Saturday, January 14, 2017


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Obama is still accusing Israel of being the barrier to peace, as he refers to “Netanyahu’s government policies” with regards to “Israeli settlements.” He even went so far as to imply that friendship with Israel is adding to the problem:
“If that’s what qualifies as a good friend, then I think that we will see a worsening situation over time.”
Nowhere does Obama condemn the goal of Hamas, the PA and Fatah: to obliterate the state of Israel, as stated in their charters. Nowhere does he refer to the fact that Israel has already given back 96 percent of the lands it won in past defensive wars. He says nothing about the fact that these concessions only emboldened Israel’s jihadist enemies to attack innocent Israelis even more.
Netanyahu has accused the Obama administration of colluding with the Palestinians when it abstained last month from voting on a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning settlements. On Tuesday, Netanyahu reiterated that claim, saying Israel had “solid information” that proved the U.S. was behind the drafting of the resolution.
Right after the passing of the UN anti-settlement Resolution 2334, leaked documents revealed that the resolution was was orchestrated by the Obama administration. As Obama packs up to leave the White House, he leaves behind a legacy of betraying Israel and rallying support for the Palestinian jihad. As the clock ticks on his presidency, let’s hope Obama’s propensity to lash out against Israel does not lead to still more rash actions. Remember that the virulently anti-Semitic former President Jimmy Carter called on Obama to unilaterally recognise Palestinian statehood before leaving office.

“Obama Warns Against Support for Israeli Settlements”, New York Times, January 10, 2017:
JERUSALEM — U.S. President Barack Obama warned in an interview broadcast Tuesday that “unfettered support” for Israel’s settlement policies would lead to a “worsening situation” over time between Israelis and Palestinians.
The interview with Israeli TV program “Uvda” comes 10 days before Obama, who has been an outspoken critic of Israeli settlements, hands over to President-elect Donald Trump, who is expected to pursue a starkly different approach to the conflict. Trump’s election has buoyed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his pro-settler government.
“If the notion is that unfettered support for Israel or more specifically support for the Netanyahu government’s policies — no matter what they are, no matter how inimical they may be to the prospects for peace — if that’s what qualifies as a good friend, then I think that we will see a worsening situation over time,” Obama said during the interview, filmed in Washington last week.
Netanyahu has accused the Obama administration of colluding with the Palestinians when it abstained last month from voting on a U.N. Security Council resolution condemning settlements. On Tuesday, Netanyahu reiterated that claim, saying Israel had “solid information” that proved the U.S. was behind the drafting of the resolution.
The White House has denied the allegations, and Israel has not publicly provided evidence to back them up.
Obama defended the abstention in the interview, saying “I believe it was the best move for peace.”
Nearly 600,000 settlers now live in the West Bank and east Jerusalem, territories the Palestinians want as part of a future state. Much of the international community as well as the Palestinians view settlements as illegitimate and an obstacle to peace. Netanyahu routinely dismisses international criticism of the settlements, saying the conflict predates them.
While Trump has indicated a willingness to help broker peace, his election platform did not mention a Palestinian state and he has taken steps that show he plans to side with Israel. He has appointed an ambassador to Israel with deep ties to the settlements and he has pledged to relocate the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, a move likely to inflame tensions and anger the Palestinians….


 Here's Why Obama Never Intended to Create Jobs
 Obama’s farewell: a soap opera for liberals 
and minority pawns
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
Here are a few snippets from Obama’s goodbye speech to the American people:
“Going forward, we must uphold laws against discrimination…But laws alone won’t be enough. Hearts must change…For blacks and other minorities, it means tying our own struggles for justice to the challenges that a lot of people in this country face – the refugee, the immigrant, the rural poor, the transgender American, and also the middle-aged white man…For white Americans, it means acknowledging that the effects of slavery and Jim Crow didn’t suddenly vanish in the ‘60s; that when minority groups voice discontent, they’re not just engaging in reverse racism or practicing political correctness…”
The question is: do people want empty sentimental sop from Obama or do they want action?

Well, it’s too late for action, because Obama’s presidency is done. And it makes no difference whether, as a result of his final speech, people view him as a great and honorable man who did his best, or as a con artist, because again, he’s on his way out the door.
Needless to say, his supporters were deeply moved by his words. They want to be moved. They don’t want to look at uncomfortable facts.
For example, let’s go to CNN, which is going to offer the best possible interpretation of economic indicators for black people in America:
“Blacks have seen their median income stagnate, along with the rest of the population…Median income [for blacks] stood at $35,398 in 2014, just a touch below where it was in 2009, when Obama took office. But it has climbed back from [a low of] $33,926 in 2011…The Great Recession sent many Americans into poverty, but blacks were hit particularly hard. The [poverty] rate for blacks hit 27.6% in 2011, nearly 2 percentage points higher than what it was when Obama was sworn in. It has since receded to 26.2%.”
If you call that a ringing endorsement of Obama’s performance as president, you’re in need of help.
Let me put it this way. For all Obama’s talk about racism and prejudice and justice, Americans of every description and color have been willing, for a long time, to work alongside each other and get along — IF THERE IS WORK TO BE HAD. DECENT PAYING WORK.
Obama is, in effect, trying to move back to another time, before that was the case.
When he was elected, in 2008, during the recession, his closest advisors thought he would come out swinging and do everything possible to create jobs. That was the number-one concern of Americans.
They were absolutely shocked when he opted for Obamacare out of the gate, as his first priority. And look what it has led to: a massive mess.
Gazing at his presidency head-on, without excuses, it’s clear that Obama chose to IGNORE jobs. He didn’t want to make a move in that arena.
The answer is stark and simple: the globalist agenda forbids the creation of new jobs, and Obama is a globalist. He was plucked out of nowhere by Ted Kennedy and mentored by Zbigniew Brzezinski, the co-founder of the Trilateral Commission, along with David Rockefeller.

The Trilateral Commission is the single most important globalist force in the world. And of the 87 members of the Commission who live in the US, Obama appointed 11 of them to key posts in his administration.
This is no accident. This is intentional.
The idea that Obama would launch a no-holds-barred effective crusade against corporations leaving the US and throwing huge numbers of Americans (of all colors) out of work, is laughable. Look at the record, if you need verification. It never happened. It was never going to happen.
The man can talk forever about discrimination and prejudice and social justice, but those words fall flat, because he has never taken action to correct the true crime—which is there for all to see: Globalists are committed to torpedoing economies.
Obama can be a master of overly sentimental rhetoric—but this is merely a diversion.
And aside from the massive loss of jobs, if he has been talking about the inner cities of America, he should have focused on the enduring disasters that destroy life in those places and hold law-abiding citizens hostage: gangs, the murders they commit, their other crimes, drugs, and the absence of fathers in homes. That’s where he would have started. And he would have launched solutions.
But he didn’t.
In various ways, over and over, he simply said: “We’re all in this together.” That and $2 will get you a bus ticket in Chicago.
‘We’re all in this together’ doesn’t destroy pernicious globalist trade treaties or create jobs for people who are willing and ready to go to work and support their families.
‘We’re all in this together’ doesn’t eliminate gangs, killings, drugs, and highly dangerous neighborhoods.
‘We’re all in this together’ doesn’t start a national program of urban farms in inner cities, and suddenly give people the opportunity to grow their own fresh clean food, eat it, and make money by selling the excess.
‘We’re all in this together’ doesn’t help create a culture in which fathers deserting their families is a cardinal offense.
‘We’re all in this together’ does pour a pleasant syrup of “deep concern” on the heads of people who, above all, want to appear virtuous. These are the people who can be led to believe in an imitation of actual solutions and action.
They are content to think that a leader who espouses a lofty ideal has done enough.
Everyone else should put the ideal into action. If they don’t, it’s not the leader’s fault. He flew the banner. He recited poetics. He wanted a better world. He was operating at a higher level—and unfortunately, the bulk of humanity couldn’t grasp its profundity.
That notion and $2.75 will get you a ride on a New York subway.
This article originally appeared at Want to free your mind from the Matrix? Check out The Matrix Revealed.



republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
 When human beings become commodities, as they have over the past two to three decades with the changing values of Western civilization, we begin to use human beings for purposes other than those purposes for which they are created. We start to use human beings in biomedical research… for instance, we use fresh aborted fetuses on a daily basis in biomedical research. Scientists used embryos and women’s eggs for stem cell research, and from there we move on to exploiting human beings for actual medical therapies. Cell lines that were made from electively aborted human fetuses are commonly used to manufacture vaccines, biologics, and now even cosmetics. While organ transplantation can be done ethically and morally, the huge demand for organ supply has driven organ transplantation and organ harvest really off the cliff, and many practices in these areas have now become quite questionable ethically.

Published on Dec 25, 2012
A talk by Dr. Theresa Deisher, President of Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
By Anita Hoge
January 14, 2017
How the “CHOICE” Fix Won't Fix Common Core
Is There Such A Thing As A Parallel School System? Looking at the plans puzzling together for a Trump Presidency, education is front and foremost on many parents’ minds. Parent warriors have become concerned to the point of being totally stressed over the appointment of billionaire Betsy DeVos for Secretary of Education. Why is this?
President-Elect Trump promised a vision of life without Common Core—
A day of looking forward to our kids not being manipulated with the behavioral conditioning processes of teacher-trained Skinnerian techniques;
A day without government data mining our children and inputting their private behavioral data over to the Feds.
Is our battle over yet? Can we rest assured that Donald Trump will keep his promise to rid our schools of all of the Common Core baggage? Are solid academics on the horizon, again?
Unfortunately this just doesn't seem to be happening. President-Elect Trump has jumped off the TRUMP TRAIN and he has jumped on the phony CHOICE TRAIN. Keep in mind that Vice President-Elect Mike Pence is a pro-“CHOICE” Governor, and he muffled the true spirit of academic freedom by cleverly rebranding the Common Core standards in Indiana:
"Indiana governor Mike Pence has made a serious miscalculation on what could easily become the sleeper issue of the 2016 presidential campaign, Common Core. After dramatically withdrawing Indiana from participation in Common Core, Pence was poised to become a hero to the grassroots movement resisting this egregious bid for federal control of America’s traditionally independent and locally run education system. Instead, Pence has created the illusion of quality and independence, while installing second-rate standards that are little more than Common Core rebranded." [Source]
And on the charter school “CHOICE” agenda Governor Pence has pushed charters:
"But Pence has a robust record on the issue. As governor, he pushed through the most significant increase in charter school funding in years, according to Chalkbeat Indiana. Pence worked with the legislature to create a $10 million grant fund that would offer an extra $500 per student to charters that post better outcomes than traditional public schools. And if Pence had his way, the funding would have been even more robust—he initially pitched a $1,500 per charter school student increase." [Source]
Since the election, every new word coming from our President-Elect is beginning to sound a bit too familiar. It reminds us of the Senator Ted Cruz S 306 legislation that we parents fought when Sen. Ted Cruz was running for President against the TRUMP TRAIN. Not quite the words we wanted to hear from Mr. Trump. This sort of government-sponsored CHOICE sticks in our throats because we know the outcome–more oppression over our children and more Common Core for ALL. [Source]
Do we want this kind of “CHOICE”?? No! This is a false CHOICE, and it is not the pathway that will lead our children to educational excellence. Phony CHOICE is not the answer to American exceptionalism. Government-controlled CHOICE is globalism, not Americanism. That scrap of money tied to the child will determine future ambitions and pathways. It is linked to the government's similarly aligned obsession to create “human capital” – i.e., the government determining the worth or worthlessness of your child as a commodity in the future workforce. Do elected officials realize just how offensive this is to America’s parents? Our children are not “human capital”!
This sort of government-controlled CHOICE is a trap, Mr. Trump. “CHOICE” is a pretty cozy word that assumes freedom. Little do parents understand the tentacles of federal strings that accompany federal assistance. Or, maybe they haven't thought of it in those terms. But, yes, CHOICE is accepting federal assistance. And with that comes the “Have To's”, where all children, parents, teachers, and schools will be forced into the federal government's obsession with domineering over the lives of our little children.
Many advocates of this CHOICE appear to think that killing public education is OK. Betsy DeVos, President-Elect Trump's new pick for Secretary of Education, thinks so. "Detroit Public Schools, she argued, should simply be shut down and the system turned over to charters, or the tax dollars given to parents in the form of vouchers to attend private schools." [Source]
She believes that our public schools are an
“...antiquated, top-down model of education in this country that originated in the 1800s in order to “educate the masses.”
And her CHOICE:
“is beginning to transform to a student-centric model that respects every child’s unique learning style.” [Source]
Well, isn’t this interesting. This is the exact personification of COMMON CORE! ESSA, The Every Student Succeeds Act passed by Congress this past year, legislated this and more. Every child must meet Common Core standards, with digital individualized career plans and diagnostic supports that will help Johnny and Suzy attain government-determined “proficiency” in collectivist style mental health and globalist attitudes, values, beliefs, and dispositions.
But this isn't why the citizens voted for you, Mr. Trump. We want you to STOP COMMON CORE!
Pending Education Secretary DeVos also explains her views that
"Educational choice is an essential part of the solution to our nation’s education challenges, including the greater issue of education inequality in America. The idea that no child should be defined or limited by his or her ZIP code or family’s income is deeply rooted in our movement’s commitment to social justice. Every parent should be free to choose the best educational environment for their children and low-income and minority children are too often the ones without choice. The only way to truly improve and innovate our nation’s system and help these students is through educational choice. The public is recognizing that true choice will break open our nation’s closed education system, encouraging innovation and education entrepreneurs to develop new ways for children to learn and reach their full potential." [All emphases added]
DeVos’s version of CHOICE will certainly “break open,” or better defined, “smash down” the public school system. Is the destruction of local public schools what American citizens voted for? The biggest problem with this DeVos thinking is that Common Core does not allow or encourage academic attainment, nor opportunity for advancement. If her CHOICE is initiated, Common Core remains – because of ESSA. Didn’t we all just vote to get RID of Common Core?
Here is how it will work. DeVos’s fake CHOICE will saddle every school with Common Core that forces individual children to have an individualized personal “plan” to meet those government standards, no matter which ZIP code or school they will attend. And this is the ominous end goal for little Johnny or Susie. It is a new way to learn, but it isn't academics. Social justice is equated with “individuality,” giving way to the forced struggle for ”equity” and molding children into cookie-cutter drones. Inequality in ZIP CODES sounds like re-distribution of wealth, with CHOICE being wielded as the useful tool to get American education nationalized. But that also means a leveling of wealthy ZIP codes to be the same of the inner city. Now, that's equality. That's what socialized CHOICE looks like, and this is what Betsy DeVos is all about!
But is this what President-Elect Trump is all about? Is anyone honestly talking to him about the direful impacts of her freedom-diminishing sort of CHOICE? To date there has been NO discussion of the effects of this CHOICE for every child, not to mention the dreadful longterm effects this will have on communities, taxes, local control, and the market value of local homes and properties.
Common Core + Government CHOICE ? true freedom of choice. It is a pending disaster...the disappearing American dream.
Others driving the CHOO-CHOO CHOICE Train
Jeb Bush announced that the DeVos pick was “outstanding...a passionate change agent to press for a new education vision.” Of course he would say that. She is Chairwoman of the American Federation for Children (AFC), a charter school promotion group, and she is also a board member of Bush’s non-profit Foundation for Excellence in Education (FEE). Bush and his foundation have served as champions for the Common Core standards. [Source]
Oh course, “low energy” Jeb's vision is totally Common Core, artificial CHOICE, and pro-charter schools. When Jeb served as Governor of Florida he was a prominent supporter of the individual data-mining performed on children, with Florida becoming the national model for the collection of personally identifiable information of children. Jeb is also a leader in the change agent/Common Core enablers. His connections, plus his opinion of DeVos for Secretary of Education, give him an inside track to legislation and a soft welcoming chair in future Secretary DeVos’s office. [Source]
Congressman Messer (R-IN), who introduced the Scholarships for Kids Act in 2014, is also a CHOICE enabler. Congressman Messer’s bill is the companion to the bill introduced by Senator Lamar Alexander, who is Republican Chairman on the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee and formerly served as Secretary of Education under President George H.W. Bush.
Senator Alexander, along with Speaker Paul Ryan, pushed through the Reauthorization of No Child Left Behind called ESSA, Every Student Succeeds Act, which codified the Common Core/mental health agenda nationally, effectually making President Obama's Flexibility Waivers law, thus further diluting a real academic education. Note how Senator Alexander stated this about the 2014 Scholarship for Kids Act:
“This is the most ambitious proposal ever to use federal dollars to enable states to expand school choice, and is a real answer to inequality in America, giving more children more opportunity to attend a better school. I look forward to working with Congressman Messer to get this bill through Congress and signed into law.” [Emp. added.]
Of additional concern,
The Scholarship for Kids Act, introduced in the Senate by Senator Lamar Alexander and in the House of Representatives by Rep. Luke Messer, would re-direct existing federal education funding (Title I) to provide up to 11 million scholarships for low-income children. The scholarships created under this bill would follow K-12 low-income children as they attend either the public or private school of their parents’ choice. The money for these scholarships, up to $24 billion a year, would come from existing funds directed towards schools, meaning no new spending and no funds cut from education. [All emphases added] [SOURCE]
Readers, notice that the money goes directly to schools, bypassing state legislatures’ budgets. This is a states’ rights question for sure. The Messer/Alexander bill actually allotted more money than President-Elect Trump's proposed $20 billion for “CHOICE”. Also remember that Rob Goad, aide to Rep. Messer, has been tapped by the Trump campaign to advance this same CHOICE agenda. This pile of money may grow. The Scholarship Act has not been passed but shows the direction of this sort of CHOICE thinking.
The Messer bill aligns to Senator Ted Cruz's bill to include homeschools. Let's look at what the Messer proposed bill would also require: state Common Core standards and tests, provides that parents are able to use that money to pay for private school tuition and fees, supplement their public school or charter school budget, attend a school outside of their district or purchase tutoring services or homeschooling materials. It further
Requires participating states and their local educational agencies to continue to: (1) work toward state academic content and achievement standards; (2) conduct annual assessments of student progress toward those standards; and (3) issue annual report cards of student progress, disaggregated by specified student subgroups, toward those standards.
“No child should have to go to a school where they won’t have a meaningful chance to learn,” said Congressman Luke Messer. “This bill empowers parents with the personal freedom to choose the best learning environment for their child regardless of income. Quality education is the great equalizer in the game of life, and bills like this one, which offer parents a choice, level the playing field.”
Questions for Congressman Messer:
Has Congressman Messer ever explained to taxpayers what "leveling the playing field" means?
Has he explained to school board members and homeowners that pay taxes for public schools how this is a massive redistribution of wealth?
Has he explained that with his fake CHOICE, Title I CHILDREN are not just poor children, and that SCHOOL WIDE encompasses the entire school to have access to CHOICE not just certain poor children?
  Has he explained how the exodus of children out of public schools will eventually kill public education and destroy local districts?
Will he admit that teachers will no longer be hired by the local school district?
Will he try to evade questions about the apparent coming dissolution of elected school boards?

Has he answered penetrating citizen questions about how taxes would be collected and where they would be sent when local neighborhood schools collapse?
Has he addressed the terrible effects this will have on property values when the playing field is leveled, wealth is redistributed, and equity becomes the commitment to social justice agenda of changing the complexion of your entire ZIP code?
I don't think so. So what is this CHOICE all about? Is it about the change necessary to end representative government to move toward globalism? I fear so. . . .
Click here for part -----> 1, 2,


republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:
By Debra Rae

January 14, 2017
Social Emotional Learning in Public Education
At its convention in Washington, D.C. (2016), America’s “largest, richest, brass-knuckled labor union,”[1] the National Education Association, recently passed two new mental health-related resolutions.[2] While addressing mental health in public education isn’t new, the burgeoning “field” of mental health in schools is.
In general, mental health researchers name five key competencies.[3] While allegedly fostering them, “safer schools” aggressively nurture a culture of shame. For example, to atone for human violence toward the planet, “well” children are shamed into Earth servitude. Kids whose families enjoy affluence, while less fortunate counterparts merely scrape by, are made to feel discomfited. Should a shy girl decline to share a school restroom or shower with an anatomic boy identifying as female, it’s the girl who’s labeled “at risk” for demonstrating “intolerance.”
Given the unexpected outcome of our 2016 Presidential election, edu-clinicians at all levels pulled out all stops by extending recess periods, offering yoga, meditation, and mindfulness work (K-8). Up to and including college level, schools staged “cry-in’s,” “group screams,” and “walk outs.” Some provided nap- and crying- rooms equipped with therapy dogs, coloring books, Play-Doh, and healthy snacks. Disappointment, students learn, is to be coddled and/or acted out in civil disobedience.
Social Emotional Learning (SEL) [4]
Through school-linked services (i.e., afterschool programs; wellness, health, and family resource centers), school-community coalitions advocate for social-emotional learning in classroom settings.[5] SEL teaches skills for setting personal goals aimed at working well with others, feeling sympathy/empathy, identifying problems and, while making ethical choices, initiating help-seeking and help-giving behaviors.
Schools are not in the mental health business, yet they are deemed essential partners in the two-fold mission (1) to promote mental health of youngsters and (2) to reshape thinking about mental health.[6]
• Promote Mental Health
With upsurge of SEL, one might reasonably expect augmented resilience. To the contrary, well over half of students in urban schools suffer learning, behavior, and emotional problems.[7] In reality, personal pathology is rare.[8] Notwithstanding, at great expense, onsite mental health clinics continue to pop up; and the vast majority of American schools extend access to mental health services beyond special education to all students.
Because the same entities purporting to promote “mental health” also normalize categories that traditionally qualified as disorders—i.e., homosexuality and bi-, pan-, trans- gender identification/ fluidity—it’s no wonder nearly three-quarters of schools studied reported social, interpersonal, or family problems as most frequent for boys and girls alike.[9]
Reshaping Attitudes Toward Mental Health
With appearance of suicide education in the 1980s, mental health services have continued to multiply.[10] The expressed intent is school-community intervention to (1) nurture overall child development and (2) curtail obstacles to learning. To “reshape feelings” at the national level, health professionals promote urgent, large-scale, systemic reform initiatives.
In 2002, President George W. Bush created the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. Congress appropriated funds for early mental health screening but, truth be told, personal pathology is by no means the primary obstacle to learning. Low-bar standards, trumping academics with unmanageably exhaustive behavioral objectives, permissive policies, experimentation with flavor-of-the-month strategies, politically correct nepotism, and countless unnamed variables no doubt fuel the problem.
Mental Health Screening
DSM-1V[11] criteria for mental illness lack clear, empirical support data, and dubious diagnostics force answers likely to yield false positives. Under auspices of “gun violence,” President Obama quietly unleashed a cache of federal dollars toward ordering mental health testing for youngsters. With no evidence supporting reduced suicide attempts or mortality as a result of its extended use,[12] the Columbia University-based program called TeenScreen was used to detect depression in students at risk of suicide, anxiety disorders, and drug/alcohol abuse. Last month it was announced, “The National Center will be winding down its program at the end of this year.”[13]
All too often, voluntary, informed, and written parental permission for administering mental health screening is bypassed. Even for religious reasons, parents in Nebraska and West Virginia are denied the right to refuse screening.[14] Flexibility as to who administers and scores tests should raise further concern. There are reported instances of underhanded methods used to coax kids into “voluntary” participation.
An inadequately trained administrator is tempted to view common emotional and behavior problems as “symptoms” to be designated as disorders.[15] Comprehensive search for some “hidden” anomaly suggests need for mental illness to be “ferreted out and captured like a rabid animal.”[16] Once “caught,” the culprit is tagged, but applying labels from the constantly expanding list (i.e., attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant and/or adjustment disorders, learning disabilities, and depression) tends to skew public policy. Case in point: Since 1995, the number of children diagnosed as bipolar has increased by forty percent. Predictably, there are increasingly more referrals than can be served.
Diagnosis and Remediation
Assessments invite misdiagnoses coupled with expensive, sometimes unwarranted interventions.[17] In actuality, “connecting kids with treatment” is code for prescribing psychotropic drugs, resulting in dangerous, “off-label,” prescriptions (not intended for pediatric use), over- and/or mis-medication. Remarkably, in 2012, multiple prescriptions for children exceeded spending on antibiotics or asthma medications.[18]
Most pscho-active medicine is no more effective than placebos yet, when used by minors, antidepressants pose calculable risk. Disturbingly, the Bush commission linked mental health examinations with “state-of-the-art” treatments using specific medications (e.g., antidepressant and anti-psychotic drugs) for specific conditions.[19]
As drug coercion becomes a condition for public school attendance, noncompliant parents fear they will face charges and/or unwelcomed intervention of Child Protective Services. Despite protest, the NEA continues to urge affiliates to support legislation at all levels (community, state, and national).
Follow the Money
There’s good reason why schools typically don’t assign high priority to mental health services. Simply put, school-financed student support services do not reflect the school’s essential mission. Nevertheless, the Federal Department of Education and Centers for Disease Control persistently advocate for federal initiatives that advance “full-service” schools.[20]
 Among the top five funding sources is Medicaid. Wraparound mental health services effectively rob from Peter to pay Paul. Given the political-pharmaceutical alliance that operates for monetary gain, conflict of interest is to be expected. By way of example, TeenScreen advisory board members served in leadership positions for at least two entities heavily funded by drug-company “educational grants.”

Cradle-to-Grave Monitoring and Intervention
Results of routine, comprehensive mental health screening for every child, preschoolers included, are integrated with electronic health records. Longitudinal national electronic databases, including treatments and personal family information, can be accessed by insurance companies, federal and state agencies, special interest groups, and eventual employers. Even fictional “mental disorders” follow a child for life. Without parental consent, DNA data collected on newborns through KIDSNET in Rhode Island are linked to educational databases.[21]
In conclusion, the late President Ronald Reagan got it right: “The most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.’”
Click here for part -----> 1, 2,

1. Forbes magazine.
2. Resolution B-66 advances competencies relating to decision-making, self and social awareness/management skills. Resolution C-5 showcases comprehensive school health, social, and psychological programs/services, pre-K through higher education. Education Reporter, Number 367, August 2016. 3-4.
3. Durlak, Weissberg, Dymnicki, Taylor & Schellinger, 2011.
4. Http:// (Accessed 19 November 2016).
5. Greenberg et al., 2003; Hawkins, Kosterman, Catalano, Hill, & Abbott, 2008.
6. E. Marx and S. Wooley with D. Northrop (Eds.). Health is Academic: A Guide to Coordinated School Health Programs (New York: Teachers College Press.1998).
7. University of California at Los Angeles, 2003.
8. Howard S. Adelman, Ph.D. and Linda Taylor, Ph.D. “Mental Health in Schools and Public Health.” Public Health Reports 2006 May-June 121(3). 294-298.
9. Foster et al., 2005.
10. Education Reporter, Apr.-May 1987.
11. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.
12. Education Reporter, Number 309, October 2011. 1,4.
13. Teenscreen shuts down. (Accessed 12 December 2016).
14. Education Reporter, Number 359, December 2015.
15. Adelman, 1995a; Adelman & Taylor, 1994; Dryfoos, 1990.
16. Alliance for Human Research Protection, The Brown University Child and Adolescent Behavior Letter, 8-01-04.
17. Lyon, 2002.
18. Education Reporter, Number 316, May 2012.1.
19. Education Reporter, Number 316, May 2012.1,4.
20. For example, grants programs for the Integration of Schools and Mental Health Systems.
21. Howard S. Adelman, Ph.D. and Linda Taylor, Ph.D. “Mental Health in Schools and Public Health.” Special Report on Child Mental Health, Volume 121, May-June 2006. 294.