Slashdot Mirror
Poorer Children More Likely To Get Antipsychotics
krou writes "A new study by a team from Rutgers and Columbia has discovered that poorer children are more likely to be given powerful antipsychotic drugs. According to the NY Times (login required), 'children covered by Medicaid are given powerful antipsychotic medicines at a rate four times higher than children whose parents have private insurance. And the Medicaid children are more likely to receive the drugs for less severe conditions than their middle-class counterparts.' It raises the question: 'Do too many children from poor families receive powerful psychiatric drugs not because they actually need them — but because it is deemed the most efficient and cost-effective way to control problems that may be handled much differently for middle-class children?' Two possible explanations are offered: 'insurance reimbursements, as Medicaid often pays much less for counseling and therapy than private insurers do,' and because of 'the challenges that families in poverty may have in consistently attending counseling or therapy sessions, even when such help is available.' The study is due to be published next year in the journal Health Affairs." The full article is available behind a paywall from the first link. The lead author of the study said he "did not have clear evidence to form an opinion on whether or not children on Medicaid were being overtreated."
Just because mental illnesses may be more common amongst poorer people doesn't explain why they are more likely to be given drugs. Please also note the line that says "Medicaid children are more likely to receive the drugs for less severe conditions than their middle-class counterparts". If they're less severe in nature, then why the drugs?
'If Christ had tweeted the sermon on the mount, it might have lasted until nightfall.' - John Perry Barlow
The article is actually normalized for one of your claimed possible confounds, the variance of psychological problems by socioeconomic position. The finding isn't just that the poor get more antipsychotics full stop, but that the poor with the same diagnosis as a wealthy person are more likely to be treated with antipsychotics for that condition.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
The study found an effect even among poor v. wealthy children with the same diagnosis, though, which none of 1/2/3 could explain. 1/2/3 could plausibly lead to more psychotic diagnoses among poor children, but not to more prescription of drugs within the same diagnosis.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
"Poor = Conspiracy of the rich"
Except this one has abundant evidence. Government's are paid off by business to sit on their hands and not do anything their people request (disability, raise the minimum wage, etc).
Then there was the Bailout. Socialism for the rich, market discipline for everyone else. I could cite numerous other instances, oh like workers being killed by coca cola? Not to mention workers WERE being killed here in north america all the way up into the 1930's, your middle-class life came from a concerted effort of the working class against the rich. Ever wonder why we call it the 8 hour day?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8_hour_day
What's even scarier is most peoples total lack of knowledge about business history.
No duh GGP was based more on Karl Marx than the Acts of the Apostles. But I need to know: Did you actually go and check Acts 2:44-45 before you told GP to check his sources?
New American Bible, Saint Joseph Edition, from around 2003 or so, Acts 2:44-45 -
All who believed were together and had all things in common, they would sell their property and possessions and divide them among all according to each one's need.
Marx was a philosopher, as we all know, so why shouldn't he have read up on his early Christianity? Acts 2:44-45 came before Marx, and Marx should have known his Christian stuff as a philosopher, and all this I would call evidence, though not proof, that Marx could have has his line inspired by the Acts verses.
Let q be a radix > 1. I am in ur base-q, killing 10 d00ds.
and Marx got it from Mosses Hess, who taught both Marx and Engles, and who actually came up with most of the ideas and slogans that were later attributed to Marx. Of course, he didn't exist in a vacuum either.
Lets not forget the irreversible damage to the brain and pancreas and the only somewhat reversible damage to the liver and the nearly inevitable weight gain (and the problems that presents).
I went through a mental psychosis episode after mixing music for a windows 7 party i was preparing to hosting & smoking some super strong weed. I peeked and It looked as though I broke enlightenment my room glowed a bright yellow I - then blacked out a few times and had realistic hallucinations even thought a Jay'z and Kayne was having a party out side my door, I told my dad I found jesus and I had him by the balls (was holding two silver zen balls) then eventually woke up on my bed to find my mom sitting on my coach with a bible in her hand. Anyway my mom and dad where very concerned I guess and for some reason or another they took me to the local hospital (Swedish American) then after-wards a cop drove me to the mental institution called H Douglas Singer Mental Health Center (Rockford IL) I was there 9 days but it felt like less I held against my will (its basically a huge prison) Anyway on the day of my release I was prescribed Risperidone 2mil 1in morning 3mil at night for sleep since I have trouble sleeping anyway that drug is not cheap! if your uninsured at walgreens 30pills cost $190. I stopped using cause it was making me feel worse and I was recently prescribed Seroquel 200mg in the morning and 200mg at night it slows my thoughts down so I don't think as fast (racing thoughts that usually focus and 1 2 or 3 words over and over again) anyway I also noticed a minor side effect...I noticed after taking it for a the first week I stopped dreaming it seems I never get to REM. Anyway I really don't know why im sharing this but I read slashdot everyday and never comment and since this was was kind of relevant to some events in my life i thought I would share. There is a lot more to the story I fail to mention only because it would seem to over the top for anyone to believe - "conspiracyish"
This data would seem to support the removal of the government run insurance plan and its replacement with a private plan.
Oh look the sheep has given up on competent government, and is serving himself up to the wolves for lunch in the hope that they'll protect him.
All private health care is in business for is to take profit. They have have no more interest in providing a service than the government does. Privatization advocates are at best dishonest.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer