It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


HR20-New Mother's Mandated Mental Health Test-JUST PASSED HOUSE!

page: 5
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in


posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 07:07 AM
Let's see, the gov't wants to place children on drugs when they are 14-16 years old if they "think" they have mental issues, then they wanna place those same kids when they get into trouble on trial as an adult, and then place them on mind-altering drugs, and now they are wanting to place new mothers on mind-altering drugs if they don't pass gov't mandated testing! Anything wrong with this picture folks? I mean, our gov't, that same gov't who lied us into wars in vietnam, ww2, korea, and Iraq, is the same gov't that is saying that "they" know what's best mentally for our kids and their mothers? C'mon now, GW Bush said that "God" told him to invade Iraq! I guess mommy Barbara skipped her meds didn't she? The same gov't that keeps lying to us is going to tell us what's best for our kids? The same gov't that can't balance our budget, pay down our national debt, keep us outta wars, and is now making america look like we're a "prozac" nation to the world?

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 01:32 AM
I think some test, maybe not one as ill timed as this, should be implemented. Just like someone stated earlier, the amount of people who are ill suited for parenthood yet still have children is ridiculous.

Maybe if they were to undergo a test during the first three months of the pregnancy then they could more accurately determine whether or not the person is fit to be a mother, and if they are not then there is still the option of abortion. And please don't go raging about how wrong it is, rather the child not be born then live in abuse and an unstable household, which would lead that child to live the same lifestyle in the future.

posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 01:34 AM
Here's the answer to what will happens when the newborns mother doesn't meet the criteria of acceptable.

There she was at Washington Hospital Center on an early spring afternoon, three days after giving birth. She'd be taking Luke home to the room she had lovingly prepared, to a time she'd dreamed about for years, just the two of them getting to know each other, reveling in the miracle of new life.
When nurses finally told Piper she was free to leave, no discharge papers for her son were brought out. Instead, she faced a parade of inquisitive official visitors, including uniformed police, a social worker, a psychiatrist, and assorted doctors and nurses. Her baby had been placed on medical hold while government investigators considered whether Piper was fit to take Luke home to Prince George's County, the authorities said. She had failed to bond with her baby, a nurse told Piper.

If people are left in any doubt what will happen when a Postpartum Depression questioner is given, and the answers don’t satisfy the hospital - this is it.
You people on this thread who didn't believe, who thought *oh that can’t happen* - Well light shines on marble head huh.

"She told me the burden was on me to prove that I should be allowed to take my baby home," says Piper, a lawyer who works at the U.S. Department of the Interior.

Now they’re even going to ask about CONCEPTION!

When a social worker asked for details of Luke's conception -- Piper is a single mother and, at 50, an unusually old one -- Piper concedes she blew up. "My attitude with her was confrontational because I was getting scared they would take my son from me," she says.

That is just beyond the realm of believability you might say - guess what, it’s not.
I’ve a feeling many people who think this kind of thing just *doesn’t happen in America* has got a very rude awakening coming to them.

The article goes on to say putting a medical stay on a newborn is a rare move, but immediately counters with:

Astonishingly, that's a matter of debate. When I wrote about a similar case of overzealous child protection last year... But in that same case, Roque Gerald, then deputy chief of the city's child protection agency and now its head, criticized "defensive child welfare. In our attempt to protect, we have also lost the ability of balance for fear of retribution."

Please visit the supporting thread here on ATS:


posted on Apr, 25 2009 @ 01:42 AM
This dreadful piece of legislation is a good example of why the USA is in so much trouble.

No where in the Constitution of the United States will one find authority to enact this sort of legislation.

Even if God wrote this piece of legislation, God would not have constitutional authority to enact it, mandate it, or enforce such legislation.

When it comes to legislation enacted by Congress in the USA or Parliament in Canada the idea that less is more is proven right time and again ... yea, even, time out of mind...

posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 09:28 AM
And yet the truly wacky mother who in no way can raise all her kids on her own passes with flying colours?


Anyone else think this legislation is to be used in nefarious ways.

Also, wonder if her work in the Department of the Interior has anything to do with this off the wall visit from these officials??


posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 10:11 AM
I am sorry you did not pass the test and now the state will take possession of your baby. Folks it will not stop there the next thing on this administration's agenda will be if you are qualified to marry the person you have choicen to marry.

I believe in the very near future you will be told what food to eat and how much and if you are not within a certain weight range for your height and bone structure you will not qualify for governmental health care coverage.

Will my right to have my own medical health coverage be taken away from me when the government run healthcare system is put into place? What an absolute nightmare with the government running your healthcare system and the millions of government employees and the major bureaucracy it will take to administrate such an undertaking. Can you imagine going to the government run doctor's office and you answer a question on a questionaire wrong or not to their satisfaction and you are denied the coverage for your particular ailment.

It is coming folks, if a particular product is not green you can not legally purchase that item in the future.

To reduce greenhouse gas emmissions it will be mandatory to shut off your electricity at certain times of the day or night to be in compliance with Big Brother's enviromental agenda.

To eliminate methane gases the amount of cattle to be raised will be restricted. This will go down in history as the most intrusive and controlling administration this country has every seen.

[edit on 26-4-2009 by amari]

posted on May, 4 2009 @ 10:11 AM
... The house is utterly incapable of seeing the bigger picture. The bigger picture in this case, is that they are going to create more suffering than they are trying to save the public from.

...Or do they even care?

posted on May, 4 2009 @ 02:54 PM
This sort of crap might encourage more mothers to be to avoid prenatal care and doctors in the first place. Or push more women towards using midwives. Which might be a better thing, in my opinion. Healthy women with normal pregnancies would probably have a better pregnacy and birth using midwives then using the medical industrial complex.

top topics

<< 2  3  4   >>

log in