this program scared me s***less. Medicating children at 4 years of age and telling them they have no impulse control? They are 4 years old!

I am so grateful this diagnosis didn't exist when I was a kid. I was a very depressed child, suicidal at times, and my mother took me to several shrinks between 4th grade and 8th grade. One was even in the city. All of them told my mother words to the effect it was pre-adolescence (I was a early developer) and I would calm down once my hormones did. The other response she got was that I was a genius and I saw the world differently. Nothing to worry about. I shudder to think what she would have been told today. And I shudder to think of me as a pre teen, taking the same meds I am currently on, black box warning at all. And I realize if that had been the case, I would have died before I was of age to vote. And for that I am grateful these things did not exist 20 or 30 years ago.

I am currently battling with different pdocs, changes to meds and what not that have rendered me impotent in my brain. It's hell to go through this now, as a grown woman, but I have a voice to question the docs and even disagree with them if I feel the need and fire them. I cannot imagine going though this in Elementary School or Jr. High.

I watched about 2 minutes of the show early on and the last 10 minutes. I will be watching it all (I probably don't have time until tomorrow). First of all... Yeah they were only mentioning that the kids are "moody" no actual picture of what bipolar disorder is like. One kid was mentioned as disruptive (ummn how about try disciplining your child not medicating them?) One parent mentioned how her daughter is becoming moody again and isn't sure if it's the bipolar disorder or the fact that she is turning 13. HELLO - Who doesn't know that kids are up and down emotionally probably more so then any point in their lives when they are that age and going through puberty. I saw no mention of how seriously dangerous these drugs are. I'll have more comments after watching the whole show.

thank you Philip for including the Frontline documentary on your website. I will try to watch it tonight as I had a prior enagement and missed the show.

What people need to really hear that was said in that program, is that anti depressants were dropped in use by doctors via the blackbox warnings, and atypicals were replaced for use. This is what is happening now, with the use of Risperdal, Abilify, etc.

The 2 boys shown in the program are quite alarming, one has permanent head and neck movements, which in my opinion look like a side effect from the Risperdal, and it's being called simply a tic.

The young boy who sees Dr. Bacon has me the most alarmed, and I want to emphasize that one needs to watch the program and watch the doctor react to the mother/parents questioning of the medications their boy is taking after they watched the Rebecca Riley 60 minutes show. This doctor waved away any idea of therapy, due to him "not being able to get anything from it due to symptoms", and said the boy is 99% treatable with meds only.
When that mom described the child's morning anxiety getting to school, the doctor said they could "get through the morning" or he could give him Xanax. Basically they left with an increase of other meds he was on, and defeated the purpose of the parents concern. When the doctor handed the mom a Trileptal rx, all he told them was to watch for nausea and sleeping all day.

This is what happens in these appointments. The parents are basically trusting a doctor, and if you pay close attention to Dr.Bacon, you will see how it's meds on top of meds and more meds.

I could see the mother's hesistant look on her face when she questioned the meds, and was glad to hear her decline the Xanax. When a person like her is in a doctor's office [and I mean this nicely]the doctor rules the roost. She clearly is learning from her gut instinct and I have a feeling she will get a little more pushy now.

The fact that Dr. Joseph Biederman refuses all media interviews is an example of an evil axis, at work, and I feel the program exposed quite much about how we got into that evil pit.

Dr. Carlat had one snippet that said, "You don't know who to trust.", and I believe he has that right, especially since he is in the process of repaying his "debt to society" for selling Effexor via speaking engagements, and now he's doing "counter" talks for free.

What is alarming and what made me the most upset, due to being a parent who sat in doc offices from 1999 until present, was that the same ease of rx is being dosed out, TODAY, and to younger children, and now more and more anti psychotics are being used, it is an alarming situation.

The reporter questioned the FDA spokesman regarding why there isn't a black box on antipsychotics, which are more dangerous in side effects than anti depressants, and he stated because all of the data is only about "demented elderly".

Lack of data, doctors pushing pills to parents like they are aspirin. That mother had no information given to her about what Trileptal is, does or any side effects except for nausea and fatigue.

If anyone was watching with a certain view point say, pharma, or parents drugging their kids, go watch it again and pay attention to Dr. Bacon, he is clearly riding the axis of evil.

My take on it is not quite as pessimistic as the reader you've quoted above. I think the producer/investigator was and probably had to be rather subtle in her anti-drug and anti-psychiatry message to get it by the PBS "censors". Remember PBS has a lot of big pharma funding. Personally I thought she made a fool of Chang and some of the treating physicians she showed. Sure she didn't say it explicitly but the message was there. These guys were arrogantly and cavalierly playing with children's lives and had no idea what they were doing. I think that came across frankly pretty loud and clear. But then I am coming at it from my own very experienced background and it's possible that that wouldn't be the take home message if you were seeing it as a neophyte. One thing is obvious there is a rush to "pathologize" disruptive behavior and nowhere (in the show at least) was there any nod to how the parents or the circumstances (or the shocking diet in one case) of the poor kids' lives might be influencing their acting out. Anyway there is more but will await PD's response to post further comments.

I agree with Sara. I thought it showed a clear disconnect between the lives of the patients, that the meds cause more "symptoms"--a true self-fulfilling prophecy, and that the docs are so out of touch.

Can I just say that what I felt during the show was extreme relief? I live in Denver and I had my son on Dr. Bacon's waiting list (or rather made an appointment for 6 months out because that's how many patients he has) before I found our current shrink, who is great, who will not treat my son unless he has therapy (symptoms and all!), and is helping us take him off of abilify. Relief, pure and simple!

I would love to sit someone down who knows little to nothing about the issue and tell us what they think of how people were portrayed. Part of me thinks that it was a clear thesis of the documentary that the young man with the head-movement-side effects was clearly made worse by adding meds. 8 at one time! Before 12 years old!

I wish the documentary had touched on other treatments for these sets of behaviors other than medication. Therapy, special school settings, physical activity, supplements and diet. They showed the one boy doing yoga, but that was it. That was disappointing.

I posted at Frontline discussion, but too lazy to figure out where it got posted if at all, I will try again:

Anyone who wants to feed their child psychotropic drugs should ingest them first, at least once, but preferably, if you're a loving parent, try your child's prescription for a week.

It won't kill you. Especially if you're totally healthy and NORMAL. After all, these pills are designed to make you NORMAL, so you'll just be a bit MORE NORMAL, that's all.

If after you do that you can bring yourself to feed those pills to your child again, then I take my hat off to you.

I'm willing to bet that if you try a decent (say 10mg or 15mg) Zyprexa pill even ONE TIME (or respective dosages of Risperdal or Abilify or Seroquel, whatever atypical you pick) you will never again consider medicating your child with these types of drugs.

While I'm at it, let me say that I used to believe in the doctrine that these meds are different for everyone, they work in some, they don't work in others, I no longer believe that at all.

They are equally vicious in everybody, it's just that some people can FIGHT the side effects for a while longer. In the long run, maintenance treatment on any psychotropic will destroy your body AND your mind.

And after watching the PBS show on treating kids, I have decided that the situation is so out of control, that I would rather go with the Tom Cruise / Scientology movement than these 4th Reich experiments that Psychiatry is doing on children today.

As far as the doctors who are doing this to kids, it won't matter if it's out of ignorance or blind trust in pharma sponsored research/marketing or straight up for the money: the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

"This doctor [Bacon] waved away any idea of therapy, due to him "not being able to get anything from it due to symptoms", and said the boy is 99% treatable with meds only."

This dubious advice caught my attention too. I would have been out of that doctor's office like a flash.

The number of general medical practicioners (GP's, pediatricians, etc.) prescribing these drugs to their young patients made an impression on me too. I find that trend to be a perfect illustration of the arrogance of some doctors. I also find the practice gravely irresponsible in most circumstances.

The most exciting idea in the film came from the doctor, whose name I cannot remember, advocating using the CCSS model of collaborative research, studies, education, etc. in the pediatric neuroscience community. I can't see a downside for the field or the young patients if a similar organizational structure was adopted.

I don't have anything. Had the boy with the rolling head on my mind all day. The doctors say we're deluded, we're living in a fantasy world? This is mad scientist redux, in the 21st century.

All I noticed was how fat the mothers were. Every one of them obese, as in unfulfilled women in shitty marriages taking comfort in the kitchen. Used to be programs to assess and treat emotional eating in women, but I'm so old I remember when something like that would be seen as an indication of emotional dysfunction, in the sort of family where a kid might take on a problem role to give the family unit a focus to keep them together. How quaint.

One thing to pay close attention to when watching this program, is what Jacob's Dad [boy with head movement]said when they sent him to a hospital and was removed of all of his medications from that original ADHD dx--"within 24 hrs" they slapped the Childhood Bipolar Disorder on Jacob. Right there--that is how it happened with my daughter, except hers was from OCD to Childhood Bipolar, when she was in the hospital for severe reactions to the meds, of which I knew nothing about back in 1999.

It's also interesting to remember that Chang and Biederman are both on CABF Professional Advisory board, and that organization is equal in influencing parents who read and post on the forum there. They have an interview up now with another major abstract top dog in this field, they are all connected. Missing from the interview were the authors of the Bipolar Child Book, and again this is another mass influence directed toward parents, and again all of this added together, including basic trust of doctors depicts how easy it is for parents to fall into this trap, as much as many don't want to read that, this is how it works. It takes over your life, and you often hear others talk about parents with young kids, [like the mom of the young boy]"they have a long road ahead of them". The parent hears this, buys it all, and it becomes lifestyle. At the end of that mom's day with 2/3 of her kids on meds, at appointments and running the house, she would tell you she has no time for herself. She will learn one day she needed to pay attention to that and see the big picture--she can't see it right now. I say this from experience, and yes regarding the bad marriage FP comment and weight, I lost quite a lot,[not enough]once that ended. Again, this is what concerns me about how this paradigm has increased and is speeding ahead in full force with FDA approving use in these meds for use in kids such as Risperdal and Zyprexa, because this is going to be a social implosion backlash in the next decade of a large magnitude. There will be more kids like Jacob and my daughter.....

FP, I've had the same thoughts (not that I'm skinny or anything). That scene with the kid shoveling corn dogs will someday be looked upon with the same tragic irony as drapetomania, the Total Woman and Reefer Madness (oh wait apparently reefer madness is considered "scientifically" valid these days with smoking weed enough to get a kid labeled bipolar, borderline, antisoical and oppositional defiant, but I digress), as will the poor young man twitching.

Why were none of the medical folks curious about the familial relationships and their impact on these kids?

Did any thereapist even note that the moms were morbidly obese?

There are some good responses and bad on the pbs site.

As I read some of this stuff about children and medication and children being hospitalized at very yound ages, I have to stop and wonder what the long term consequences will be, not only the physical consequences. With all the gun control laws that appear will be inacted and people with psych historys being placed on national data bases. What will the long term consequences of all that be? Will children be able to obtain insurance as adults because they will be considered high risk just for taking these medications as children? Will we bar them from being able to obtain certain forms of employment based on drug use and the labeling we are placing on them. Do these issues concern the medical professional at all?

The below quote is from an email from my husband whom I asked to watch the show. He knows about psychiatry pretty much only through what I've told him and from living with me as a diagnosed person. He does not follow any of this stuff on a regular basis. I found his response to the show interesting. (we're currently on different coasts, hence the email exchange)

"I've watched half of it so far - will watch the rest later today. I understand that you might find the program's focus limited,but I think that it's done very well and I find it extremely disturbing.

Psychiatry is to mental illness, what medicine was to the treatment of contagious disease before there was any understanding of microbiology. (That is however an imperfect analogy in that whereas a tool (the microscope) was key to unlocking understanding, in this case focusing on metabolic functions doesn't provide insight into the social matrix. In the Frontline report, the questions that are begging to be asked relate to what is going on inside the families, the schools, the exposure to toxins, etc.)

I'd be interested in someone conducting this thought experiment. Ask a doctor to propose a course of treatment for a disease on the assumption that he had an array of pharmaceuticals known to have some limited effect in treating particular symptoms, but that in terms of internal medicine, nothing was known about the disease. Picking the right disease would be key to making this a compelling narrative -- in other words, it would need to a disease with a suitably exotic array of symptoms and that does in fact have a well understood and effective form of treatment. Showing what the alternative and exclusive use of symptomatic treatment would look like, would convey the extent to which drug psychiatry is a form of quackery.... Just an idea."

I know I'm late to the thread, but I watched the video last night and I've been thinking about it since.

As a mom of an active 18 month old, I found myself noticing the powerlessness of the parents. They were trying to do the "right thing"--defined as getting treatment for their kids. Yes, some kids were eating horribly and that may have contributed, and we, as outsiders, can take this is evidence of bad parenting, but I seriously doubt these families were outliers in that respect. I don't think that's the central issue here, and can we please not blame a mother's weight for all of her family's difficulties?

Unless you've been through the the wringer with meds, either for yourself (like I have, and many people here) or your kids or both (like Stephany), how are you going to know what a trap this is? How were Jacob's parents supposed to know what was starting when their son's teacher started pressuring them to get "treatment"? Based on my own experience, I know that the moment anyone implies my daughter needs a diagnosis or meds, particularly a teacher, my daughter will be pulled out immediately. I know that once someone is labeled there is no going back, but if I hadn't experienced this myself, I could see ending up exactly where Jacob's parents are.

As a relatively new parent, I often feel that everywhere we turn there's an expert to tell us we're doing something wrong. No matter what you do, with regard to feeding, sleeping, discipline, potty-training, activities, schooling or ANYTHING, there is some expert who wrote a book somewhere detailing the many ways that you are damaging your child. It can be absolutely paralyzing. Our approach was to stop reading parenting books and start reaching out to other parents, but I think we're unique. Families are no longer connected to their communities, to faith, to extended families. As a society, we can't fill that void with a prescription pad, but apparently we're trying.

Two other things struck me:

1) Jessica saying that her meds made her "more like she was supposed to be" absolutely broke my heart. I have grappled long and hard with the deep sense that I was broken due to my diagnosis, and my label was applied at 19, not at the tender age of 5.

2) Based on the history as presented, Jacob had never had a true off-meds trial since the age of 4 or 5, and in the meantime the diagnosis changed several times. By the end of the show he was 16. They keep going with meds (thankfully reducing from 8) but they have no idea what he's like now without them.

All of these kids, AND their parents, seemed to be trying so hard, under difficult circumstances and with horrible horrible advice from people who were supposed to be caring for them. My heart went out to all of them.

'undiagnosed', made a good point and one that I lived. I repeatedly told psychiatrists that not one of them made a diagnosis[and they gave her just about everything in the DSM except Borderline]off of medications. Before the age 11 Imipramine beginning [for bed wetting prevention]she was a motor-mouth, full of life, book worm who called herself "Tigger" for being like the bubbly Disney character. Not one doctor, not one saw her off of meds, and when she DID go off of all meds the summer of 2005, it took an inpatient psych doc no time at all to start her on a new road to hell at age 17, --11 meds in 13 weeks, discharged on 5!

The program for me, was like watching my life for nearly a decade, and seeing Rebecca Riley's face was like seeing my daughter's; and hearing Jessica sing at the end, well that was it, between her and Jacob, my heart just broke.

My hope lives with the youngest boy shown, that somehow he can be taken off meds before he ends up --ruined, physically, therefore and mentally.For life.

Undiagnosed, that's a strawman argument, no one but you said there was assumptive evidence of "bad parenting".

If what you take from this discussion is really "blaming a mother's weight for all of her family's difficulties," you need to think larger and more psychologically about what's been said. Look at the fact that every mother is significantly overweight, and ask what avenues of investigation remain that have been ignored in these family systems. What is ignored can't be ameliorated, which means nothing changes, one wins, and the child bears the cross for the rest of his life.

It would certainly be wrong to blame a mother's weight for all of a family's problems. Of course a mother's weight can be a factor or not, or a symptom or not, but the fact that it's something noticeable in all of the families profiled is interesting I think, and troubling, signifying to me, along with the demeanor of the fathers and of course through the biased lens of my own experience, that the mothers might be eating to get gratification not provided by their husbands while ineffectively attempting to control their children, baffled, not because they are necessarily bad people, but because the system in which they live is inherently broken.

Or it could be bored lonely people pathologizing normal childhood behavior because parenthood didn't live up the bogus entertainment and comfort they were raised to expect from kids in our consumer society, because the system in which they live is inherently broken.

Or it could indicate that mother and child are eating poor diets and not getting proper nutrition, but if all Americans in that boat were labeled mentally ill, most would be in trouble. I think that's the direction we are moving in.

Or I suppose the kids could really need the drugs but I haven't seen any compelling evidence of that possibility.

I would like to see some type of rating scale regarding parenting skills and displine much like the Conner rating schools use to determine if a child has ADHD prior to any child being put on medications. If it's determined parenting skills are the problem, required parenting classes be insitituted. Teachers and anyone involved in the medical treatment of children would be requried to attend parenting education classes. Psychiatrist would need extended and indept training in parenting. This may increase the number of parents on medication, but it might allow for infants and children a chance to live drug free.

flawedplan--My initial comment may have came across too harshly. I read comments elsewhere (including the online discussion with the producer that Philip linked to) and concern about diet and parenting showed up there as well (aspects of which I certainly share). What I was trying to add to the conversation was a sense of identifying with the parents far more than I had expected to. I'm new enough to the parenting game that I still find this surprising at times.

It has been interesting reading through the comments. My first reaction to Dr. Chang's research in "preventing" the trigger of bipolar was that it could be good. Of course there's the "uneasy relationship" that he described, being funded by the drug companies, but wouldn't we want to delay the onset of symptoms? As I understand from my own doctor, bipolar is progressive, and what I can do that is best for myself is consistently stay on my meds (thankfully only two, and kept at the lowest dosage possible). But I thought about the idea of having a brain scan as a child and being given meds to "prevent" or postpone the onset of bipolar, and I don't think that is good either. The tragedy is that so often, as in my and my sister's cases, the diagnosis came tragically late. And I think that is the reason I was initially drawn to the idea of having been able to postpone the symptoms.

Dr. Bacon was extremely cavalier in his response to the mother who was so concerned about her son's medications. He didn't even engage her concerns or questions. What arrogance.

And the little girl who was singing at the end made my heart absolutely ache. There was something so precious, unguarded, and absolutely *herself as she sang in front of the camera. I have made a similar comment about being on meds helping me to be more like who I am, and perhaps that is what she is saying. There is the difficulty of separating ourselves from the idea of "normality", but the years that I went undiagnosed there was an uneasy unrest about something not being "right". Medication has provided relief from me (although on this side of things, I have also struggled with the grief of feeling "broken", as a previous commenter wrote).

Overall, I think that medicine has gotten lazy with diagnosing patients, handing out meds and then more meds, and wish that they would change their approach. I *loved the collaborative research model, and think that is probably one of the best ways to move forward, as it allows for different voices and perspectives to engage, push back, challenge, question, and seek together.

Tonight I spoke with a friend who had spent last night with an old high school friend who has a son who was diagnosed with ADD, the family now thinks wrongly, and got permanent brain damage from the drugs he took for ADD before being diagnosed with you guessed it child bipolar. He's heavily drugged and they wonder what's wrong with him. I guess it would never occur to them or the doctors that it's the drugs. My friend told me it was just like I said the woman had no clue that most credible science indicates there's no such thing as child bipolar. If the old friend watched the PBS special she still has no idea. A real tragedy and why I still think the show was a bio psych infomercial.

Last night I watched the show again to see for sure that my impression that the the producer Marcela Gaviria was being deliberate in her choices to make an anti-drug, anti-psychiatry message and I have to say I still think she was. Even the list of resources that is cited on the website are all about trying to treat developmental problems without drugs. Then I decided to skim through some of the doctor interviews. Just imagine my astonishment and shock when I learned that little five year old Julie had already been on an antipsychotic for a month when she was filmed in the doctor's office as a "classic case of bipolar". That is so despicable and unethical that I feel like sending Dr. Axelson (even sounds like the evil axis?!) a personal e-mail telling him a thing or two. How do we know that that manic(?) behavior was not in fact treatment induced or exacerbated? I can guarantee you it was. If AAPs drive adults crazy what do they do to five year olds?! Honestly this just reconfirms for me in a very big way the total narcissism and self centered navel gazing that characterizes the field of psychiatry. No scruples at all. Now I think I'll post something like this on the Frontline site.

I'm kind of glad Philip hasn't been posting since it keeps this thread within shouting distance of the top of the page. Sara--I also noticed that the producer was careful to use language like "DJ, whose doctor believes he has bipolar disorder" when she could just as easily have written "DJ, who is bipolar." That kind of language, combined with footage where she lets the doctors squirm, seems to speak to your point. Many important points questioning meds are not made, and she includes the discredited SSRI/suicide study, but I agree with your impression that she is not fully in the drug camp.

It's true if you're watching carefully and you are aware that there's no evidence bipolar disorder exists then sure the show gives you something. But the "believes she is bipolar" language which was good also has a bad side in that it makes it appear that these children have behavoirs that justify drugging whether they are bipolar or not. The poor kid with the facial twitch is a perfect example. The show never really got to the point which was to show or at least give an example of some kind of behavior manifesting in the kid that would justify giving him drugs that have made him apparently have involuntary muscle spasticity for life. In my opinion no such behavior exists and there can never be any justification for doing such a thing to a child. I don't give my dog treats without reading the label, I don't take a pill without looking it up in the pdr. Tardive dyskinesia is a known side effect of antipsychotics. These parents have no excuse.

It's easy to criticize people when you haven't walked in their shoes. I saw parents (mostly the mothers) simply trying to do the best for their child. I have personal experience with this - I am bipolar and there's a good chance that one of my children will be, too.

My one son has severe ADHD (which can sometimes be a misdiagnosis - and is really bipolar) and he takes medications. We are very cautious with the medications he gets (only two). If he isn't medicated, he can't concentrate in school and is a whirlwind through the house.

His behavior has caused children and adults to shun him - like he's some kind of monster (which he is most definitely not.) It is unfair to HIM not to help him feel his best.

I'm not overweight. We occasionally give our kids a corndog - with good vegetables and fruit. The snacks they get are fruit or veggies - sometimes a fruit roll-up.

Unfortunately, obesity runs in families - thanks to mom and dad - but give the kid a break! It was a corn dog - not a helping of cotton candy.

It's easy to criticize people when you haven't walked in their shoes. I saw parents (mostly the mothers) simply trying to do the best for their child. I have personal experience with this - I am bipolar and there's a good chance that one of my children will be, too.

My one son has severe ADHD (which can sometimes be a misdiagnosis - and is really bipolar) and he takes medications. We are very cautious with the medications he gets (only two). If he isn't medicated, he can't concentrate in school and is a whirlwind through the house.

His behavior has caused children and adults to shun him - like he's some kind of monster (which he is most definitely not.) It is unfair to HIM not to help him feel his best.

I'm not overweight. We occasionally give our kids a corndog - with good vegetables and fruit. The snacks they get are fruit or veggies - sometimes a fruit roll-up.

Unfortunately, obesity runs in families - thanks to mom and dad - but give the kid a break! It was a corn dog - not a helping of cotton candy.

I can't seem to let this show go, not least because I might as well confess I'm in it. That's me and my daughter pictured when they start the coverage of the FDA hearing on antidepressants. I wondered to myself if even that was a little deliberate since we're on the Stanford campus, a little dig at Kiki Chang perhaps? My daughter was "treated" by Stanford psychiatrists. Anyway I'm not saying that the show hits you over the head with its point of view because many of the biopsychiatry crowd seem to be kind of happy with the show too, but if she'd been too hard hitting she wouldn't have got the cooperation she did from those clinicians. They just fed right into what she was trying to do. I wrote a great comment to Frontline but not holding my breath that they will post it and unfortunately I didn't save my copy of it the way I thought I had.

I do think it's possible the parents on the show really were concerned about their children. The kid in the show didn't just eat one corn dog however, he ate a lot of them. Again the old obesity runs in families theory was good back when obesity was not the norm in our culture and it's certainly true that there are different body types that are normal but it's also true that our epidemic of obesity comes from lack of exercise and overeating. However many of us can't afford the cost of health food which may be yet another reason the poor are disproportionately obese and unhappy in a way that is often destructively labeled as mentally ill. And now a link the the NYTimes article about how much cheaper junk food is than health food:

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/05/a-high-price-for-healthy-food/

And there's the circular effect poverty causes physical and emotional exhaustion and lack of time to exercise (not everyone can afford to join a gym in the winter)
and poor diet which causes weight gain which causes low self esteem, which causes self absorption which means inability to parent in a way that teaches your child impulse control which causes the child to mirror your behaviors and then throw in expensive meds to make you and your kids poorer, less in control of your impulses and hungrier....much like how the obesity is genetic, dieting won't do any good idea fell out of fashion (so the pharmacos had find another reason to prescribe speed, enter adhd) and now we know that positive attitude, diet, and exercise help physical health, some day we'll figure out the same about mental health. Meanwhile, I've lost 9 pounds!

But the obese thing is related to the mental health thing in another way...when someone is considered fat is subjective and people I think are fat might disagree and we don't legally force people who meet the medical definition of over weight to go on "legally assisted diets," even though obesity related illnesses certainly cause more deaths than even TAC's most generous estimate of mentally illness related deaths. Why, I wonder.

You make a great point about obesity, Sally, and one which hits pretty close to home as my sister died from it. The fact is that people deemed "sane" are allowed to make their own choices, no matter how wrong they are.

The "insane," of course, are denied this. Why doesn't TAC apply the same rules here? Deem obesity a mental illness and call all fat people incompetent. The "proof" that obesity is a mental illness is that you'd have to be incompetent to let yourself get fat. That's no stupider than anything else that TAC argues.

Thanks Francesca. Angela's assertion that obesity runs in families reminded me of something intertesting. In the 70's and 80's at least, it was thought in scientific circles that obesity was caused not by diet and lack of exercise, but by genetics and "metabolism." I remember in the 90's reading one morning the New York Times that a study linked obesity with caloric intake determining that people who are overweight eat more that people who are not. Talk about a study to prove the obvious.

These days when 30 percent of the US is overweight, every one acknowledges that diet and exercise, i.e. environment, cause obesity and we're seeing some changes for the better in dietary habits that we didn't see when obesity was viewed as genetic.

Maybe something similar is happening in the mental health industry. In these days of little excercise, poverty, and unhealthy food, so many humans are reacting negatively that there maybe hope that some one will realize the problems are caused not by genetics but by the society.

Because I wrote a letter into Frontline (never published) about how Jessica was medicated with an antipsychotic before her "diagnosis" was ever confirmed and how outraged I was, I have been following the Discussion on the Frontline website. I urge all of you to read the two most recent letters, one from D.J.'s mother (featured in the show) and then a response from another mother with an "explosive" child. I think the most recent letter is extremely revealing. Bottom line is supplements can be an answer to all this and can help people get off meds, but you probably need a professional who knows about them. Go to bipolarblast.wordpress.com for more on this topic. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/medicatedchild/talk/
Sara

Sara, I just wanted to say I didn't miss your post above that says you are in the Frontline program. I want to thank you, for paving the way for people like me, when I've been in the trenches.