Sunday, June 13, 2010

The Truth Behind Kendra's Law - Reading Past the TAC (Treatment Advocacy Center) fear mongering babble and in-between the lines of deceit

The Truth Behind Kendra's Law - Reading Past the TAC(Treatment Advocacy Center) fear mongering babble and in-between the lines of deceit

Kendra's Law in New York State is being mirrored across America @ an alarming rate.

I hope to challenge you the reader to become more knowledgeable about what's behind the mental health curtain and place an investigative eye toward those supporting these kinds of unjust laws and legislation:

The " Fuller Torrey" Treatment Advocacy Center lobbying to limit civil rights and force drug large segments of our population

STOP "Kendra's Law" - Removal of human rights, forced medication, and just more fear mongering

Sunday Seattle Times Front Page - government fear mongering over the state of insanity

You can also check out here where TAC's DJ Jaffe outrageously compares the MAD Pride Movement with Scientology. This is typically how the propaganda machine at "TAC" functions.

"DJ Jaffe at 6:30 pm on May 10th, 2010

One of the issues I have with the “Mad Pride” movement is that like scientologists, they want to deny others the right to choose medications. Here is how two groups are opposing a law in NYS that helps those with mental illness lead better lives."

This is just one of many examples of DJ Jaffe's editorial writings that attempt to discredit or attack any person, organization, doctor, or even the science that would dare question the "Treatment Advocacy Center's" fear mongering efforts.

Another quote from DJ Jaffe: "mental illness is a biologically based no-fault medical problem that resides in the brain's chemistry or neuroanatomy"

In Retort to DJ Jaffe and his cohorts, I will just use the highly regarded Dr. Carlat's own words taken from his new book - Carlat Psychiatry

"few laypeople realize how little we actually know about the underpinnings of [psychiatric] disorders....In virtually all of the psychiatric disorders--including depression, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and anxiety disorders--the shadow of our ignorance overwhelm the few dim lights of our knowledge."

"Our diagnostic process is shallow and is based on an elaborate checklist of symptoms, leading us sometimes to over-diagnose patients with disorders of questionable validity, or, conversely, to miss the underlying problems in our rush to come up with a discrete diagnostic label that will be reimbursed by the insurance company. We tend to treat all psychological problems the same way--with a pill and a few words of encouragement. Because of this rote approach to treatment, patients are often misdiagnosed and medications are over prescribed. In the end, we misserve our patients, failing to offer them psychotherapies that are sometimes more effective than drugs"

"The resulting frenzy of psychiatric diagnoses has damaged the credibility of everyone in the field."

"We like to see ourselves as neuroscientists, rationally manipulating levels of neurotransmitters like serotonin in order to get patients better. But the fact is that we have no clear evidence that chemical imbalances are at the root of any mental disorder....we don't know if changing levels of serotonin [by prescribing Zoloft or Celexa, or any other drug] is the actual curative mechanism. Nonetheless, we give patients elaborate explanations of how the drugs work chemically. It makes us feel more scientific, and gives patients a feeling of confidence in us, but it's little more than made up neurobable."

"The fact is that psychopharmacology is primarily trial and error, a kind of muddling through different candidate medications...." depending upon which company's sales rep or which academic "Hired Gun" recently made a pitch for one or another drug. Indeed, "when our most esteemed colleagues have essentially joined the marketing teams, it makes it that much harder for us to practice our craft responsibly."

Then you should check more into the science behind mental health disorders and these laws:

I would recommend you read both "Mad In America" as an historical prospective
and then "Anatomy of an Epidemic" by Robert Whitaker as evidence of what were facing with our modern day mental health modality.
Mad In America - Robert Whitaker Blog

Anatomy of an Epidemic - blowing the lid off a false modality steeped in criminal greed and corruption

and also some important articles @ Alliance for Human Research Protection you can read:

"Unhinged: the Trouble with Psychiatry"

Pharma Targets Children-- Fastest Growing Market for Rx Drugs

"Do Antidepressants Cure or Create Abnormal Brain States?"

Or read
this OpEdNews article series by Evelyn Pringle

Tracking the American Epidemic of Mental Illness - Part I

Tracking the American Epidemic of Mental Illness - Part II

Tracking the American Epidemic of Mental Illness - Part III

I placed these links above here because this is information that the main stream media refuses far to often to report or discuss with the public. Our corporate media is a silent bystander watching society get munged and beaten in all intent and logical purpose.


I believe it's far past time to really look at what these "Fear Mongers" are really after?

If you were to pick up a news paper or watch the news on TV you would almost never (very seldom) get the other side of this and other mental health related stories that I will attempt to in part present here.

In fact the main stream "News" gives "FEAR MONGERS" like "TAC" tons of editorial space to push this dangerous and intrusive message/legislation. But this same main stream corporate "News" seldom allows presentations with any balance/depth from other perspectives. You can draw your own conclusions related to this questionable behavior, but personally I would ask what agenda are they pushing and profiting from exactly?

TAC, NAMI, and the Pharmaceutical Industry want to have "Forced Treatment Laws" in place everywhere for anyone labeled mentally ill, concurrently denying them the basic human right of self determination, their constitutional rights of legal due process, and to force a questionable and damaging medical treatment modality upon them against their will; all this in the name of targeting a single segment of the population based not on real need or rational facts, but by using scare tactics and fear mongering from rare isolated incidents to cover broad sweeping chastisement of their targeted and demonized population.

This in the end is not about safety or real humane treatment. Since we already have rational criminal laws a plenty in place to deal with violent criminal behavior. We already have a defunct and under achieving mental health system in place that fails those they are supposed to serve time and time again with unjust imprisonment and ineffective treatment modalities.

This is mostly about targeting a "label" or innocent segment of the population using propagandized fear mongering as a catalysis, and profiteering as a means to perpetrate actual unchecked evil upon us all.

You may think I'm taking it a little to far with that last statement, but when there are human rights and constitutional principles truly at stake; I would counter that is not an understatement in fact.

You are better off as a criminal today in our society than to be labeled "mentally ill". You as a criminal would receive a trial for your charged offense, an advocating defense lawyer, and a verdict. When you are solely convicted of a crime you are given a set fine, sentence, and then released either to parole or freedom.

Yet, if your Labeled "Mentally ill" you can be brought to trial in a very different kind of court. Your guilt of being "mentally ill" is determined by doctors, not by juries in the end. Since you may only receive one trial for the guilt state of "mental Illness", and after that you are pretty much labeled guilty indefinitely, as your sentence can be go on and on virtually forever. As a labeled mentally ill person you have your rights of self determination voided, and even lose your right to preclude a violation of your body from chemical restraints. Your basic rights and your body are subjected to decisions out side of your own control.

In fact in the very near future medicine/psychiatry wants to start treating you before you are labeled "mentally ill" or have actual symptoms of illness, by their new DSM5 battle-star galactica enlightened approach to include preemption/preventive forms of aggressive drugs treatments if a person might be determined @ high risk for developments and maybe/possibly even belonging to a determined genetic category.

I hope you can see where this could scarily be headed toward. (giving small hint; the new improved and more profitable eugenics ring any bells)

Does this begin to sound like some other governments that historically perpetrated horrendous crimes upon their own populations by indiscriminate and unjust labeling?

So let's take a look at the Kendra's Law newest bill they are pushing through here as the permanent replacement to an already poor and intrusive law.

A10421 - Bills A10421 Summary:

BILL NO A10421

SAME AS Same as S 7596


COSPNSR Weisenberg, Skartados, Christensen, Millman, Stirpe, Lancman,
Scarborough, Benedetto, Castro, Titus, Maisel, Zebrowski, Fields,
Gabryszak, Rosenthal, Schroeder, Schimminger, Paulin, Spano,
Mayersohn, Hoyt, Schimel, Hooper

MLTSPNSR Abbate, Aubry, Bacalles, Calhoun, Corwin, Crouch, DelMonte, Duprey,
Finch, Hikind, Hyer-Spencer, Markey, McKevitt, Perry, Pheffer, Raia,
Reilly, Robinson, Saladino, Sayward, Sweeney, Thiele, Townsend

I invite you to go here and
see where they get their money.
I believe you will find a disturbing and consistent
of the Major Pharmaceutical Industry and Health Care Giant Influence peddling

Forced medication and Big Pharma??? Is this a relevant question that should
be asked concerning laws like Kendra's??

Enhances assisted outpatient treatment program and repeals expiration of
Kendra's law.

They might as well just said - we want to extend/strengthen the laws to drug those
"scary people" up indefinitely.

A10421 Actions:

BILL NO A10421

03/25/2010 referred to mental health

A10421 Memo:



An act to amend the
mental hygiene law and the correction law, in
relation to enhancing the assisted outpatient treatment program; and to
amend chapter 408 of the laws of 1999 constituting Kendra's Law, in
relation to the effective date thereof


The purpose of this bill is to repeal the expiration date for New York's
Assisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT) program and
enhance the program's

For those that would like this double speak political squawking simplified,
this bill is not just
attempting to make a bad law permanent,
but it also wants to expand the intrusiveness
far beyond any reasonable
or fathomable realm of basic individual humane rights

and constitutional principles for ever.

In fact once you have been labeled "mental hygiene unclean"
this law will trap you under
government/medical control indefinitely.
Since any and all past incidents

(even though they have not been proven violations of criminal law)

can be used against you indefinitely in the realm of institutionalization
(being locked away) and forced drug compliance
(take this pill "whether it works or not",
"whether it harms you or not").

Yes, under this law you can never really be considered well

and fully recovered (that determination is left in the hands of others??).
You should really ask yourself if you would want others/strangers/relatives
making all of your life choices for you?

That's called nothing less than creating a permanent subclass
of virtual serf's "less than" human beings and life long forced drug/treatment consumers.

Who Pays? We all pay, we pay the high cost financially across the broad,
but we also pay a much higher cost. For once you allow the targeting and removal
of basic human
and constitutional rights of one innocent segment of the population,
We in truth have dangerously opened the door for those time honored rights

to be taken from everyone.

This law at best is in practical terms all about selective persecution
of the poor, labeled, homeless, and minority groups.
Please don't fall for this poison political speak, The entrenched misleading medical
propaganda, the TAC (Treatment Advocacy Center) blatant fear mongering

(as well as all those like other false "patient" advocacy groups),
and don't fall for just another pharmaceutical industry ploy/intrusion upon our society
made purely out of an unquenchable lust for greed.


Section 1 would state the legislative findings.

Section 2 would
amend Mental Hygiene Law (MHL) S 7.17(f) to require
that AOT program coordinators: monitor local programs to ensure that expiring
AOT orders are adequately reviewed to consider the need for renewal; and
monitor local needs for training of judges and court personnel to ensure
that the Office of Mental Health (OMH) adequately provides such train-

Section 3 would amend MHL S 9.47(b) to clarify
that a director of
community services' responsibility to investigate reports
of persons who may
be in need of AOT applies
to reports received from family and community
as well as to written reports
received from hospital directors

Section 4 would amend MHL S 9.48 to require that AOT program directors'
quarterly reports to program coordinators include information on any
expired AOT court orders, including the determination made as to whether
to petition for renewal, the basis for such determination, and the
court's disposition of the renewal petition, if any.

Section 5 would amend MHL S 9.60 to:

add medication or symptom management training, financial
management services, and random testing for drugs or alcohol as
listed potential services to be included in AOT, and
clarify that other,unlisted services which may be included
in an individualized treatment plan need
not be clinical in nature,

* provide that the
"look back" periods, used in determining whether the
subject of a petition has the requisite treatment history to be eligible
for AOT,
are extended by the cumulative time within such periods
the subject has been hospitalized or incarcerated;

* allow the court, in determining whether the subject of an AOT petition
is in need of AOT to prevent a relapse or deterioration likely to result
in serious harm,
to consider not only the subject's "current"
but past behavior as well;

* Require OMH to make qualified physicians available to counties with
populations under 75,000, for the purposes of assisting with AOT

* Allow the subject of an AOT petition and the petitioner to stipulate
upon mutual consent that a
physician need not testify at the AOT

* Clarify
that in determining whether a subject of an AOT petition
has refused to submit to an examination should be removed
to a hospital
for such purpose, the court need not hold a hearing;

Require a physician appointed to develop a treatment plan for the
subject of an AOT petition to make reasonable efforts to
gather potentially
relevant information from the subject's family or significant


* Increase the maximum potential length of an initial AOT
court order
from six months to one year;

* Require that if during the period of an AOT order, the assisted outpa-
tient relocates to a location within New York not served by the current-
ly obligated AOT program, such obligation to provide AOT shall transfer
to the director of community services of the local governmental unit to
which the assisted outpatient has relocated;

* Require an AOT program director, upon determining not to
petition for
renewal of an expiring AOT order, to notify
the appropriate program
coordinator in writing,
stating the basis for thedetermination

* Provide that if an AOT order is allowed to expire and a new AOT peti-
tion is filed within 60 days by another authorized petitioner, the new
petitioner (mirroring existing law for a renewal by the current peti-
need not establish anew that the subject of the petition
experienced either two hospitalizations within the last
36 months or one
violent incident within the last 48 months;

* Require that if an AOT order is appealed, notice be provided to multi-
ple parties including the appropriate director of community services and
the appropriate program coordinator;

Establish a presumption that an assisted outpatient should be
removed to a hospital to determine his or her need for admission
if, despite efforts to solicit compliance, he or she has violated
the order of the court by substantially failing to take medication,
submit to blood test-ing or urinalysis, or comply with drug
or alcohol treatment

In other words if you fall under this law, you can be locked away not for violating
an AOT, but to determine if you have complied.

As you can see clearing stated here
substantially failing to take medication" which is forced
medication compliance against an individuals will
backed by the
stipulation of law and consequently denial of freedom

(imprisonment/hospitalization) without fair/reasonable
representation or due legal process determined by a jury of your
peers. So when you hear them say this doesn't force medication
on anyone, they are liars.
If fact this law is all about control over rights,

medication over any other real/effective treatments or chooses.
Let us remember this is not about a crime being committed,
this is
about politicians, groups like TAC, and the other greed
and fear mongers subverting our constitution on the mere
guess that a person has a possible predetermination to commit a
crime based solely on some unproven or suspect mental health label.

* Require OMH to provide AOT training to judges and court personnel with
such frequency and in such locations as may be appropriate to meet
statewide needs.

Section 6 would add a new paragraph (o) to MHL S 29.15 to
require the director
of a hospital who does not petition for AOT upon the discharge

of an involuntary inpatient, or upon the expiration of a conditional
release of such inpatient, to report such discharge or expiration
writing to the appropriate director of community services.
Section 3 of the bill, the director of community services
would then be
required to investigate whether the inpatient meets
the criteria for

Section 7 would amend Correction Law S 404(2) to require the director of
a hospital serving mentally ill prison inmates, upon discharging such an
inmate to the community at the expiration of his or her prison sentence,
to report such discharge in writing to the appropriate director of
community services, stating a recommendation as to whether the inmate
meets the criteria for AOT, and the basis for such recommendation.
(Under Section 3 of the bill, the director of community services would
then be required to investigate whether the inmate meets the criteria
for AOT.)

Section 8
would repeal the current sunset date to extend the
of Kendra's Law indefinitely.

Section 9 would provide a separability clause.

Section 10 would provide an effective date of June 30, 2010; provided
that if the act does not become law on or before June 30, 2010, the
provisions would take effect immediately and be deemed to be in full
force and effect on and after June 30, 2010.


The current provisions of Kendra's Law are set to expire on June 30,
2010. This bill would remove the expiration date and extend Kendra's Law
indefinitely. It would also
amend the current law to require greater
accountability from those responsible for its implementation
to more effectively allow families and caregivers
to be
appropriately engaged in the AOT process, and to improve the coordination
and delivery of services to assisted outpatients.


In 1999, the legislature enacted "Kendra's Law," establishing a state-
wide court-ordered assisted outpatient treatment (AOT) program to
improve outcomes for persons with severe mental illness who, in view of
their treatment history and present circumstances, are likely to have
difficulty living safely in the community. At the approach of the law's
original 2005 expiration date, the legislature took note of OMH data
indicating that Kendra's Law had impressively served its targeted popu-
lation, including documented declines in rates of homelessness, hospi-
talization, violence, arrest and incarceration, and documented increases
in treatment compliance. However, at that time questions and concerns
about the program remained unanswered. Rather than make the law perma-
nent in 2005, the legislature opted to extend Kendra's Law for an addi-
tional five years with a mandate that OMH contract with an external
research organization to evaluate the program.

On June 30, 2009, a team of independent researchers released the report
of their long-term study of AOT throughout New York State. This report
confirms the earlier OMH data on vastly improved outcomes, including
less frequent psychiatric hospitalizations, shorter length of hospitali-
zations, and reduction in the likelihood of arrest. It further estab-
lishes, inter alia,
that AOT recipients are far more likely than other
patients to consistently receive psychotropic medications
appropriate to
their psychiatric condition;
that AOT does not cause
recipients to perceive stigma or coercion
; that those who receive
AOT for periods of at least one year are more likely than those who receive
AOT for shorter periods to sustain gains after leaving the program; that the law has
been applied in a nondiscriminatory manner; and that the court order
itself, in addition to high quality services, is a significant factor in
the program's success.

Though is does in fact target the poor, people of color, and homeless.

I have to wonder who they were talking to when making a determination
that was "no
perceived stigma or coercion"? I'm willing to bet
it was not to those patients directly effected by this law.

Based on these empirical findings, the concerns/which led the legisla-
ture to extend the expiration of Kendra's Law in 2005 have been
addressed. Kendra's Law should be made a permanent fixture of New York's
mental health care system.

Moreover, the June 30, 2009 study findings, as well as the experience of
thousands of patients, treatment providers and families who have
utilized Kendra's Law since 1999, point to several areas where the law
should be improved to promote smoother functioning of the AOT program
and easier access to those who stand to benefit from it. The amendments
included in this bill are intended to reflect these findings and maxi-
mize the unique potential of this legislation to simultaneously serve
the goals of compassionate care, fiscal responsibility, and public safe-


This is a new bill.




June 30, 2010

I hope you the reader take the time to ponder, do your own research,
and draw your own conclusions regarding these laws, then let your
elected representatives know what you think.

My conclusion:


This is bad law, it is bad for those labeled ill,
Bad for the general public,
Continues a cumbersome financial burden without effective results,
Just creates more government aristocratic bureaucracy
intrusively peering into the lives of it's citizens
This law does nothing in truth/fact to make anyone safer
by just creating an illusion of safety, does not if fact protect us
or does this law provide real, assessable, or
effective treatment options for those targeted,
This Law is bad for society and bad for our nation


Anonymous said...

A web link to why this law is misdirected and ill-conceived.

Anonymous said...

DJ Jaffe is the PR Face and hitman for Fuller Torrey's treatment advocacy center.

This ex-NAMI guy, and PR firm shill attacks anything and anyone that does not fall into their nasty and twisted views related to mental health.

Both Torrey and jaffe have disturbing history's with their own family members mental health conditions which makes them just push that much harder for legal control and chemical over others.

If that was not enough, they both have ties to the pharmaceutical industry. Jaffe through his NAMI years and in the PR business, and Torrey with his drug patent and direct connection to the Stanley Foundation.

These are the very last people on the planet you would want formulating mental health policy.

Stephany said...

For readers of this blog:

It's on the Mindfreedom link page:

Blogs on changing the mental health system, human rights and alternatives

click here for the blogs listed.

There's a lot of information that can be found about Fuller Torrey and TAC( the Treatment Advocacy Center).

What people need to know upfront, is that it highlights the NEGATIVE stories about people with mental illness labels on its blog.

They like to present the worst case scenerios and present it to the public in the media depicting ALL ppl this way.

This is how Kendra's Law is wrong.

It can swoop up people who might have ended up in a psych ward for benign reasons, labeled, sent out and suddenly part of:


What does that mean to the general population?

Well, let's say my daughter lived in New York. Kendra's Law passes.She was wrongly diagnosed and in the mental health system. She is autistic but mental health docs labeled her bipolar and SZ.

The law then makes sure upon discharge she has mandatory drugging.

and she is wrongly diagnosed.

Once in this system it's fucking hell to get out of it, and as witness to what's happened to my daughter, let me tell you it was by the Grace of God and some severe ass-kicking advocating that got her OUT.

This can happen to the most innocent of people.

P. Ropecia said...

You should be appreciating as you are giving knowledge for mental health and raising curtain behind that.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This may contain copyrighted (C) material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.

Terms and conditions on the use of the contents of the “Is Something Not Quite Right with Stan - A Mental Health Blog” site are for informational and entertainment purposes only. Stan does not represent or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or reliability of the information or content (collectively, the "Materials") contained on, distributed through, or linked, downloaded or accessed from this website.

Stan encourages you to make your own health care and legal decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care and/ or legal professional. The information posted here should not be considered medical advice and is not intended to replace consultation with a qualified medical professional if they exist. I do not answer specific medical questions.

Third party information is gathered from sources that Stan believes to be reliable. However, in no event shall Stan, or any third parties mentioned on this site be liable for any damages resulting directly or indirectly from the use of the content whether or not Stan is advised of the possibility of such damages.

Stan reserves the right, in its sole discretion and without any obligation, to make improvements to, or correct any error or omissions in any portion of the displayed materials.

You hereby acknowledge that any reliance upon any Materials shall be at your sole risk.

Disclaimer of Liability

The user assumes all responsibility and risk for the use of this web site and the Internet generally. Under no circumstances, including negligence, shall anyone involved in creating or maintaining this web site, or shall the website writer or any commenter’s be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special or consequential damages, or lost profits that result from the use or inability to use the web site and/or any other web sites which are linked to this site.

Nor shall they be liable for any such damages including, but not limited to, reliance by a visitor on any information obtained via the web site; or that result from mistakes, omissions, interruptions, deletion of files, viruses, errors, defects, or any failure of performance, communications failure, theft, destruction or unauthorized access.


In states which do not allow some or all of the above limitations of liability, liability shall be limited to the greatest extent allowed by law.

Disclaimer of Endorsement - Reference to any products, services, hypertext link to the third parties or other information by trade name, trademark, supplier or otherwise does not constitute or imply its endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation by me. Nor is an endorsement by me is implied by such links. They are for convenience only, as an index in a public library.

Information Subject to Change - Any information on this web site may be removed without notice. Information may include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Furthermore, the information may change from time to time without any notice.

GENERAL INFORMATION - The information contained in this online site is presented and intended to provide a broad understanding and knowledge critical to psychiatric practices and humorous social interaction. The information should not be considered complete and should not be used in place of communication and consultation.


This site is not a monologue of truth. It is a catalyst for public debate about medical conduct and for entertainment purposes. The reader is urged to confront officials to clarify issues mentioned herein. This site is designed strictly to provide information for critical, literary, academic, entertainment, and public usage. A qualified and trustworthy medical professional must be consulted regarding medical issues, treatments, diagnoses, etc.; if they exist in all actuality or truth.