as a drug study?  And why is the VA allowing a drug trial with a contraindicated drug for dementia to "treat" people who can not give Informed Consent?  Why is the NIH approving funding for drug trials testing drugs that have been given a Black Box warning because they cause patients to die?  It is unethical and just plain WRONG!  

If any of the neuroleptic drugs were used to treat a "physical" disease or biological dysfunction, I suspect they would have been banned long ago; due to the iatrogenic illnesses, disability and increased mortality that neuroleptics cause.  These teratogenic drugs have a lot in common with psychiatric treatments used in the past; treatments that in their turn, were proclaimed to be "safe and effective"--- insulin shock, cold water baths, and lobotomy, none actually were safe or effective, but all were decreed to be safe and effective treatments by the psychiatrists who used them.  The claim was not based on the patient's outcome; but in spite of  a high rate of adverse and even fatal real world outcomes of psychiatric patients.


Neuroleptics are neither safe nor effective for a significant percentage of people.  Neuroleptics are being prescribed "off-label" to children, to the elderly and to traumatized Veterans---with devastating consquences.  The number of bio-psychiatry's victims has to be in the millions since the advent of neuroleptic drugs; but this fact is not acknowledged by psychiatrists or mainstream mental health advocates. Proponents of Involuntary Treatment in fact lobby for unconstitutional Involuntary Treatment Laws. 

I know from experience, that my son's rights were neither protected, nor defended, when court orders were sought and obtained by mental health professionals.  My son's Individual Rights to Substantive and Procedural Due Process were violated, and I know this is not an isolated incident---Perjury and Forgery were used by two licensed "mental health professionals," acting Under Color of Law as agents of the State of Washington; one of them a psychiatrist. There was no criminal investigation conducted of the crimes that were promptly reported. The blatant criminal conduct that AGAIN victimized and further traumatized my son compelled me to start writing this blog.  I could not openly share the story without Isaac's permission--he wasn't willing to let people know what had been done to him as a psychiatric patient until the illegal court proceedings in the summer of 2010. 

"Practice Parameters" are developed by members of the American Psychiatric Association by consensus---not derived from valid research or scientific data. Consensus, a quasi-democratic political process is not at all scientific, nor is voting a scientific method that can quantify the safety or effectiveness of a treatment standard. Nonetheless, psychiatrists rely upon consensus and a vote of the APA membership to "validate" the Standards of Care used in standard clinical practice. 

Psychiatric diagnoses themselves are based on subjective observation and opinion, not empirical data; patients are diagnosed based on opinion, and a consensus of opinions is used to develop standard treatment protocols.  The neuroleptic drugs have fatal risks, and their use as a first line treatment for schizophrenia is based not on empirical data demonstrating their effectiveness, but on the opinions of so-called medical experts more than fifty years after their introduction!  Is this because the evidence base does not support using them as a first line treatment for people given a diagnosis of schizophrenia?  Why are we Court Ordering people to take drugs with disabling and fatal risks, how is this justifiable when neuroleptics are helpful for about a quarter of the people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia?  

In addition to this a egregious betrayal of psychiatric patients' and of the general public's trust, a betrayal that is ongoing; psychiatry has implemented standards of practice that make Medicaid and Medicare Fraud common in Standard Clinical Practice.  I personally don't believe this massive fraud and deceit will stop until the professionals who prescribe the drugs "off-label" and the pharmacists who fill prescriptions that are fraudulently submitted for reimbursement are held legally accountable for submitting fraudulent claims for payment...  

Pharmaceutical companies are liable for the illegal marketing practices of their employees---both civil and criminal liability needs to be addressed---fines for the corporate entities has done nothing to stop the rampant fraud, corruption and "off-label" prescribing of harmful drugs to children and other vulnerable people.  Individuals who are committing these crimes need to be prosecuted for the fraudulent claims that decimate publicly funded medical care programs.   

A prescriber who fails to share what is known about the risks for iatrogenic illnesses, disability and sudden and/or early death; fail to inform people that psychotropic drugs can cause physical and/or psychological DEPENDENCE---not unlike illicit drugs or alcohol dependence; is guilty of medical negligence.  

It took me years to forgive myself for not questioning or independently researching sooner the effects of the drugs given to my traumatized child.  I started independently researching in 2001; by then, my son had been given several psychiatric drugs "off-label;" all of which were fraudulently billed to Medicaid over the previous 6 year period--and none of which, "effectively treated" the behaviors they were prescribed to treat.  Quack Master Jack, Jon McClellan, the Medical Director at the State of Washington's psychiatric research facility for children, Child Study and Treatment Center, was less than forthcoming with information when I spoke with him; in fact McClellan avoided answering my questions about Isaac's diagnosis and treatment; and didn't even bother to pretend to be respectful or honest. McClellan was unable to be forthright and honest, when I would ask for information he was evasive. McClellan's evasiveness compelled me to start researching psychiatric diagnoses and the drugs used to treat them independently. 

The data I found, horrified me.  McClellan, one of the investigators funded in the TEOSS drug trials, which were being conducted while my son was his patient; minimized and even ridiculed my very real concerns about the obvious harm being done to my son physically and emotionally---For over four years while my son was in Child Study and Treatment Center, staff falsely claimed to be  informing and educating me about his diagnosis and the drugs that were prescribed to my son. 


Please note on the TEOSS Drug Trials---there is something seriously fishy about this expensive trial.  There are conflicting reports about how many children were enrolled--some reports say 116, and others say 119.  Two children died, and according to all of the reports, only 12% were helped by the neuroleptic drugs---This really begs the question, WHY ARE THESE DRUGS, WHICH ARE ONLY EFFECTIVE FOR A MINORITY OF PATIENTS DIAGNOSED WITH THE CONDITIONS THEY WERE DEVELOPED TO TREAT, BEING USED "OFF-LABEL" AT ALL, GIVEN THE SERIOUS RISKS??? EVEN MORE IMPORTANTLY, WHY ARE THEY IN WIDESPREAD USE???   

Jon McClellan claimed I had no say in what he was doing as my son's doctor---although my son was not in any condition to give Informed Consent, and his "assent" was coerced.  My son was told he would not, "get better" and "would not get to go home," if he did not take the drugs given to him.   So he took the drugs, only he never "got better," he was in fact disabled physically and cognitively impaired by the drugs.  My son says, "They stole my intelligence, mom;" and asked in agony, "How could they take so much from me, mom?"  No answer provides any comfort...

Doctors who lie to and mislead patients and parents whose patients develop iatrogenic illnesses and become disabled by the known, documented effects of psychiatric "treatment;" should lose their medical license and be criminally prosecuted.  ( it's not the patient's or the parent's fault that psychiatrists have been lying to and misinforming one another and other medical professionals about the actual direct effects of neuroleptic drugs! ) 

When serious and well-documented risks are denied, or are not shared in an open and forthright manner, it is unethical; such dishonesty is not the behavior of someone who values patient trust, or the Hippocratic Oath or is ethically seeking an Informed Consent for treatment.  When these risks are not even shared with the patient or a parent and the patient subsequently develops iatrogenic illness and/or disability, the "doctor" or other prescriber, often attributes these adverse effects (the drug's effects) to the patient's "diagnosis;" and do not report the adverse effects to the FDA database adverse events--even fatalities caused by the drugs are not required!  This begs the question, WHY are we purposely not collecting the very information needed to ethically and accurately assess risk vs benefit for FDA approved drugs?

Psychiatrists who lie to their patients, family members, and the general public, should not be trusted with special authority OR be granted special Police Powers to detain patients!  They certainly should not have the broad authority granted by the legislation passed with their "advocacy," strengthening Civil Commitment Laws.  It is ludicrous: A profession that has historically practiced "medicine" without honoring the Ethical Guidelines for Informed Consent of the American Medical Association; does not seem to value ethical research standards; and regularly deprives patients of their Human Rights in violation of the Nuremberg Code is granted broad authority including Police Powers to detain patients unwilling to be subjected to psychiatric "treatment." This broad authority allows psychiatrists to have people adjudicated in order to legally affix a diagnostic label and "treat" people who do not want to be treated. 

People who are vulnerable due to experiencing a crisis who may have difficulty communicating or be difficult to understand; people who may have difficulty distinguishing what is real and imaginary; and people who need help staying safe when in an emotional crisis need compassion and assistance from people who are HONEST with them and in telling others about their difficulties!  It is patently absurd that a "medical specialty" reliant upon manipulation and methods of social control to coerce a patient and their family member's cooperation to maintain treatment compliance; continues to wield authority and power that it has abused.  It is simply foolish to blindly trust any profession; it is criminal to grant legal authority to professionals who use deceit and coercion as tools to control vulnerable people in distress.

Thus far, bio-psychiatry has done nothing to earn the trust it has been granted "legally."  Psychiatrists and other medical professionals who fail to warn patients or guardians about the well known direct adverse effects of neuroleptic drugs, in cases where the patient experiences permanent disability are guilty of felony assault.  When the patient dies as a result of this "treatment," it is the crime of Criminally Negligent Manslaughter; Homicide.  Why is it that when the perpetrators are psychiatrists, no criminal charges are brought against them; they are allowed to continue practicing medicine and even be Federally Funded to conduct RESEARCH on vulnerable people.    

How in the hell did psychiatry determine that criminal conduct, is acceptable, that coercion and prevarication can be used in Standard Clinical Practice to gain "treatment compliance?" Using dishonesty and coercion in the practice of "medicine" does not change the nature of the acts themselves--lying is still being dishonest and coercion is still a social control strategy; a manipulation of vulnerable people; calling these tactics "treatment strategies" does not in fact change the nature of the acts themselves; much less make them ethical medical practices! Stating that psychiatric drugs are "safe and effective" in spite of evidence to the contrary, does not make the drugs safe or effective either.

I may have been naive, and regrettably, I was way too trusting in mental health professionals in my pursuit to get appropriate treatment that would effectively help my son.  Over the past 20 years, I have witnessed  more crimes committed by mental health and social service professionals than I ever witnessed during my misspent youth on the streets of Seattle.  Due to my experiences, I can assure you, I am no longer naive or trusting .  I wonder if I am overly cynical, skeptical, or just too freaking angry from being lied to and disrespected by professionals with a lack of professional ethics or a moral compass?  What is the appropriate response for a MadMother who bore witness to the Human Rights crimes that disabled my once brilliant son under the guise of "medical treatment?"

Andreasen Drops a Bombshell

via Pharmagossip

Antipsychotics and brain shrinkage - Certified Fraud Examiner Andy Prough comments

Andy Prough is a Certified Fraud Examiner who has been investigating fraud and abuse in healthcare settings since 1992. Andy completed his professional training with the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, and has gone on to complete specialized training in healthcare fraud and investigating conflicts of interest. Andy is the Vice President Elect of the Austin Chapter of Fraud Examiners. He has been very active with the state legislature, most recently serving on legislative advisory committees on the rights of children in foster care, and on the rights of families under investigation by Child Protective Services. Andy has also served on numerous state agency working groups and committees, including recent work with the Texas Dept. of Mental Health and Mental Retardation advisory committees on restricting the use of physical restraint and emergency medications in state mental hospitals. Recent reports by the Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General, by the Texas Comptroller's Office, and by numerous federal government agencies indicate that healthcare fraud is a significant, increasing problem in our society, costing the US billions per year. Through specialized training and experience, Andy has developed professional skills in the investigation of whistleblower claims of fraud against government healthcare agencies.

Source: http://www.austinacfe.com/andy.htm

A recent piece in PharmaGossip looking at Robert Whitaker's blog: here prompted a comment from Andy Prough.

Here it is in full:

Hi Robert,

I'm a big fan, having read everything you publish (sometimes several times, in order to understand the nature of the damage). 

You've brought up some great questions here, related to Andreason's study. And clearly, you predicted this revelation yourself quite a few years ago when you first published Mad in America. 

I think the bigger question is whether the manufacturers will be held liable? They've had the same information for at least as long as you have. What happens when the corporate whistleblowers start coming forward, showing evidence of Big Pharma board meetings at which brain shrinkage among juveniles was discussed and discarded? How big will the bill be under the False Claims Act? Fines of $11,000 per incident and triple damages can add up quick. 


parts of this article were first published on June 1, 2011 with the title "Let's be real, there already exists ample data"