The "Mother's Act" Re-Visited: Is this about helping mothers? OR Big Pharma?

[Faryn Balyncd]

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_4638.shtml

http://www.lawyersandsettlements.com/articles/12332/stress-test-mothers-act.html



Do we really want our party to enact mandatory screening for post-partum depression?

Are big dollar psychotropics so UNDER-PRESCRIBED that this approach is the best one?

Do we want our Democratic lawmakers in bed with the same Big Pharma lobbyists who believe that American school-children are so UNDER-medicated that they also want a federal law mandating screening of all American children for psychiatric illness.





(A word of disclaimer: As a physician I encounter the severe consequences of the very real illnesses of post-partum depression, ADD and ADHD, and other psychiatric diseases. Properly diagnosing and treating these illnesses, including appropriate pharmacologic treatment is essential.

The problem of mal-use and over-presribing of these medications is also a significant problem.

Mandatory "screening" is not a benign intervention that will be without ill effects. As the financial backers from Big Pharma well know, mandatory screening will lead to much more psychotropic meds consumed by Americans.

Should we not think a bit about the Law of Unintended Consequences?

Is not a thorough risk-benefit analysis in order before we once again jump to the demands of Big Pharma, and enact a well-intentioned, but potentially quite damaging piece of intrusive legislation?)





:kick:

[Mythsaje]

1. Last I checked, many of our legislators and would-be legislators HERE

are immune to the concept of the law of unintended consequences. It's all "Hey, that's a great idea!" without thinking why it might NOT be.

[Faryn Balyncd]

2. And what kind of ogre would even think of voting againsts a "Mother's Act"?

[Mythsaje]

4. Ah, yes. The "frame." n/t

[Horse with no Name]

3. I hate to burst your bubble

But we already routinely screen and educate our new moms about PPD.
Many, if not all, hospitals do this.
Here is an actual version of the bill that isn't attached to inflammatory, pre-disposed websites. I see nothing at all insidious in it.
http://menendez.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=257314


The Mom’s Opportunity To Access Help, Education, Research, and Support for Postpartum Depression (MOTHERS) Act

Introduced by Senators Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Richard Durbin (D-IL)

The MOTHERS Act will ensure that new moms and their families are educated about postpartum depression, screened for symptoms, and provided with essential services. In addition, it will increase research into the causes, diagnoses and treatments for postpartum depression.

Specifically, the MOTHERS Act will help new moms by:

Providing important education and screening on postpartum depression (PPD) that can lead to early identification and treatment. A major part of prevention is informing new mothers about the symptoms and providing them with the services that are available in their community. Thus, this legislation includes two grants to help health care providers educate, identify and treat PPD.

Awards grants to States so that local health care providers (physicians, nurse midwives, and other licensed health care professionals) can educate women who have recently given birth and their families about PPD before the mothers leave the birthing center and offer the opportunity for new mothers to be screened for postpartum depression symptoms during the first year of postnatal check-up visits.

Awards grants to States and local governments, public or non-profit hospitals and community based organizations for the delivery of essential services to individuals with postpartum depression and psychosis and their families, including enhanced outpatient and home-based health care, inpatient care and support services.

Expanding important research to improve and discover new treatments, diagnostic tools and educational materials for providers. Since the exact cause of PPD isn’t known, research continues to be the key to unlocking the mystery of this condition.

This legislation incorporates a House bill, the Melanie Stokes Postpartum Depression Research and Care Act, which would expand and intensify research at the NIH with respect to PPD and psychosis, including increased discovery of treatments, diagnostic tools and educational materials for providers.

New Jersey’s Lead on Postpartum Depression Policy The MOTHERS Act was introduced in response to a recently passed, first-of-its-kind New Jersey law requiring doctors and nurses to educate and screen expectant mothers about PPD. This state bill was introduced by State Senate President Richard Codey whose wife, Mary Jo Codey, suffered from PPD.

Understanding Postpartum Depression

Postpartum depression is a serious and disabling condition that affects anywhere from 10 to 20 percent of new mothers.

1. In the United States, there may be as many as 800,000 new cases of postpartum conditions each year.

2. In New Jersey alone there are 11,000-16,000 cases of PPD each year.

3. These mothers often experience signs of depression and may lose interest in friends and family, feel overwhelming sadness or even have thoughts of harming the baby or themselves.

4. The cause of PPD isn’t known but changes in hormone levels, a difficult pregnancy or birth, and a family history of depression are considered possible factors.

Endorsements:

Postpartum Support International, Association of Women’s Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses (AWHONN), Family Mental Health Institute, Inc., American College of Nurse Midwives, National Mental Health Association (and the New Jersey Chapter), The National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (NAMI),Illinois Academy of Pediatrics, Illinois Psychiatric Association, New Jersey Chapter of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACO

[Faryn Balyncd]

5. "But we already routinely screen and educate our new moms about PPD." - (You could not have said...

...it better.)



Post-partum depression is a serious problem.


But not all well-intentioned bills are helpful.


Now that you have characterized those who question the approach of this bill as "inflamatory", ""pre-disposed", and in need of having one's "bubble" burst, do you have anything to say regarding the SUBSTANCE of the the objections to the bill?

[Horse with no Name]

6. I did not question YOUR character--but the websites you linked to

are slanted and pre-disposed. They are biased. That is never a good place to get your information so I found an unbiased source to read about the bill.

I am looking at the many well-respected organizations that are supporting this legislation and I read it in its entirety. I am in favor of it.
Reagan cut out ALL of the mental health resources and it is nice to see some of it being put back in.
There are many women who need this resource whose lives are actually affected by PPD. The legislation assures that these programs will be funded. I see nothing wrong with that.

[Faryn Balyncd]

7. So the website of the sponsor of the bill is the "unbiased" website?

...... And, actually, I don't think I'm alone in having found "Online Journal" to be a rather consistent source of thoughtful, serious discussion of political issues of interest to progressives.....but maybe you meant that Evelyn Pringle's article, not "Online Journal" was slanted and pre-disposed.

But what is wrong with addressing the substantive issues she raised?

[Horse with no Name]

9. It is the source. He wrote the bill.

What better place than to go to the source?

[Faryn Balyncd]

12. Why define the bill's author as "unbiased", and dismiss the bill's opponents as "slanted"...........

.....without examining the substantive issues on their merits?

[Horse with no Name]

13. because I want to read the bill itself--not someone elses opinion of it

The bill itself will always reflect the author--it won't, however, reflect it's critics. There, the author rendition of the bill is not biased--unless you already think the bill is biased in the first place.

[Faryn Balyncd]

14. But why dismiss critics as "slanted" without addressing their substance?

[Horse with no Name]

15. because there is *no* substance to biased articles

Same reason I choose not to watch Fox News. They are the *same* thing.
I prefer pragmatic to dogmatic every day of the week and twice on Sunday and rarely indulge or engage a source that is biased--one way or the other.
I have provided you with links and my reasoning.
Your source was biased, but I was interested in what you had to say, so I went to the source ITSELF to read it myself--not someone elses version of it--slanted to their viewpoint.
I came up with my viewpoint and I presented it to you.
Yet you attack me for not lending credence to your biased source--instead of addressing my viewpoint as I addressed yours.
I do thank you for posting this, however, because it is something I can really support and it is something that I will work to pass. Many women (especially in lower socio-economic demographics)can benefit from this help.
What I won't do,though, is continue to argue with you about my unwillingness to waste my time researching biased sources. :hi:

[Missy Vixen]

8. Okay, I'm just throwing this one out here

I don't pretend to know what causes post-partum depression, besides chemical imbalance in the body and other factors. I'm not a parent. At the same time, I spent a couple of hours holding my friend's baby a few days ago so she could get some sleep.

Before Big Pharma gets their fingers in the "mandatory testing" pie, might it be a good idea to enact some kind of national paid maternity leave?

Just throwing that one out there.

[Faryn Balyncd]

10. You might be on to something there......

.....(If only compassion could be patented.)

[Horse with no Name]

11. Many civilized countries do that

They also send nurses to the homes of new mothers to screen for PPD as well as to make sure they aren't in need of other resources.
It is a great idea...but mental health funding for new moms with PPD is a start (and probably as good as we will get in this country in our lifetimes).
This is a great study that was done:
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=95830
>>>snip
Jan. 15, 2009 -- Phone calls from volunteer mothers who overcame postpartum depression prevent depressive symptoms in at-risk mothers, a Canadian study shows.

"Mothers who received this support were at half the risk of depressive symptoms 12 weeks after delivery," says study leader Cindy-Lee Dennis, PhD, Canada research chair in perinatal community health at the University of Toronto.

>>>snip
"Depression in the past, prior postpartum depression, complicated pregnancy, and life difficulties or stress are red flags for postpartum depression," Wulfsohn says. "And postpartum depression is an umbrella term. It describes several mood reactions women can experience at this critical time of huge hormonal shifts."

Wulfsohn agrees with Dennis that in the U.S., there's no formal outreach system for identifying women who suffer postpartum depression. The stress is on making families aware of the symptoms and of making sure they know whom to call for help.