The Dispatch has an article on the front page this morning about TeenScreen, a program the Pickerington school district is using to prompt students to ''divulge anxiety, suicidal thoughts, drug use, obsession with hand-washing and more''.
This is a terrible idea.
The program is voluntary, and parents currently need to give their permission for their teen to take the test. However, the possibility exists that the permission could become passive, which means parents will need to opt-out rather than explicitly give permission.
But my objects go far beyond this. TeenScreen, in my opinion, represents an intrusion into the personal lives of teenagers that is unwarranted and belongs with the family.
The article states that the test doesn't diagnose problems but connects kids to the help they need. What's the difference?
What happens if a teen's test results show a mental problem? Does it go on her record? What if she refuses treatment? Can it be forced on her?
Here's another problem I have with it: I gather from the article treatment is either drugs or counseling. I believe children are prescribed way too many drugs for the ''problem'' of just being kids. The drugs commonly prescribed to children are quite toxic, and kids who shoot up schools (like Columbine) are usually on them. The FDA finally put a black box warning on the SSRI antidepressants noting that they can actually CAUSE suicidal thoughts and behavior.
Here's something else: counseling is almost a requirement in our society, but have any studies been done to show it is effective? Yeah, it feels good to tell someone your problems and have them agree that the people in your life are louses, but does it make anyone better? And can't you get that from a friend for free?
Phyllis Schlafly, a conservative commentator, wrote an article in 2004 about such a program titled ''No Child Left Unmedicated''. Read it and be frightened. http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/phyllisschlafly/2004/11/23/13742.html
According to Ms. Schlafly, in the Columbia University pilot program for TeenScreen, one-third tested ''positive'' for mental health problems. Is it really that many kids who have problems, or is the problem the test?
Also, according to www.teenscreentruth.com, TeenScreen has an 84% false positive rate. 84%!!!! It also states ''As far as the reliability of screening, in 2004, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) stated that they ''found no evidence that screening for suicide risk reduces suicide attempts or mortality.'' Furthermore, they found ''insufficient evidence that treatment of those at high risk reduces suicide attempts or mortality.'' ''
It's deplorable that the PLSD is hurting for money, space and has declining test scores, yet is able to find resources for this test.
This is my formal notice to the Pickerington school district that you do not have permission to test any child of mine for mental problems.
This is a terrible idea.
The program is voluntary, and parents currently need to give their permission for their teen to take the test. However, the possibility exists that the permission could become passive, which means parents will need to opt-out rather than explicitly give permission.
But my objects go far beyond this. TeenScreen, in my opinion, represents an intrusion into the personal lives of teenagers that is unwarranted and belongs with the family.
The article states that the test doesn't diagnose problems but connects kids to the help they need. What's the difference?
What happens if a teen's test results show a mental problem? Does it go on her record? What if she refuses treatment? Can it be forced on her?
Here's another problem I have with it: I gather from the article treatment is either drugs or counseling. I believe children are prescribed way too many drugs for the ''problem'' of just being kids. The drugs commonly prescribed to children are quite toxic, and kids who shoot up schools (like Columbine) are usually on them. The FDA finally put a black box warning on the SSRI antidepressants noting that they can actually CAUSE suicidal thoughts and behavior.
Here's something else: counseling is almost a requirement in our society, but have any studies been done to show it is effective? Yeah, it feels good to tell someone your problems and have them agree that the people in your life are louses, but does it make anyone better? And can't you get that from a friend for free?
Phyllis Schlafly, a conservative commentator, wrote an article in 2004 about such a program titled ''No Child Left Unmedicated''. Read it and be frightened. http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/phyllisschlafly/2004/11/23/13742.html
According to Ms. Schlafly, in the Columbia University pilot program for TeenScreen, one-third tested ''positive'' for mental health problems. Is it really that many kids who have problems, or is the problem the test?
Also, according to www.teenscreentruth.com, TeenScreen has an 84% false positive rate. 84%!!!! It also states ''As far as the reliability of screening, in 2004, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) stated that they ''found no evidence that screening for suicide risk reduces suicide attempts or mortality.'' Furthermore, they found ''insufficient evidence that treatment of those at high risk reduces suicide attempts or mortality.'' ''
It's deplorable that the PLSD is hurting for money, space and has declining test scores, yet is able to find resources for this test.
This is my formal notice to the Pickerington school district that you do not have permission to test any child of mine for mental problems.