CDC Medical Child Abuse Report: Ten Thousand Plus Toddlers Prescribed Psychotropic Drugs

Psychotropic Drug Regimens are Medical Child Abuse

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention an unreasonable number of children under the age of three are the recipients of psychotic medications. This information coupled with last month's New York Times report that 6 million children are under treatment for psychosomatic disorders raises the question of professional misconduct.

Because the FDA has no authority to regulate the practice of medicine, these subjective childhood mental illness determinations strongly indicate that some physicians have been abusing the country's carte blanche prescription delivery system.

This laissez-faire marketplace has been beneficial to pharmaceutical manufacturers and drug prescribers but not to the children who have no say in the matter.

The behavior-altering drugs under scrutiny are not FDA authorized for use in children under the age of six but physicians may recommend medications outside their intended use.  It has long been verified that these Class II substances pose significant risks to patients, especially children.

Although troubled by the data, the CDC offered no suggestions on how to dissuade physicians from approving dangerous substances for three-year olds and other children.

Doping minors, many of whom are state wards, for economic gain is an indefensible enterprise. The Department of Health and Human Services reports that in 2011 there were 400,500 children under state protection available for research projects.

Consideration: If physicians were charged with medical child abuse these predatory prescription practices would cease.

Medical Child Abuse References:

"Psychotropic Drugs: What Are They? "—ABC News—2011

" Atypical Antipsychotic Use Among Medicaid-Insured Children and Adolescents: Duration, Safety, and Monitoring Implications " —Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology—April 2014

" Psychotropic Meds for Georgia Youth in Foster Care: Who Decides ? " — Georgia Supreme Court Committee on Justice for Children—January 2011

" Payment of clinical research subjects " — The Journal of Clinical Investigation—2005

" The Justina Pelletier Medical Experiment "— Daily Kos—April 2014

" What Killed Rebecca Riley "—60 Minutes—2007

Watchdog Says Report of 10,000 Toddlers on ADHD Drugs Tip of the Iceberg —274,000 0-1 Year Olds and 370,000 Toddlers Prescribed Psychiatric Drugs— Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR)—May 2014

Medical Child Abuse Perpetrators

Who are the medical child abuse perpetrators?

By current definition, the child's parents or guardians are the guilty parties. The term medical child abuse was originated by pediatrician Carole Jenny and her psychiatrist husband, Thomas A. Roesler.

In the Jenny/Roesler opinion, parents or caregivers are able to trick doctors into performing unnecessary surgery and prescribing superfluous medications. There is no doubt that some parents manipulate the system but it is not credible that the medical providers are innocent parties in the subterfuge because they establish the diagnosis and are compensated for services rendered.

Until such time physicians are charged in tandem with parents, medical child abuse practices will continue.

Medical child abuse was the subject of a 60 Minutes report in 2007 following the psychotropic drug-induced death of four-year old Rebecca Riley. The parents were charged and convicted of murder— Dr. Kayoko Kifuji was given immunity in exchange for her testimony. Dr. Kifuji's attorney said that his client was practicing mainstream psychiatry. 60 Minutes, after reviewing Rebecca's medical records, noted that Dr. Kifuji had her patient on ten medications per day.

The latest example of medical child abuse allegations involves Oregon Senate hopeful Dr. Monica Wheby . Dr. Wheby is one of several physicians of interest in the Katherine Parker indictment because she performed tethered-cord surgery on the defendant's son. Tethered cord surgery is recognized by Legacy Health, Dr. Wheby's employer. The cost billed to insurers is approximately $23,000. Because she is an employee, Dr. Wheby says she is not remunerated for her surgeries but Dr. Wheby would not have a job if she did not enhance revenue for the hospital.

How Somatic Symptom Disorders Relate to Medical Child Abuse

Patients complaining of pain and other maladies of unexplained etiology are thought to be suffering from somatic symptom disorders. This terminology when applied to minors is interpreted to mean that parents are making their children sick with subliminal signals. Valid or not, this diagnosis is employed by interested parties throughout the county to persuade juvenile courts to revoke parental rights.

Once under state jurisdiction, seized children may be subject to extreme measures such as alternative medical treatment, psychiatric incarceration, enrollment in clinical trials and psychotropic drug regimens. The Justina Pelletier Medical Experiment is a case in point.

Psychiatrist Allen J. Frances, former chair of the '94 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual warned in 2012 that the somatic symptom disorder, as formalized in DSM-5, is subject to inflated diagnosis and may penalize parents who are:

considered 'excessively concerned' about a child's symptoms. Families caring for children with any chronic illness may be placed at risk of wrongful accusation of 'over-involvement' with their child's symptomatology or of encouraging 'sick role behavior.'

Are Clinical Trials Medical Child Abuse?

The National Institutes of Health reports that there are 13,504 children's clinical trials completed, in progress or terminated. In 2011 there were 400,500 children under states' protective care available for research.

Test subjects are recruited by advertising or are pulled from state agency welfare rolls. Because the government does not provide the data, it is not known how many children under state jurisdiction are utilized for experimentation. It is known that state agencies through various medical providers, are prescribing psychotropic drugs to their wards.

Depending on the type of study, clinical trials can be punitive and especially to an already stressed, out-of-environment child. The FDA defines clinical trials as studies on human volunteers but urges parents to consider enrolling their children for experimentation projects. Payments for participation in clinical trial research may be viewed here .

The National Institute of Mental Health initiated its Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trial of Riluzole in Pediatric Bipolar Disorder in 2008. The 5-6 month experiment, if it had been completed, would have involved 80 children, ages 9-17 who were exhibiting bipolar/anxiety symptoms. During Phases 1 and 2 of the trial the children would be confined to the Pediatric Behavioral Health Unit. Research protocol: blood and urine samples, reduction and cessation of current medications, then application of either a placebo or the test product. Riluzole is currently prescribed for ALS patients

One of the inclusion criteria was that the enrollees had failed to respond to earlier atypical [off-label] antipsychotic medication clinical trials.

By any rational judgment clinical trials and psychotropic doping are examples of medical child abuse.

References:

" Atypical Antipsychotic Use Among Medicaid-Insured Children and Adolescents: Duration, Safety, and Monitoring Implications " —Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology—April 2014

" Psychotropic Meds for Georgia Youth in Foster Care: Who Decides ? " — Georgia Supreme Court Committee on Justice for Children—January 2011

"Payment of clinical research subjects" — The Journal of Clinical Investigation—2005

Dr. Alice Newton—Medical Child Abuse—Justina Pelletier

Dr. Alice Newton, Director of Boston Children's Hospital child protection team, determined in February 2013 that the institution's newly-admitted patient, Justina Pelletier, was a victim of medical child abuse .

Those unfamiliar with this terminology might think that a doctor or doctors had provided injurious care. In one respect they would be correct but the most important aspect of the charge is that the parents or the child's caregiver were the instigators.  The psychiatric community posits that some  guardians create disease symptoms to persuade the medical community to act inappropriately.

The medical child abuse allegation is specious but it is the basis for child custody hearings and suspension of parental rights throughout the country. Because many adjudicators, like Judge Johnston, gag order the proceedings the number of children taken from parents remains confidential.

The reason the public knows about the Justina Pelletier custody dispute is the parents disobeyed the court's order.

Once the child is under state jurisdiction the protection agency may then legally place its ward in clinical trials. It is not uncommon for children under state jurisdiction to be prescribed psychotropic drugs to help them adapt to their new circumstances. It is not known whether BCH has Justina on behavior-altering substances but since she has been incarcerated in psychiatric facilities, part of her
regimen would likely include these calming but potentially harmful agents.

Are Dr. Alice Newton and Judge Joseph Johnston Guilty of Medical Child Abuse?

The Boston Globe's extensive coverage of the Justina Pelletier case raise troubling questions on the part of the hospital's care and treatment of their patient. One of which is, why did the evaluation staff immediately dismiss her entering mitochondrial diagnosis and want to initiate treatment for a psychological disorder? 

Unknown to the parents, BCH had petitioned the state for custody based on Dr. Newton's medical child abuse theory and as improbable as it may seem, these events occurred in a three day period.

The Pelletier intervention/custody papers filed by Boston Children's Hospital under Dr. Newton's name alleged that mitochondrial disease is a suspect illness. Dr. Newton also claimed that the cecostomy button surgery performed on Justina by Tufts Medical was an unwarranted procedure. These are misleading complaints because Boston Children's Hospital treats mitochondrial disorders and performs cecostomy button procedures. Judge Johnston based his opinion on refutable and easily obtainable information.

Dr. Newton, as the newspaper points out, never interviewed the parents or her patient before making her custody petition. Judge Johnston also did not choose to meet with fourteen-year old Justina before separating her from her parents.

While under Judge Johnston's watch, Boston Children's Hospital was allowed to confine Justina to its psychiatric ward for eight months. In fact the court gave the hospital carte blanche.  The child protection team altered Justina's medications, forbade contact with prior Tufts Medical physicians, severely limited parental visits, and provided no educational or religious support. The Globe cites five other examples of Boston Children's Hospital attempts to take custody of their patients through the juvenile court system.

Dr. Newton told Judge Johnston that Justina was exhibiting symptoms of a psychological illness induced by her parents. In Dr. Newton's opinion Justina was suffering from somatic symptom disorder. Dr. Newton's snap—somatic symptom disorder—judgment should have given the court cause for concern because SSD requires long-term evaluation to arrive at a probable diagnosis.

Psychiatrist Allen J. Frances, former chair of the '94 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual warned in 2012 that the somatic symptom disorder, as formalized in DSM-5, is subject to inflated diagnosis and may penalize parents who are:

considered 'excessively concerned' about a child's symptoms. Families caring for children with any chronic illness may be placed at risk of wrongful accusation of 'over-involvement' with their child's symptomatology or of encouraging 'sick role behavior.'

Because there is no evidence to support Dr. Newton's allegations or Judge Johnston's rulings these professionals have diminished credibility and should not be allowed to handle child custody issues.

There is a back story as to why Boston Children's Hospital is in the business of seizing children. Some medical child abuse critics have suggested a profit—fill-the-beds—motive but this charge would be difficult to prove.

The Globe reports that the Justina Medical Experiment venue is changing. Justina will be held by the JRI Susan Wayne Center for Excellence in Thompson, CT., but Massachusetts will remain her custodian. The Justice Review Institute, owner of the Susan Wayne Center for Excellence, is described as a therapeutic service provider.

Judge Johnston is insistent that Lou and Linda Pelletier receive counseling for their wayward behavior. In all fairness Judge Johnston and Dr. Alice Newton should be required to do the same.

References

The Boston Globe: "A medical collision with a child in the middle"

The Boston Globe: " Frustration on all fronts in struggle over child’s future "

Judge Joseph F. Johnston's "Very Concerning Conduct" in the Justina Pelletier Custody Case

Judges within the Massachusetts Juvenile Court system are expected to:

protect children from abuse and neglect, to promote opportunities for children to reside in a safe, stable, permanent family environment, to strengthen families...and to decide all cases fairly and impartially with dedication, integrity and professionalism.

From the information presented by The Boston Globe and other sources, Judge Joseph Johnston has not acted judiciously in the matter of Justina Pelletier. Because he had issued a gag order, Judge Johnston trusted that his rulings would remain a private affair.

In an unexpected countermove Lou and Linda Pelletier, Justina's parents, violated Judge Johnston's suppression of speech dictate and chose to go public after attempts to regain custody of their daughter failed. Because Joseph F. Johnston has life-time tenure it is unlikely that he will lose his judgeship but he is deservedly facing the court of public opinion.

The Justina Pelletier Medical Child Abuse Claim

When presented with medical child abuse allegations by Boston Children's Hospital in February 2013 Judge Johnston did not hesitate to suspend Pelletier parental rights. At dispute: whether Justina Pelletier was suffering from a psychological [Boston Children's Hospital] or medical [Tufts Medical Center] diagnosed disorder. The BCH child protection team led by Dr. Alice Newton told the court that Justina was suffering from a somatic symptom disorder .

If Judge Johnston or his staff had researched medical literature he would have known that the somatoform disorder cannot be diagnosed in a three-day period and that this novel mental condition is highly subject to misdiagnosis .

To further prove her point on parental medical child abuse, Dr. Newton referenced the cecostomy button surgery performed on Justina at Tufts Medical. An inquiring judge would have asked whether cecostomy button surgery is performed at BCH. Though unasked, the answer is yes .

The Dr. Flores mentioned in the previous link is Alejandro Flores, one of Justina Pelletier's former Tufts physicians. Dr. Flores' research and opinion on cecostomy surgery can be viewed here . The criticized cecostomy-button procedure is performed in hospitals throughout the country. All one has to do is check the web..

Custody hearings based on nebulous medical opinions should require an outside advocate but Judge Johnston did not appoint a guardian ad litem until December which was 10-months into Justina's psychiatric confinement.

Juvenile Judge Joseph Johnston knew or should have known that Boston Children's Hospital had a dubious history of medical child abuse complaints before the court because that point was highlighted in The Globe articles.

Parents, e.g. the Pelletiers, are not allowed to violate judges' orders and publicize judicial actions. When they do they can expect the court's wrath.

Judge Johnston could have rescinded his decisions in view of the facts but instead continues to punish the Pelletier family. The latest threat: the state may maintain custody of Justina until her eighteen birthday. In this disposition Judge Johnston displays his irritation by stating that the parents' public conduct is very concerning. True or false, the complaint is a ruse. The singular issue before the court is Justina Pelletier and her health has not improved while under BCH care and Judge Johnston's supervision.

By all accounts there is no evidence to support Dr. Newton's medical child abuse allegations. It is time for Judge Joseph Johnston to prove his worth and free Justina Pelletier from state custody.

References

The Boston Globe: "A medical collision with a child in the middle"
The Boston Globe: "Frustration on all fronts in struggle over child’s future"