PRESS RELEASE

Date: 4-9-03
Contact:

Patricia Weathers, President Parents for Label & Drug Free Education, State
of New York (845) 677-8115

Sheila Matthews, Vice President Parents for Label & Drug Free Education,
State of Connecticut (203) 966-8419

 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

A New Federal Law, The Child Medication Safety Act (H.R. 1170) Would
Prohibit Schools From Coercing Parents to Drug their Children.

Who Could Oppose That?

The fact that a group called "Children and Adults with Attention Deficit
Disorder" (CHADD) has rallied their troops to oppose a new federal bill
called the "Child Medication Safety Act 2003" should come as no surprise to
anyone who is familiar with this organization.   The bill, entitled H.R.
1170, simply states that parents should not be coerced into drugging their
children.   One must wonder how an organization claiming to work with
parents, could ever disagree and oppose a measure which has been enacted to
protect parents from coerced psychiatric drugging.   Perhaps the reason is
that CHADD is funded by the pharmaceutical companies that promote the very
drugs being forced upon parents across the nation.  In response to the new
federal law, CHADD has claimed that only a "handful" of highly publicized
and isolated events of such coercion have occurred.  Surely CHADD must be
aware that the issue is such a national concern, that already 4 states have
had to pass laws to prevent parents from being forced to drug their children
(Connecticut, Illinois, Minnesota and Virginia ).  In 2003 alone, 15 more
states have introduced similar laws including Arizona, Hawaii, Texas,
Alaska, Colorado, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New York,
Vermont, Michigan, Texas and West Virginia.

So much for their theory of a "handful" of highly publicized events.  What
does CHADD think?  That legislators across the nation went to all the
trouble to enact laws simply based on a few parents horror stories?

If one cares to look deep enough, there are some issues about CHADD that
could explain their motivation.  For example,  the U.S. Drug Enforcement
Administration has pointed out the conflict of interest in their 1995 report
on Methylphenidate (Ritalin) which stated, "It has recently come to the
attention of the DEA, that Ciba-Geigy (the then manufacturer of the
methylphenidate product marketed under the brand name Ritalin) contributed
$748,000 to CHADD from 1991 to 1994.  The DEA has concerns that the depth of
the financial relationship with the manufacturer was not well-known by the
public..."

 Today, CHADD continues to receive money from the drug companies.

Even more to the point at hand, the same report further states,  "Of
particular concern is that most of the ADHD literature prepared for the
public consumption by CHADD and other groups and available to parents, does
not address the abuse potential or actual abuse of methylphenidate.
Instead, methylphenidate (usually referred to as Ritalin by these groups) is
routinely portrayed as a benign, mild substance that is not associated with
abuse or serious side effects.  In reality however, there is an abundance of
scientific literature which indicates that methylphenidate shares the same
abuse potential as other Schedule II stimulants."

The only issue that any organization should be concerned with is a parent's
right to chose, and a parents' right to informed consent.   CHADD and pro
mental health groups do not apply the needed information to parents, not
about the subjectivity of the disorder (ADHD which has no scientific
evidence to validate it as a physical abnormality) or about the dangers of
the drugs being pawned off on millions of our children.   It is hard to
imagine any organization claiming to have the interest of parents and
children's rights, expressing opposition over this issue. After all, H.R.
1170 would ultimately strengthen parental rights and protect children from
being forced to take cocaine like drugs as a condition of attending public
school.

The basic truth is that not one of these mental health coalition members
that oppose H.R. 1170 took any pro-active action on the state level to curb
the massive problem that is occurring.  In fact, parents initiated each
state law, stemming from the abuses by the same coalition members now
opposed to H.R. 1170.  In addition, at each State hearing these same
coalition members opposed the actions.

Teachers are not instruments to promote mental health research.  Teachers
function to recognize learning styles and provide appropriate instructions
based on each child's basic educational need. The mental Health Coalition's
position that teacher are a vital part in providing observations to the
diagnosing professionals cannot be more dangerous.  This approach has been a
complete failure.  Effective language based approaches to behavior is the
part in which the teacher role exists.  After all communication directly
affects behavior.  There should be no underestimating, that the United
States is facing a huge issue when it comes to the use of Amphetamines and
Methylphenidate on school age children.  This practice is stemming from
somewhere.  The evidence points directly to the commingling of mental health
and education.  CHADD and it's mental health coalition members have a direct
link to the promotion of the labels and drug treatment they recommend.  It
is not surprising that they object to H.R. 1170, after all, their livelihood
is at stake.

For More Information visit our website: www.ablechild.org