Congressman to Propose “Parental Protection Act” to Congress

Inspired by the plight of Justina Pelletier’s family, Representative Steve Stockman (R-TX) will introduce a bill to Congress that proposes to cut off funds to medical institutions that take children away from their parents over disagreements on subjective medical diagnoses, or deny First Amendment rights to parents and wards of the state, or conduct greater than minimal risk research on wards of the state.

H.R. 4518: Parental Protection Act (GovTrack)
Free Justina: Stockman seeks to strip funding for risky research on wards of the state (Representative Stockman’s Webpage)

Congressman Stockman discusses the Justina Pelletier case and his bill H.R. 4518, the “Parental Protection Act.”

Representative Stockman’s press release:

WASHINGTON—Congressman Stockman will introduce legislation cutting off funds to medical institutions that conduct greater than minimal risk research on wards of the state, deny First Amendment rights to parents and wards of the state, and take children away from their parents over disagreements on subjective medical diagnoses.

Such medical institutions include the National Institute of Health, state agencies, medical facilities, and hospitals. This bill would direct the Inspector General of Health and Human Services to withhold funds from these institutions for the aforementioned reasons.

The story of Justina Pelletier, who has mitochondrial disease and was declared a ward of the state over a custody battle regarding a subjective psychotropic drug diagnosis, motivated Congressman Stockman to introduce the legislation.

Lou and Linda Pelletier brought their daughter, Justina, to Boston Children’s Hospital for flu-like symptoms in February 2013. Justina had been diagnosed with and receiving treatment for Mitochondrial Disease, a genetic medical condition, since 2011. Less than 24 hours after being admitted to Boston Children’s Hospital, mental health workers disagreed with the Mitochondrial Disease diagnosis and insisted she had a psychiatric disorder called Somatoform (though there are no fool-proof medical or genetic tests to validate this as a legitimate medical condition).

Upon learning of the psychiatric diagnosis, the Pelletiers attempted to discharge Justina from the hospital. In response, the Hospital filed an allegation of medical child abuse against them. Justina has now been removed from her parents’ care, and has been under psychiatric treatment for over a year.

“Boston Children’s Hospital will not disclose if they are performing experiments on Justina. What is known is that several institutions are engaging in this ethically questionable behavior and getting federal funds for it. It is wrong for hospitals and research centers to use your tax money to perform risky, unbeneficial research on wards of the state,” said Congressman Stockman.

Stockman sent the following letter to members of Congress:

Dear Colleague,

Recently, there have been several high profile cases involving the rights of parents and various state agencies. State agencies are tearing children away from parents if they seek a second medical opinion or decide against giving their child a dangerous psychotropic drug.

Lou and Linda Pelletier brought their daughter, Justina, to Boston Children’s Hospital for flu-like symptoms in February 2013. Justina had been diagnosed with and receiving treatment for Mitochondrial Disease, a genetic medical condition, since 2011. Less than 24 hours after being admitted to Boston Children’s Hospital, mental health workers disagreed with the Mitochondrial Disease diagnosis and insisted she had a psychiatric disorder called Somatoform (though there are no fool-proof medical or genetic tests to validate this as a legitimate medical condition).

Upon learning of the psychiatric diagnosis, the Pelletiers attempted to discharge Justina from the hospital. In response, the Hospital filed an allegation of medical child abuse against them. Justina has now been removed from her parents’ care, and has been under psychiatric treatment for over a year. Justina has not been allowed to attend mass, take communion, or observe any of her other religious First Amendment rights under the constitution.

The Justina Pelletier case in Massachusetts is not the first case; it has only magnified the problem. How bad is the problem? 8 million children are on some type of psychotropic drug. Included in that figure are 120,000 babies under one year of age.

It is far too easy for a physician to threaten families with the charge of medical neglect should they want to seek a second opinion. If a family questions a doctor regarding the safety of the drug, the doctor can then call a relevant state institution to have a child removed. This is what happened with Maryanne Godboldo in Detroit.

Maryanne refused to give her daughter Arianna a harmful, potentially lethal antipsychotic drug documented by international drug regulatory agencies to increase the chances of an onset of diabetes, stroke, and death. Maryanne did this under the careful guidance of another physician. As soon as the doctor that prescribed the original psychotropic drug was made aware of the parent’s lawful decision, Child Protective Services was notified, and a SWAT team was sent to retrieve the little girl from her mother: a mother who refused to put her child’s life in danger.

The police and CPS negotiated with Maryanne and assured her that they would not take her daughter to a psychiatric ward, or administer drugs to her. They lied. Arianna was taken to a psychiatric ward where she was drugged against her mother’s will. It would take nearly two months to get Maryanne’s daughter out of the psychiatric hospital. This case garnered international press coverage.

Once a child becomes a “ward of the state,” he or she becomes a second class citizen. These children do not have the protections afforded them while they were with their parents. Many hospitals and institutions around the nation currently have policies allowing them to conduct research on a ward of the state presenting greater than minimal risk with no prospect of direct benefit for the research subject. In many cases, federal funds are allocated to these hospitals and other state institutions to facilitate this ‘research,’ on children who are wards of the state. In short, taxpayers are funding the systematic drugging of our nation’s most vulnerable children.

There is also a disturbing link between the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and drug companies. A study from Tufts University found that of the 170 DSM panel members 95 (56%) had one or more financial associations with companies in the pharmaceutical industry. One hundred percent of the members of the panels on “Mood Disorders” and “Schizophrenia and other Psychotic Disorders” had financial ties to drug companies. The same doctors alleging medical neglect have a financial incentive to give these dangerous drugs to children, by any means necessary.

I would like to invite you to join me in sponsoring legislation that would withhold all funding from the National Institute of Health from going to institutions, agencies, or medical facilities that do not respect the rights of parents and children. Many state agencies and institutions have been incentivized to treat children who are wards of the state as second class citizens, violating their natural civil rights. In many instances, these agencies have also violated constitutional due process in taking children from their parents. This bill will remove that financial incentive.