Bowsite.com

""A bill that would require a mental health exam for every student in grades 6 through 12 each academic year is up for consideration in the Oregon state legislature. Legislative Concept 2890 would require school districts and public charter schools to conduct “mental health wellness checks” annually on every student in grades 6 through 12, Truth in American Education observes.

According to Mental Health America, Oregon is ranked as the state with the highest prevalence of mental illness. Additionally, the state earned a ranking of 16 out of 51 on Mental Health America’s “Access to Care” map.""

Then again, given the pic, the state would suggest conservatism is a mental disorder since most of the state is red and the state is noted in the article to have the highest rate of mental disorders...

Ill have to hunt down some info on it to really understand it what they are doing. If the intent is what I noted above, I'm cool with it.

Per your map, Greater Portland, Eugene ( the U of O), Corvallis (OSU) and Salem (State Givernment) are basically the only left-wing bat-sheet crazy places in the state.

Of course, if the bill passes, it will apply statewide.

Maybe using your brain and intellect and reading a few parenting books actually works. Rather than beating them into obedience.

Terry

I'm sure some think it's real cool, and likely enjoy "counseling". I'm kinda taken aback that some people are OK with what is essentially MANDATED psychoanalysis? I'da been labeled anti-social I guess..... right after I told them to go procreate themselves...... go play your games with someone else....

As stated....50 years ago there were no school shootings, etc. Seems like bottom line that is what this is all about. No testing for mental illness, etc. And in high school you could count the guns in the window gun racks in the Senior parking lot. Dozens, I always had 2 or 3. Why now? Ever ask yourselves that? Ever? What has changed? Hint: not the guns...

"Let the Snowflake Special, shine a light on you....." now lets all quietly line up for our daily medication so we can get you off to class.....

I know this is asking a lot form a bowlib, but you want want to chweck the opulation of all those red counties before yammering poppycock.

Is my poppy cock related to using a map with a lot of red areas (as people have been doing for two years to try and say the majority voted a certain way) or to thinking mental health screen's may be beneficial for people? I'm surprised that post frustrated you man, I figured you would like to see that I'm starting to realize, as Spike has suggested, that my centrist belief, at least on by CF standards, is in fact bat s**t crazy libtard :)

Discipline is not child abuse, HITTING and BEATING a child is. And that’s not me saying it, it’s the law. You do respect the law, right?

I thought it was to make sure learning was not impeded by a physical challenge. Obviously I am wrong.

Are mental disorders worth looking into? To use a favorite ploy here, if it gets one person help that prevents a school shooting, is it worth it?

Mental challenges according to some are at levels never recorded before. Scientists are studying several contributing factors, including but not limited to beatings, er, I mean discipline.

Going back to the key point though, if folks are treated early, it most likely reduces costs on the medical or legal system long term given the challenges of advanced mental illness. Since mental illness tends to come with more difficulty holding jobs as well, it seems recognizing it may be a factor and starting help early could lead to less total strain on the systems which pay for those folks care later when the poo goes down - and I'm not talking school shootings, I'm just talking about being unable to function in society, work, etc...

Seems to make sense, to limit the expense we all face long term.

H4W raises a good point as well on two fronts. That screenings for various health factors have been common practice for decades and help. This seems to be in that category. His last couple sentences also are on point based on a lot of research into corporal punishment.

And let's not forget voodoo Psych drugs they use to stop boys from being boys...........

Can you even explain in clear measurable terms what good "mental health" is? And isn't?

Fact is..... you don't need to be a psychologist to get a feel for a person when you're dealing with them hours every day, 5 days a week. A pattern can be seen and documented among teachers. I believe that is already pretty much a standard practice. I doubt you will find many with the "screening" that aren't already known to have some "issues".

The big question, even the big question if they are "screened"...... now what? What actions will be taken? What authority are you acting on? The state? Really? You want state action taken on an educated hunch? With no measurable standards? Mandatory "counseling" to go with the mandatory screening? There are a good many who think "cry closets" and "safe spaces" actually help with anything...... is that who is in charge of this?

I don't think the problem is "finding them". I think the problem is "now what?" Offer help? What rights do you have over other peoples lives if they don't accept your offer to "help"?

What rights? We could start with the right to prohibit firearm access for those who are clearly mentally unfit. ( granted, this must be a very well organized and high functioning system of evaluation) Perhaps strick guidelines and follow-ups on any access that such a person could have. A regular visit from a qualified agent for the mentally ill person is a preventative measure.

You can't force help but we can protect others.

Appreciated [url=www.google.com]nice[/url] https://olatcc.com.br/comprar_tcc

BTW, there is a difference in abusing a physically abusing a child and spanking their butt.

Of course liberals don't know the difference.

Politics is already involved in the bill. So no way will it be 'pure medical.'

And even then, who decides what 'medical' is?

The liberal OR legislature?

Some far-left shrink?

BC did you see that other thread with the article Pig Doc linked on gender? Public health professionals collect medical data on students every year at schools related to vision, hearing, cognition, motor skills etc. Its just really hard for me to see mental health screening as a long term negative considering how much data is pulled on kids already.

And, we potentially save $ long term by preventing/ managing mental illness before it's way off the rails.

That kid may be able work and contribute to society at a far greater level over a lifespan.

I dont deny that any info can be used nefariously. Or that I'm pathologically optimistic. It just seems a simple strategy like this could be a positive.

One: for your "Bingo game." Will. There are far more influential and active public loons on the left ( the majority of lefties) than whacky far right nuts ( the minority of right siders ) Cancel that Bingo!

Two: If we're able to accept well-trained psych professionals we could get somewhere but it is all too common with the Left to redefine the value of professional credentials according to political affiliation. This is more of a problem with the left, in all things including constitution and law enforcement, as written. They would do the same with mental health. ( Just redefine without reason.)

That is what makes it such a problem. (Reason v. popularity)

There's your Bingo!

No wonder you guys support gun control, geez....

Something of our past that was good ( rational thought process) got tossed out with the bath water.

I don't think there are more on the left but it was growing at a faster rate among motivated voters. Eventually, even the plague will stop spreading. This too will end but not die out.

I was once asked: Would you rather be liked or right?

Everyone I respect aims to be right the rest end up being liked.

I'm asking..... is there ANY such thing as hard parameters in testing mental illness? Can you get a hundred mental illness professionals to even agree as to pass/fail parameters? Can you get them to agree even on what should be tested?

Do they ask personal family questions when they check your vision? Ask if the family owns (gasp!) guns? Does your mother/father drink? Do they both live at home..... do they argue? What are you going to do if all the answers don't line up to...... somebody.....

Apples and oranges as to what testing you are suggesting. Not even in the same ballpark, much less the same room. There is subjective input and results to mental health..... likely on the magnitude of 10-20..... a hundred times more than whatever physical testing there may currently be.

What happens when a kid grows up hunting and therefore likes guns? Will he be declared mentally unbalanced and a threat?

He will be if he's 'examined' by the wrong so-called expert.

Is it possible that they will ask if a gun is in the house, no, it's almost 100% certain given that is common practice, I believe mandatory in many states, for medical practitioners across the land - assuming they are doing a good job.

That has ZERO to do with whether a person is mentally ill or not. It does not contribute to the dx.

If that person's condition suggests they are mentally ill, then it becomes a factor.

Now we go worm hole - what if the mom/dad/sister etc own a gun. Is the childs mental instability disqualifying for personal ownership? No - while I accept many would say that risk is to great so this whole thing is bovine excrement. However, does that then allow the provider to discuss with the family: "Hey, make sure things are locked up, dont let them have access to the key to the gun safe. Oh, you cant afford a safe. Ok, can you at least trigger lock the firearms you have?..." etc etc.

Then again, Ill circle it back. The key to me, is that early dx and treatment is most likely to keep that person functioning at the best level and positively contributing to society long term. It very likely ends up saving all of us money long term, which is a positive to me as well.

Could a rogue off the rails crazy provider abuse this? Sure. Just like people in all fields and industries sometimes go off the rails.

I just dont see screening kids for mental health problems, and getting them treatment early if possible, as a bad thing. I dont see it as political in any way. I dont see it as being an invasion into our privacy (the families of those kids).

Spike your point is a good one. Ill suggest it's more a cultural phenomenon relative to ethnocentricity and some degree of a narcissistic world view that's culturally been pushed forward. If someone stands to the left, they see the same "issues" to the right and vice versa. It's the old "this is true for me that's true for you, but if you disagree you are a fascist/racist/homophobic/bigoted etc... " Or "if you disagree you are a baby killing libtard america hating commie". Pretty lipstick from both angles, but just hurts either cause in the long run. If people could be people, and recognize other world views add to the world v take away, we would all be a lot better off for it. Yes, if folks on the left would quit assuming the President/any Republican is a fascist authoritarian and be open to the ideas they discuss that would help at least get along, and at best, all would rise for it. The reverse is true as well.

So yeah, I hear you and feel what you are saying. I'm hopeful R's can recognize as well that because an ideas origin is not from a specific angle, that it can still be a good idea.

Ideas add value to our knowledge individually, culturally and as a society as a whole. Be they ideas we gravitate towards or away from.

Your point, Spike, is a really good one. And I get the skepticism from the political direction - it's a really good point! From the public health perspective, I just feel this sort of screening, especially given situation leading to the decision to bring this approach to the fore showed a real need for greater mental health care services in that population.

It became a taboo to approach the issue and monitor the individual. It became commonplace to treat with drugs that oftentimes make matters worse. See the list of mass shooters and the drugs they were on. ( absent a Therapist of course)

Once upon a time those same people were taken off the street and received therapy. Sometimes drugs were also added to assist in lessening symptoms. I am sure of this as my Stepfather was A Director of Psychotherapy Clinics in New England, from early 1960 onward and Pioneered in-home evaluations for children at risk.

There was a great success until someone decided that drug therapy was the better way to go ( economic justification) and the therapy part vanished. People were dumped back on the street and or back into family homes. Drugs and almost no psych - therapy. No accountability and nowhere to sound an alarm when the individual was exhibiting signs of trouble. Almost all do.

A lawyer friend we know, who is Bipolar, worked to defend the wrongfully incarcerated in more recent years. It was evident when a patient needed institutional restraints. Evident when she needed it too.

Those are the people that we have a very good opportunity to intercept when meds are not working and those are the people who need to have regular check-ins and follow up visits. They need a real Therapist and not a social worker.

It fell out of favor ... too invasive to their rights and all . Now we have the same mess we started with and are reinventing the Psych Wheel.

Its not a rational progression from the unknown to the known ... emotional half-baked thoughts without good reason to temper them took the day. That's what got us here.

Same issue and sentiments that prompt Sanctuary cities, illegal criminal offenders on the street, and interfere with the process of keeping problem people in check. It is the Liberals creation ... Own it and get with the program.