Medical Whistleblower

Supreme Court Decisions: Corporations as powerful “persons”

2012-01-19T17:35:00.000-08:00

William Blackstone once said “the most powerful individual in the state will be cautious of committing any flagrant invasion of another’s right, when he knows that the fact of his oppression must be examined and decided by twelve indifferent men.”

The jury is particularly important today, as powerful corporations encroach ever further into our political system. The jury is important to help counter-balance the powerful influence of the special corporate interests with those of the common people. As corporations use their great financial assets to lobby their own legislative agendas and ply their influence on even the executive branch of government, the jury stands as a sanctuary for justice for the American people.

Judges at all levels work daily to ensure that the court system protects the rights of everyday Americans. As a grassroots movement to protect the rights of “human persons” in front of our court system, we need to make clear that our judicial system must continue to offer a forum for all people, not just special interests, to seek justice.

But in the Supreme Court’s Citizens United case, a slim 5-4 majority allowed giant corporations unlimited license to drown out the voices of American citizens in our elections.

There have been over recent years many Pro-corporate Supreme Court decisions. In Supreme Court cases below it is easily demonstrated how these legal precedents can do great damage to the rights of everyday Americans, minorities, the elderly, consumers, the middle class, the environment, and even to established law.

For examples of how the Supreme Court decisions have eroded the rights of “human persons” see these important Supreme Court Decisions:

The right to a jury trial - Rent-A-Center

The Supreme Court in the Rent-A-Center case has diverted working Americans away from a jury by forcing them before an arbitrator. In Rent-A-Center, for example, the Court stopped American employees who work under binding mandatory arbitration agreements from challenging unfair treatment by their employers in court. Americans, the slim majority held, cannot even go before a court to challenge an unconscionable arbitration agreement.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/09-497.pdf

The heightened legal standard to plead injury - Ashcroft v. Iqbal

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 129 S.Ct. 1937 (2009), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that top government officials were not liable for the actions of their subordinates absent evidence that they ordered the allegedly discriminatory activity. At issue was whether current and former federal officials, including FBI Director Robert Mueller and former United States Attorney General John Ashcroft, were entitled to qualified immunity against an allegation that they knew of or condoned racial and religious discrimination against individuals detained after of the September 11 attacks. In this case the Supreme Court overhauled the long-settled standard for what an injured person must allege in a complaint to get a case to a jury. In 2007, the Court had handed down its opinion in Bell Atlantic v. Twombly. The Twombly case had previously set the civil concept of “plausibility” as the dividing line between complaints that do and do not state a claim. In Ashcroft v Iqbal, the Supreme Court held that top government officials are not liable for the actions of their subordinates absent evidence that they ordered the allegedly discriminatory activity. The heightened fact pleading standards, as required by Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, was extended to all Federal court cases. So after Twombly and Iqbal, these higher pleading standards will mean that American workers will all have a harder time winning legal cases about corporate wrongs.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/08pdf/07-1015.pdf

The right to bring class action law suits - Walmart

In the largest employee class-action lawsuit in U.S. history the Supreme Court ruled that the case would not go forward as a class action suit. This was a major victory for Wal-Mart Stores and the case had been potentially worth billions in damages to the plaintiffs. As many as 1.6 million female employees from Wal-Mart were included in the sex discrimination case. Instead the court agreed unanimously that the litigation could not proceed as a class action form. This Supreme Court Decision reversed a decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The court split along 5-4 lines over whether the group presented a common claim in seeking an injunction that would have forced the retailer to change its employment practices.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/10-277.pdf

The right of small businesses to compete with the big business - Leegin antitrust case

Consider the Leegin antitrust case, where the 5-4 majority on the Court reversed many decades of precedent that had kept prices low for consumers, and had helped small businesses compete with corporate giants. The Supreme Court in this decision overturned nearly a hundred years of antitrust precedent in a groundbreaking 5-4 decision in Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc. The decision over tuned a previous decision which made it per se illegal for a manufacturer and its distributor to agree on a minimum price at which the distributor may resell the manufacturer’s goods.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/06pdf/06-480.pdf

The right of victims of environmental disasters to obtain adequate compensation - Exxon v Baker

See the Supreme Court Case Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker, 554 U.S. 471 (2008). This Supreme Court decision took the opinion that the punitive damages awarded to the victims of the Exxon Valdez oil spill should be reduced from US$2.5 billion to US$500 million.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-219.pdf

Employment Discrimination based on race or gender – Ledbetter v Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 550 U.S. 618 (2007), is an employment discrimination decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. Justice Alito held for the five-justice majority that employers cannot be sued under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act over race or gender pay discrimination if the claims are based on decisions made by the employer 180 days ago or more. Lilly Ledbetter found that she had been paid less than her male counterparts year after year despite working just as hard, Ms. Ledbetter brought suit against her employer. A jury heard the evidence in the case, found that the big corporation had indeed discriminated against Ms. Ledbetter, and awarded her back pay and damages. Then the corporation got the case before the Supreme Court. The conservatives on the Court decided to take the decision away from the jury.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-1074.pdf

Age Discrimination - Gross v FBL Services

In Gross v. FBL Services, a 54-year old man claimed that his employer had discriminated against him because of his age. A jury agreed. Again, the corporation turned to the Supreme Court. And again, a narrow majority of Justices overturned the jury decision – in the process making it more difficult for older Americans to prove they were wrongfully discriminated against on the basis of age.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/08pdf/08-441.pdf

Republican House Members withhold funding to important UN programs

2011-12-30T18:16:00.000-08:00

In a straight party-line vote of 23-15, Republican members of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs passed H.R. 2829, the U.N. Transparency, Accountability, and Reform Act of 2011. Among other things, the legislation seeks to withhold funding for several important U.N. programs and initiatives. The action of the House Committee on this issue seeks to restrict U.S. participation in the Human Rights Council which had issued a groundbreaking resolution addressing violence, discrimination, and incitement to religious hatred and the first ever resolution addressing violence and discrimination against LGBT persons.

"Eliminating U.S. engagement with the Human Rights Council would undermine the global leadership of the United States and our ability to build support to advance vital human rights protections for people around the world," read the letter from The Leadership Conference.

A key provision of the bill that cuts funding to U.N. bodies tasked with implementing human rights conventions to which the U.S. is not a party, such as the Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), the most comprehensive women's human rights treaty. This cut in funding would undermine the U.N.'s work in advancing the rights of women worldwide.

See this letter written by the Leadership Conference sent to members of the committee on October 13, 2011. letter opposing H.R. 2829

Human Rights as a Mental Patient - What about informed consent?

2011-12-02T23:06:00.001-08:00

What actually happened to Mark Taylor the miracle boy who survived being shot at the Columbine High School? Mark showed great strength of character to go through rehabilitation after his shooting and also great psychological resilience of spirit. Mark Taylor's recovery required multiple surgeries, an initial hospital stay of two months and the anguish of having tubes thrust down his throat and tubes placed in his side. ”The horror of what I went through in the hospital, I can’t even put in words,” said Taylor, who was shot by Eric Harris on April 20, 1999 during the Columbine High School shooting. http://columbinefamilyrequest.org/mark-taylors-blog/

Mark Taylor like many other victims of trauma had to fight back against the odds; it was a long journey of physical rehabilitation as well as spiritual journey that took him from shock to understanding. Mark chose to write a book about his experiences which highlighted the importance of his Christian faith and his own pathway to forgiveness and understanding. He has forgiven shooters Harris and Dylan Klebold and their families. He has talked to gang members and Vietnam veterans about forgiveness.

See the following website: http://columbinefamilyrequest.org/mark-taylor-defense-fund/mark-taylor/

Mark was a citizen whistleblower against the dangers of antidepressants and other psychotropic drugs. During the rigorous process of discovery prior to the legal battle with Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Mark Taylor was able to expose many dangerous truths about the pharmaceutical industry’s fraud against the American public. The pharmaceutical industry does not take kindly to this kind of exposure of their deeper secrets. Thus Mark Taylor and his mother, Donna Mae Taylor, were targeted with anonymous violence, surveillance, harassment, petty crimes, entrapment schemes and even a mysterious methane gas leak that forced Mark’s brother to seek medical care out of the state. During all this Mark was courageous and continuing to move forward with his life and sell his book.

Many of the other Columbine victims/survivors settled with the pharmaceutical company after threats that the lawsuit would ruin them financially. Mark and his mother experience continuing retaliation, threats of counter law suits, intimidation, surveillance and other forms of bullying behavior against Mark Taylor and his family. This is presumed to be intended to cause him to drop his law suit and to cease his public advocacy against antidepressants, SSRI medications and other psychotropic drugs.

In 2009 Mark Taylor was continuing to heal from his trauma and trying to continue to move forward with his life and sell his book, he was involved in television and radio show appearances and many book signings. Mark was told that he is accused of writing a letter that he would bomb a bookstore in Colorado Springs. He protests he is innocent of those accusations and that they are not true. He and his mother have no idea who started this hostile gossip.

Those with negative intent can often use the powerful mental health law to their advantage. Those wishing to silence Mark’s advocacy against the pharmaceutical drugs were suspected of being behind this fabricated allegation. Mark denies the truth of these accusations, but Mark is still grabbed by the police and put in 72 hours mental health hold in the hospital. So all it took was someone stating something and his freedom was lost, his right to face his accuser denied and his right to due process ignored. In addition he is denied his liberty and even his right to decide his own fate and medical care. He is held in incognito detention and his family is not allowed to see him for some time. During this time, those in charge of his captivity clearly get power over him – physically, emotionally, psychologically and legally. Mark is drugged against his consent, and held for a month and then let go with outpatient care but forced to take medications. Mark is then under the medical community’s monitoring and control. So suddenly Mark Taylor who has never had any due process, is not accused of any crime is now being forcibly drugged against his consent with lifelong consequences for him.

Doctors are very much influenced by what the pharmaceutical companies advertising states about these psychiatric medications. When facing a charge of mental illness, the patient is rarely believed and accusations against him readily believed. Then after that incident Mark Taylor’s mother reports that he was just walking in his neighborhood and he is suddenly confronted with police who drag him off on false pretenses that he was acting weird and they incarcerate him in a mental facility. He was admitted to the hospital. While there the mental health professionals decide to forcibly drug him with psychotropic medications without his informed consent and again refuse to let him for some time to communicate with his family. He finally was released as an outpatient but only after addicting him to psychotropic medications. Many who saw Mark prior to these hospitalizations remarked that Mark Taylor had resilience and had come a long way in his recovery. But with the use of powerful mind altering drugs, Mark slips into a state of incapacity. The very effects of the drugs make it less possible for Mark to express himself and to assert his rights as a human person. These drugs themselves cause a disruption in the ability to think. After his hospitalization the effects of the drugging on him are clearly evident. (See the video above)

In all these decisions Mark himself is not respected for what his own wishes were in regards to psychiatric medications - his views were very well known to all who heard him speak publicly and who read his book, “I Asked, God Answered … a Columbine miracle.” The medical professionals have not discussed or really explained the treatment to the family and continue to down play the very visible side effects of the drugs. Decisions about Mark's care were made by the doctors with no consultation with the family or even Mark himself. Donna Taylor continues to be concerned if Mark stays on these medications for a very long time there’s a increased risk of developing an irreversible behavioral and physical conditions.

Continued treatment with psychiatric drugs will cause significant effects and many do not realize how these powerful mind altering drugs affect patients. These psychiatric drugs block receptors in the brain and cause a decrease the flow of dopamine and serotonin - both neurotransmitters. This is why patients develop symptoms similar to Parkinson’s disease and get tired easily and move more slowly. Patients often show problems with speaking – getting the words out and also being able to think clearly and gather their thoughts.

These are the effects of the drugs themselves:

1. Psychomotor effects – muscles slowing, body not moving so well
2. Emotional indifference - not being emotionally responsive / not caring, apathy, lack of initiative, limited range of emotion,
3. Reduced initiative – not showing interest in initiating activity
4. Slowing of thought
5. Tremors
6. Difficulty eating and talking
7. Memory impairment
8. Not being able to sit still, pacing

These are not symptoms of the underlying disease - these are caused by the drugs themselves.

Thus the very effects of the drugs make it less possible for any patient to express himself and to assert his rights as a human person. These drugs themselves cause a disruption in the ability to think. High enough doses over a long period of time of many of these medications makes people quite depressed. Thus a cyclic drugging can get started with ever increasing symptoms of the drugs themselves which causes the treatment team to keep adding drug upon drug to manage the actual effects of the medications.

Mark's mother objects to the continued administration of even stronger drugs to Mark, drugs with more adverse effects that dull his mind, prevent his speech and slow his movements. She believes that he should be carefully weaned off these drugs and allowed to consider other options for mental health treatment.

Mark Taylor and his mother were staying with friends when one day Mark starts to experience an adverse effect of the very medication he was forced to take.

Mark was observed by a friend to have a short blacking out period and to be feeling these serotonin related side effects which were directly caused by the medication and his prescribed decreased dosage (caused by decreased levels of the neurotransmitter serotonin). This friend called an ambulance and Mark was admitted to the hospital – suffering from SSRI Discontinuation Syndrome – a side effect of his psychiatric medication.

Tapering off very, very, very slowly has proven the safest and most effective method of withdrawal of psychiatric medications. When discontinuing or withdrawing from a psychiatric medication that affects the brains serotonin level, a dangerous situation can occur a condition called the "SSRI Discontinuation Syndrome." When serotonergic activity dramatically decreases because the neurons aren't able to communicate properly with each other anymore. As a result of this decreased serotonergic activity, side-effects occur. Sometimes these side-effects are reported by the patient as feeling like electric shocks, zaps or shivers in the head (brain) or sometimes like “pins and needles” in the skin or like a light flickering in his/her head. These symptoms are sometimes so severe that the patient feels confused or like on the verge of blacking out or losing consciousness. These sensory disturbances may make the patient feel very confused and may involve short periods of short-term memory loss or absences. These absences are actually petit mal seizures which may be invisible to the observer and not recognized as epileptic activity.

This is an effect of the withdrawal of the prescribed drug itself - not a symptom of mental illness. It is caused by the drug.

Then the terrible tragedy of the downward spiral of more and more medication, more dangerous drugs until finally Mark was at one point according to his mother, in a coma. While all this psychiatric drugging was going on, his family was refused regular access to him and he was totally in the power of the doctors who were able to charge $700/day for his basic care and even more for treatment and diagnostics. This meant that the hospital bill was surely over a hundred thousand dollars and probably much higher.

Currently Donna Taylor is fighting for her son’s human right to not be drugged against his consent for a condition he may not even have. Mark regularly tells her that he does not want to take these medications but the doctors ignore his pleas for them to take him off or at least reduce the dosage. Donna Taylor is struggling against an entrenched mental health system where all the power lies with the hospital and the doctors and where there is little effort to respect the human rights of the patient or to honor the right of Donna Taylor as the legal guardian.

So let us review what the World Health Organization has to say about Mental Health rights.

World Health Organization’s Ten Basic Principles of Mental Health.

1. Promotion of mental health and prevention of mental disorders
2. Access to basic mental health care
3. Mental health assessments in accordance with internationally accepted principles
4. Provision of least restrictive type of mental health care
5. Self-determination
6. Right to be assisted in the exercise of self-determination
7. Availability of review procedure
8. Automatic periodical review mechanism
9. Qualified decision-maker
10. Respect of the rule of law

Everyone should benefit from the best possible measures to promote their mental well-being and to prevent mental disorders. This includes: 1) mental health promotion efforts 2) mental health prevention efforts.

Mental health care should be quality care that preserves the dignity of the patient allowing patients to cope by themselves and providing clinical and non-clinical care and a system of care that is affordable and equitable as well as accessible. Mental health care should be available on a voluntary basis.

Mental health assessments should be done in accordance with internationally accepted principles and should include: 1) diagnosis 2) choice of treatment 3) determination of competence 4) determination that someone may cause harm to self or others due to a mental disorder. They should only be done for purposes directly related to mental illness or consequences of mental illness.

The health care provided should be the least restrictive and should consider: 1) the disorder 2) available treatments 3) the person’s level of autonomy 4) the person’s acceptance and cooperation 5) the potential that harm be caused to self or others.

Community based treatment should be made available and institution-based treatments should be provided in the least restrictive environment. (Restraints should be strictly of limited duration only 4 hours for physical restraint and all restraints should be documented).

Consent is required. This includes all diagnostic procedures, medical treatment, drugs, electroconvulsive therapy and irreversible surgery and also any curtailment of liberty. Consent must also keep in mind the culture and the advice of family or friends. Consent should be free of undue influence and be informed. To be informed means to be accurately given enough information to understand the disadvantages, risks, alternatives, expected results and side effects of any treatment.

The designation of a surrogate decision maker should be made only in occasional instances and that person is empowered to make decisions in the patient’s behalf.

Persons have the right to be assisted in the exercise of self-determination if they have difficulties in general knowledge, ability to speak or other problem resulting from disability.

Mental health decisions are open to review at the request of interested parties including the person involved and should be done in a timely fashion. The patient should not be prevented to access review on the basis of his or her health status. The patient should be given an opportunity to be heard in person.

There also should be an automatic periodic review mechanism for all decisions that involve the integrity and or liberty of the person (treatment or hospitalization). These reviews should be conducted every 6 months by an official qualified decision maker. The decision making body should be more than one person and best if they are from different relevant disciplines.

A judge or other official decision maker such as a surrogate or guardian should be:
1) Competent 2) Knowledgeable 3) Independent 4) Impartial

There should be respect for the rule of law which can include the constitution, international case law, international agreements, regulations, laws, orders and decrees. The law should be accessible and understandable.

Foster Care Children Inappropriately Overdrugged

2011-12-02T00:22:00.001-08:00

Children in foster care are a very vulnerable population having been removed from abusive or neglectful homes. These children are experiencing childhood trauma, grief at loss of their biological family, loss of their home community and often having experienced severe abuse – physical, psychological, emotional and sexual. These are children who often have experienced years of trauma leaving them with complex post traumatic stress. Thus they are prone to show the symptoms of PTSD - which is often misunderstood and therefore is often treated as other mental health conditions instead.

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder or PTSD is best handled by cognitive behavioral therapy – this is proven to be effective for victims/survivors of sexual assault and also survivors of combat trauma. Cognitive behavioral therapy is usually provided by a therapist or psychologist. These children have come from a home environment which is like a combat zone – domestic violence, drug dealers, drive by shootings, child sexual abuse by relatives, abusive punishments, parents with mental illness who act irrationally and arbitrarily, and other traumatic events. Psycho-social treatment has better outcomes.

Child placement agencies, foster care parents and residential treatment centers get paid a daily sum for the care of a foster child. These allocated amounts are based on the federal entitlement system IV-e and are based on the level of care the child needs. The more difficult the child is to care for the higher the daily payment for care. Thus it is in the interest of the state agencies, social service workers, foster parents, and therapeutic clinicians to make the child appear on paper to need the highest level of care possible. Many foster children are labeled with more than one psychological diagnosis in order to upgrade their status to a higher level. Foster care daily rates run from $17 per day to $1,000 per day. To those in the business of providing welfare medical services, a child diagnosed with a mental disorder and placed on psychiatric drugs provides more income than a child without problems. In addition pharmaceutical companies often provide a "finders fee" to doctors who find additional children to place in clinical trials of drugs for "off label use". Psychiatrists who prescribe these medications according to pharmaceutical company directives are rewarded with paid educational conferences and continuing education credits, research funding and priority for selection to serve on prestigious posts at universities and on governmental agencies or public commissions. Talk therapy is not the usual work of psychiatrists in this modern age of mind altering psychiatric medications. Instead the standard psychiatrist is a clinician who uses drugs to alter behavior and spends very direct face to face time with patients. Prescribing psychiatrists are only required to spend 15 minutes every 90 days with their patient in order to collect their professional fee as a patient's doctor. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/mind-altering-psych-drugs-year/story?id=15066848#.TtrfltSKIrV

Thousands of foster children are routinely prescribed doses of psychotropic drugs that are higher than the maximum levels cited in guidelines based on FDA approved labels. This increases the potential for adverse side effects and does not typically increase the efficacy of the drugs to any appreciable extent. Even children as young as one year old were prescribed psychiatric drugs even though there were no mental health conditions in infants which would warrant their use. This certainly could result in serious adverse effects including metabolic and cardiovascular problems.

A 3 year old girl in Kansas died as a result of being overdosed on Seroquel. Both parents were former drug addicts and both diagnosed with bipolar disorder. This 3 year old girl starts acting out, banging her head against the wall, and even tried to suffocate a dog. The little girl who was only 37 pounds was prescribed 6o mgs/day. http://cjonline.com/news/state/2009-06-06/child%E2%80%99s_death_a_tragic_destiny

Many of these drugs cause symptoms that can themselves be construed as mental illness. The side effects of these drugs include suicidal thoughts, loss of coordination, hallucinations, kidney, thyroid, liver and pancreas damage, polycystic ovaries, weight gain, diabetes, tremors, potentially fatal neuroleptic malignant syndrome, rigidity, tardive dyskinesia, depression, agitation, sleeplessness, nightmares, blurred vision, decreased appetite, tics, and psychosis. As a class of drugs SSRIs can create a unique combination of side effects that may severely impair judgment and impulse control in individual patients. Excessive doses of antidepressants can cause brain dysfunctions including disorientation, confusion, and cognitive disturbances. The FDA warning specifically links antidepressant use to suicidal behavior in four percent of kids on these drugs compared to two percent for kids on placebos.

When the children show these symptoms they are often given higher doses of the drugs or even additional drugs, rather than being given lower dosages or taken off these medications. So a spiral occurs of increasing dosages of more powerful drugs leading to great symptoms and decreasing function of the child. When the child becomes unmanageable, they are placed in a residential treatment facility at $700 or more a day for weeks sometimes much longer. If the psychiatrist wants to change their medication and get them “habituated” on a new medication the child might be hospitalized for half a year or more. This all happens at the US taxpayers’ expense.

In an effort to expand the market for psychiatric drugs, pharmaceutical companies capitalized on the use of foster children to test their products on this vulnerable population. These children were not given the right to informed consent, they were wards of the court in a judicial system that is overworked and understaffed and where even CASA volunteers have little time to carefully review FDA information or scientific literature about the safety or effectiveness of prescribed medications. The legal surrogate decision makers for the child are not medically trained and often accept blindly the advice of the treating psychiatrist. No information about the long term consequences of the use of these medications in children is given to these decision makers so crisis decision making is the norm with the pills looking like the perfect quick fix. In addition the pharmaceutical industry has for decades controlled the release of negative information about their products by controlling all the publicity of research findings (funded by the industry), using an aggressive legal campaign to shut down any malpractice law suit¸ out of court settlements with gag orders for silence and suppressing court documents from discovery by having them sealed by the judge.

Through aggressive marketing to medical professionals, teachers, CASA volunteers, welfare case managers, and guardians, the pharmaceutical companies have now pushed the treatment of children for such mental diseases as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), bipolar disorder, depression and schizophrenia, often diagnosing them for these problems so as to use psychiatric medications “off label”. The Teen Screen program which pushed psychiatric drugs on school children is an example of this direct marketing by pharmaceutical companies. The pharmaceutical industry has placed industry representatives on major governmental panels and commissions order to influence policy to facilitate passing legislation that would approve the Medicaid payment of psychiatric medications for “off label” uses. But these drugs are not without risk, there are serious side-effects, including irreversible movement disorders, seizures, and increased risk of diabetes. Many patients who take these drugs also develop over time Parkinsonian side effects.

The prescription of these drugs is oftentimes very questionable and inappropriate prescribing to youth in state custody has lead to increased costs to the US taxpayer over the lifetime of the child. These children, who are often medicated with up to 5 drugs at the same time, have cognitive impairment, as well as physical dependency on the drugs. When they try to stop the medications they face severe withdrawal symptoms for up to 6 months and these symptoms can be misunderstood and the child instead re-drugged at high dosages. No study has been done to see if these foster children who were highly medicated were able to go on to productive independent lives after leaving foster care. During their years in foster care, many have been in and out of residential treatment, leading to disruption in their schooling. In addition these drugs change the child’s ability to think, reason, and also dull emotional awareness and response. This makes it difficult to learn and to relate to peers and their foster/adoptive family.

When they age out of the foster care system, they find themselves thrown out into a world that labels them as mental misfits, treats them with disrespect and forces them into being repeat users of the psychiatric industry/medical complex. Many end up in prison and then are force drugged by court order in prison and when they are released court ordered medicated for life. The costs of the repeat hospitalizations – at $700 -$1,000 a day along with the cost of medications at tens of thousands of dollars a year, is a cost borne by the US taxpayer often until the former foster child’s death.

Although these drugs produce no tolerance and no euphoria, they produce enduring post-discontinuation changes that are as extensive and long lasting as the changes underpinning current disease models of addiction. Patients also get withdrawal or discontinuation syndromes when they stop taking their medication or when their medication is lowered in dose. So when a patient runs out of medication or is suddenly put on a lower dosage they can demonstrate exacerbation of their clinical signs. Therapeutic dependence can be lifelong and thus the cost to the US taxpayer is also for the life of the foster child who often transitions into a life long welfare recipient or a prison inmate.

The danger of withdrawal from antidepressants and antipsychotics is well documented. The brain compensates for the blockage of the serotonin and dopamine receptors by growing additional receptors for these neurotransmitters. When the medications are discontinued or suddenly decreased, these additional receptors contribute to 'overload' of serotonin and dopamine flooding the receptor. This is known as discontinuation syndrome. What usually happens to the patient in withdrawal is that they end up back in the hospital again. These crisis admissions lead to being labeled with a new disease diagnosis – schizophrenia, or delusional or manic depressive and then placed on even greater dosages of even more dangerous drugs. The doctors in these instances are quick to blame the patient, for a relapse rather than considering when the patient last took his medication. Discontinuation syndrome can sometimes last for weeks or months - some people have said they can last as long as six months.

It has been estimated that 70% of the US prison population was once in foster care. Three in 10 of the nation's homeless adults report foster care history and this points to an obvious problem within our social service network. There are inadequacies in supervision of the placement of these children, clear indications of corruption within the system as well as neglect of the children’s needs. These traumatized children need us to protect them from abuse as human subjects for unauthorized research and we must as a nation be more careful in authorizing Medicaid payments for “off label use” of psychiatric drugs in our foster care system .

Violence and Anti-Depressants

2011-11-29T21:20:00.001-08:00

We are coming up on the 10th anniversary of the Columbine Shooting tragedy. On April 20, 1999, two teenagers, Eric Harris and his Dylan Klebold stormed the Columbine High School, in Littleton Colorado, tossing pipe bombs and shooting helpless classmates, killing thirteen and injuring 23 before taking their own lives. Harris and Klebold's deadly plan went undetected by friends, teachers, administrators -- and, apparently, their own parents -- until the killings began. Both Eric and Dylan were bright and generally did well academically in school. Both enjoyed their computer class in school. Jefferson County School District and Columbine High School officials did not address the environment of classroom and play yard bullying that existed at the school and students reported later that the bullying and harassment went on uncontrolled throughout the school. Following the investigation of the shooting it was revealed that Eric had been forced by court order to take psychiatric medication, the drug Luvox – an SSRI antidepressant that can cause violent behavior, suicide and homicidal thoughts. There was a group of twenty kids picking on other kids, including the shooters Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. They got spit on and called 'faggots' and pushed around. These two troubled boys, Klebold and Harris, plunged into a computer world where they could re-invent themselves and become more powerful and intimidating than the bullies at school they despised. Nobody did anything about the school bullying situation. Many teenagers at the school were reluctant to take their complaints to adults out of fear of retaliation or of being branded a snitch. Then the two outcasts decided to retaliate against those who bullied them – and the worst school mass murder occurred in Littleton, Colorado.

Eric Harris had experienced the life altering trauma of sexual assault. He was further re-traumatized by taunting by school classmates and was suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder or PTSD. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is a natural emotional reaction to a deeply shocking and disturbing experience. It is a normal reaction to an abnormal situation. Any human being has the potential to develop PTSD. But the use of Luvox - an antidepressant that affects serotonin levels in the brain was a disaster waiting to happen. Psycho-active antidepressants are capable of turning a depressed student into a smiling active killer.

What really happens inside the minds of "depressed" patients when these drugs are given? Let's consider first what is naturally happening to a victim of trauma and who has shown signs of depression or anxiety.

The truth is that sexual assault is a mind altering traumatic event that leaves its victims suffering Post Traumatic Stress. When a person has been forced into a situation that is life endangering, they respond by either fighting or fleeing. This is a very stressful situation and one that the victim cannot escape from and therefore the memory of the events brings great fear, anxiety and distress. The events that led to PTSD cause great fear, these emotional memories are etched deeply in the cognitive centers of the brain and linked by neural pathways to the deeper emotional centers of brain. These deeper emotional centers in the brain cause hormones to be released that act on the adrenal glands and cause these adrenal glands to release the hormones of cortisol and adrenaline into the blood stream. This hormonal release causes the heart to beat faster, blood pressure to rise and produces an euphoric state. This natural body response to the stress hormones allows a victim to flee, run, fight, and do the necessary things to survive. But after the real danger is gone, the memory of the horrible fear and the sense of eminent death that these events usually bring is forever permanently laid down in fast-track brain neural pathways. This is because in the evolution of human beings it was necessary to be able to remember your enemies and to rapidly flee or get ready to fight them. Thus the brain has developed a very fast neural pathway for the emotional memory center to get alerts from the cognitive front lobe of the brain and send information very fast through chemical hormones to the adrenal glands. These neural hormones then selectively stimulate the adrenal glands to produce cortisol. Cortisol is very powerful blood born chemical and in a few heart beats this powerful chemical message has readied the body to fight or flight. The heart rate has increased, the blood pressure increased, the lungs are breathing at a faster rate, and the parts of the body not needed for fighting or fleeing are given less blood. This all allows the body to pump blood containing oxygen to our muscles – the better to fight with and to run with. But the neural pathways that turn on this powerful message system do not have a corresponding turn off neural pathway. So once activated the body remains in alert status for a significant period of time until the affects of the hormones have worn off and the alert status for danger is over. But the next time those traumatic memories are triggered; the fast-track neural pathway is already there and immediately jumps into to action getting cortisol release from the adrenal glands. But sights and sounds that remind one of the trauma, make it happen even if there is no danger present – it is like being in a constant state of alert. Thus it is very important that a PTSD suffer learn how to turn off that response or at least moderate it, by using conscious awareness of how his own mind works to relax and to forget. Any medication that interferes with the ability of the patient to do this will not have good long term affects on a PTSD sufferer, and anti-depressants have been shown to actually increase cortisol and thus prolong the period of anxiety and fear.

In situations of sexual abuse and assault, the victim is helpless to flee and may have, through no fault of his/her own, failed to defend him/herself. The psychiatric injury of PTSD is caused by an external cause and leaves lifelong psychological scars. A person suffering PTSD will experience hyper-arousal to things in the environment that remind them of their trauma – these are called triggering events. A victim will also be hypervigilant looking for danger – be ever watchful. The impact of the trauma will cause the victim to have difficulty trusting others and forming close relationships (may appear withdrawn, uncooperative, defensive or aggressive). He/she may have fears and concern for her/his safety but have difficulty expressing feelings, be irritable or depressed. Victims have nightmares and difficulty sleeping. Victims may respond rapidly to events and be prone to anger. They may act out; have traumatic memories that are intrusive in their daily thoughts. They will deny, and avoid the memory of their trauma and have difficulty with concentration. They will be distrustful and often alienated. Individuals suffering from PTSD live daily life as if the traumatic experience is recent, even though it may have happened years earlier. Events, words, visual images that evoke the memories are called triggers and will cause the event to be constantly re-experienced. PTSD interferes with the victim’s ability to verbalize the events and their meaning. People do not believe, and deny the severity of the trauma thus blaming and stigmatizing the victim. Society has a tendency to blame the victim for not being able to simply “get over it” and this cultural lack of support can be classified as secondary wounding and promotes a victim mentality, thus keeping the problem going.

This is what was happening to Eric Harris when he was prescribed the anti-depressant Luvox. Luvox affects the neurotransmitter Serotonin or 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) in the brain. Serotonin is a neurotransmitter that affects the brain and plays a role in aggression, memory, learning, pain, sleep, appetite, anxiety, depression, migraine, and vomiting. Several different classes of psychiatric drugs like anti-depressants, anti-psychotics, anti-anxiety drugs, anti- migraine drugs and psychedelic drugs affect the level of this neurotransmitter inside the neuro-synapses of the brain. Some drugs such as tricyclic antidepressants (TCA’s) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) inhibit the reuptake of serotonin, making it stay in the synapse longer.

SSRI's and TCA antidepressants not only fail to modify cortisol, but actually stimulate/increase cortisol release. This is why these drugs can create a drug induced abnormally elated mental state, typically characterized by feelings of euphoria, racing thoughts and talkativeness. This can then progress further to a neurologically driven agitation. This agitation can range from mild leg tapping, to severe panic or even an extreme manic state. This does tragically lead directly to suicidal, aggressive and/or homicidal thoughts and behaviors.

Bill Forsyth of Maui, Hawaii, had taken fluxetine for only 12 days when he committed one of the first murder/suicides attributed to any SSRI. Joseph Wesbecker who had only been on the drug fluoxetine for 4 weeks killed eight others and himself in a Louisville, KY. at printing plant where he worked.

But the lesson from the Columbine School shootings was not learned, because in the U.S.A today these dangerous drugs are still being prescribed for depression – with fatal consequences. In 2005, Jeff Weise, aged 17, was taking Prozac and when his dosage was increased after his Prozac induced nightmares; he then went out and did a mass murder at the Minnesota Red Lake School.

News reports stated that Stephen Kazmierczak, who shot and killed five Northern Illinois University students at the Dekalb campus on February 14, 2008 had recently stopped taking medication and "had become somewhat erratic in the last couple of weeks." There was no apparent motive or any relationship with any of his victims who were mowed down as he fired more than 50 shots in a matter of seconds from a lecture hall stage. This was not unusual as often there is no motive with these drug-related killings. The profound influence of drugs on the person’s brain levels of neurotransmitters are affected so much that any sudden increase or decrease in the dosage can result in insane homicidal behavior.

Steven Kazmierczak was 27 when he purchased the shotgun and two of the hand guns prior to the attack. Kazmierczak had no criminal record but had been a patient for a year at Thresholds-Mary Hill House, a psychiatric treatment center for teens. Under Illinois state law he would not have been able to purchase a weapon legally if there had been a record of arrests or mental problems.

Current gun control policy is geared to accept that patients “under the care of a physician” are approved to purchase a deadly weapon. These pills do not “cure” mental disease – they alter brain function – often with devastating effects. Remember that the supervising clinical doctor is perhaps only seeing the patient for 15 minutes every 3 months. Some supervising physicians are not even seeing their patients that frequently, as they are allowing nurses or PA’s with prescription authority to actually do the face to face with the patient, in these instances the MD may not see the patient hardly at all.

Many states permit mental patients on these medications to purchase guns – not considering at all the fact that the FDA warning inserted in every antidepressant prescription warns of possible violent behavior and suicide. Those empowered to make public policy decisions on gun control legislation should reevaluate the assumption of low risk of gun violence from patients taking psychotropic drugs. When will the public policy on gun control actually reflect the research findings that lead to the FDA warning label on these dangerous mind altering drugs - when will we finally realize that taking a pill doesn't make someone "normal" or safe to handle a gun. Right now the legislation is worded in such a way as to prevent someone who uses non-drug therapy (such as Cognitive Behavioral Therapy or psychotherapy) from purchasing a weapon but place a weapon in the hands of someone else taking a drug that is known to cause persons to do mass violence.

When will public officials wake up to the real danger - the psychotropic drugs that cause disruption of brain activity and thoughts of violence.

Check out the full transcript of Columbine Shooting progress report submitted to the court:

http://columbinefamilyrequest.org/evidence-repository/pages-00001-00100/

http://columbinefamilyrequest.org/evidence-repository/pages-101-200/

http://columbinefamilyrequest.org/evidence-repository/pages-00201-00300/

http://columbinefamilyrequest.org/evidence-repository/pages-00301-00400/

http://columbinefamilyrequest.org/evidence-repository/pages-00401-00500/

See the following list of traumatic incidents and deaths associated with antidepressant use.

Violence & Antidepressants

2004 08/18 Antidepr. Violence Yvonne Jenkins, 27; medication for anxiety attacks and depression
2004 08/17 Antidepr. Violence "Man", 41; anti-depressant medication
2004 08/06 Antidepr. Violence Dr Joseph Coladonato, 61; antidepressant
2004 07/00 Antidepr. Killing Mark Hobson, 35; anti-depressants
2004 07/27 Antidepr. Killing Gerry Christensen, 55; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine)
2004 07/26 Antidepr. Killing Mary Ellen Moffitt, 37; Paxil/Seroxat (paroxetine)
2004 07/11 Antidepr. Violence Alex Yun, 26; antidepressants
2004 07/07 Antidepr. Killing Gina Davis, 36; antidepressant
2004 07/06 Antidepr. Fraud Rene Rivkin, 55; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine)
2004 06/29 Antidepr. Killing Raymond F Noll, 58; Effexor/Efexor (venlafaxine)
2004 06/22 Antidepr. Killing Emiri Padron, 24; Zoloft/Lustral (sertraline)
2004 06/18 Antidepr. Killing Timothy Joe Irwin, 42; antidepressants
2004 06/16 Antidepr. Violence Gale Thomason, 36; Celexa/Cipramil (citalopram)
2004 03/06 Antidepr. Violence Ryan Dowling, 25; antidepressants
2004 02/00 Antidepr. Violence Morag McManus, 57; anti-depressants
2004 02/22 Antidepr. Violence William J Heck, 35; Paxil/Seroxat (paroxetine)
2004 01/14 NewYorkPost Wellbutrin/Zyban (bupropion) induced delusion

Adults: Shootings, Violence & Delusions

2003 12/00 Antidepr. Dreams Denise Martin, 53; Paxil/Seroxat -dreams of killing
2003 11/01 Antidepr. Violence Frank Kendall, 37; Effexor (venlafaxine) -"flipped out"
2003 09/10 Antidepr. Killing Mijailo Mijailovic, 25; anti-depressants
2003 08/16 Antidepr. Killing "Mother", 38; anti-depressants
2003 07/08 AntiDepr. Killing Doug Williams, 48; Celexa & Zoloft
2003 06/17 Antidepr. Violence Merrilee Bentley, 36; -Effexor (venlafaxine)
2003 06/17 Antidepr. Violence "Mum", 32; Paxil/Seroxat & Effexor -attempted murder/suicide
2003 06/14 Antidepr. Killing George Harold Davis, 46; Paxil/Seroxat withdrawal rage
2003 04/00 Antidepr. Fraud Robert Treadway, 36; antidepressants
2003 04/08 Antidepr. Killing Colleen Mitchell, 51; Zoloft/Lustral & Wellbutrin/Zyban
2002 12/27 Antidepr. Killing Christopher Bernaiche, 27; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine)
2002 09/26 Antidepr. Violence Wayne L Horowitz, 52; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine)
2002 07/24 Antidepr. Killing Carol Ackels, 40; Paxil/Seroxat (paroxetine) -killing daughter
2002 07/12 Antidepr. Killing Lee Sims, 68; antidepressants, Paxil/Seroxat (paroxetine)
2002 06/20 Antidepr. Violence Andrew Meyers, 28; Zoloft/Lustral (Sertraline)attempted murder
2002 05/03 Antidepr. Killing Cindy Gail Countess, 49; Paxil/Seroxat (paroxetine)
2002 05/02 Antidepr. Killing Jason Davidson, 33; Zoloft/Lustral (sertraline)
2002 01/04 Antidepr. Killing Albert Pacheco, 47; Zoloft/Lustral (sertraline)
2001 10/25 Antidepr. Killing Scott Ellison, 41; "medication for anxiety & depression"
2001 09/02 AntiDepr. Killing Leslie Wallace, 39; Wellbutrin/Zyban (bupropion)
2001 06/30 AntiDepr. Violence Diana Reese, 40; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine)stabbing with knife
2001 06/23 AntiDepr. Violence Paula Townsend, 31; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine)tire slashing spree
2001 06/20 AntiDepr. Killing Andrea Pia Yates, 36; Effexor, Wellbutrin & Remeron
2001 06/08 AntiDepr. Killing Mamoru Takuma, 37; 10 times his daily dose of an anti-depressant
2000 12/26 AntiDepr. Killing Michael McDermott, 42; Prozac, Paxil & Desyrel (trazodone)
2000 03/25 AntiDepr. Violence Nadine Trewin, 31; Prozac/Sarafem -cooking cat in microwave
1999 10/00 Antidepr. Killing Donna Yost, 29; anti-depressant
1999 08/22 Antidepr. Rape Matthew Giannascoli, 21; Strattera (atomoxetine), an SNRI
1999 08/01 AntiDepr. Killing David Hawkins, 76; 5 Zoloft/Lustral tablets
1999 06/10 Antidepr. Killing Kelly Silk, 32; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine)
1998 02/13 AntiDepr. Killing Donald Schell, 60; 2 Paxil/Seroxat (paroxetine) tablets
1997 12/00 AntiDepr. Robbery Christopher DeAngelo, 28; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine) -robbery spree
1997 08/05 Antidepr. Killing Richard Shuman, 55; Zoloft/Lustral (sertraline)
1995 12/15 Antidepr. Killing Gerald Clemons, 36; Prozac/Sarafem
(fluoxetine)

Teens, Murder and Antidepressants

2004 08/23 Killing at Home 10 year old boy, 10; Prozac/Sarafem -killing father
2003 01/03 Killing at Home Ryan Furlough , 18; Effexor/Efexor (venlafaxine)
2002 11/02 Killing at Home Dustin Lynch, 16; Paxil/Seroxat
2002 05/29 Killing at Party Katrina Sarkissian, 17; antidepressants
2002 04/10 School Violence Sean McEvoy, 15; Paxil/Seroxat
2002 01/25 Killing at Home Tavares Eugene Williams, 18; Prozac/Sarafem
2001 11/28 Killing at Home Christopher Pittman, 12; Paxil & Zoloft
2001 04/15 Imprisonment Cory Baadsgaard, 16; Paxil/Seroxat & Effexor
2001 03/22 School Shooting Jason Hoffman, 18; Celexa (citalopram) & Effexor (venlafaxine)
2001 03/07 School Shooting Elizabeth Bush, 14; antidepressants
1999 04/20 School Shooting Eric Harris, 17; Luvox Related
1998 05/21 School Shooting Kip Kinkel, 15; Prozac/Sarafem

Anti-Depressant related Suicide (attempt) & Death

2004 08/27 Omaha Channel Vickie McCarthy & Paxil withdrawal: electrical zaps, suicide attempt
2004 08/20 Yahoo/Forbes Nancy Hugo, 57; -Zoloft: "urge to slam the phone into the side of my head"
2004 06/12 Antidepr. Suicide Perry Custance, 22; Lexapro/Cipralex (escitalopram)
2004 04/12 Antidepr. DeathCassie Jo Geisenhof, 19; Serzone/Dutonin -liver damage/transplant
2004 03/15 Antidepr. Suicide Stephen Leggett, 53; Celexa/Cipramil (citalopram)
2004 02/27 Antidepr. Suicide Deon Whitfield, 17 & Durrell Feaster, 18; Prozac/Sarafem -hanging
2004 02/21 Antidepr. Suicide Kaitlyn Kennedy, 16; Zoloft/Lustral (sertraline)
2004 02/07 Antidepr. Suicide Traci R. Johnson, 19; Cymbalta (duloxetine)
2004 01/01 TheLedger Report links Paxil/Seroxat (paroxetine) to crash
2003 00/00 Antidepr. Suicide Joey Casseday, 16; Celexa/Cipramil (citalopram)
2003 12/01 Antidepr. Suicide Michael Halton, 41; an anti-depressant drug
2003 11/00 Antidepr. Suicide Stephanie Fritz, 15 Zoloft/Lustral (sertraline)
2003 11/00 Antidepr. Suicide Joanne Marsh, 26; antidepressants
2003 10/00 Antidepr. Suicide Rhett Kunkel, 21; antidepressants
2003 10/29 Antidepr. Suicide Larry Boyd Smith, 61; Celexa/Cipramil (citalopram)
2003 09/04 Antidepr. Suicide Peter Hearn, 51; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine)
2003 08/00 Antidepr. Suicide Candace Downing, 17; -Zoloft/Lustral (sertraline)
2003 08/00 Antidepr.SelfHarm Alicia Quartermain, 18; Paxil/Seroxat/Aropax (paroxetine)
2003 08/05 BostonGlobe Michelle van Syckel was suicidal on Seroxat/Paxil
2003 07/22 Antidepr. Suicide Julie Woodward, 17; Zoloft/Lustral (sertraline)
2003 07/08 Psychology Today Jamé Tierney, 14; Effexor withdrawal reactions, suicidal impulses
2003 06/12 TheGuardian Novelist Helen Walsh was suicidal during her time on Seroxat/Paxil
2003 06/01 Antidepr. Suicide Colin Whitfield, 56; Seroxat/Paxil
2002 09/17 Antidepr. Suicide Wendy Hay, 52; Prozac/Sarafem
2002 04/10 Antidepr. Suicide Jessica Viscount, 28; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine)
2002 03/24 Antidepr. Suicide Joseph Scholes, 15; Prozac/Sarafem
2002 01/00 Antidepr. Suicide Gareth Christian, 18; An SSRI-antidepressant
2001 12/00 Antidepr. Suicide Douglas Bruce Hopey; Paxil/Seroxat (paroxetine)
2001 06/07 SSRI Suicide Kara Jaye-Anne Otter was 12... Paxil/Seroxat -child suicide
2001 05/23 Antidepr. Suicide Daren Alli; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine)
2001 05/15 Antidepr. Suicide Jay Douglas Goodwin, 16; "medication"
2000 00/00 Antidepr. Death Child, 9; liver cytochrome P-450 2D6 deficiency; Prozac-related death
2000 11/00 Antidepr. Suicide LaVerne M. Shell, 63; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine)
2000 08/00 Antidepr. Death Alan Ridley, 46; Wellbutrin/Zyban (bupropion)
2000 06/03 Antidepr. Suicide Kevin Rider, 14; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine)
2000 12/05 AntiDepr. Suicide Jacob Williams, 14; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine) -suicide 2000 04/11 AntiDepr. Suicide Sarah Lawson, 22; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine) -voluntary suicide
1999 06/03 Antidepr. Suicide Hugh Blowers, 17; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine)
1998 10/23 Antidepr. Suicide Jean Hurley's Husband; Prozac & Effexor
1997 07/28 Antidepr. Suicide Matt Miller, 13; Zoloft/Lustral (sertraline)
1994 06/01 Antidepr. Suicide Evan, 18; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine)
1990 03/11 Antidepr. Suicide Chris Reid, 18; Prozac/Sarafem
1990 02/08 Antidepr. Suicide Del Shannon, 56; Prozac/Sarafem (fluoxetine)

Psychiatric Patients Have the Right to Informed Consent

2011-11-14T20:50:00.001-08:00

Informed consent is an essential human right which was guaranteed by the Nuremberg Code and an ethical principle approved by the World Health Organization, the United Nations and even the US government. This is a human right that all human beings have under both international law and under US Constitutional law. Mental health professionals need to honor the ethical and human rights principle of informed consent. The human right to have informed consent is a right that even prisoners of war and convicted felons have and yet mental health patients, who have been charged with no crime, have been routinely denied this basic human right. As a third party decision maker, the legal guardian stands for the human rights of the patient when the patient is incapacitated. The legal guardian needs to stand firm and insist that he/she be fully informed regarding all medical treatment choices including the dangers of all drugs and treatments given.

The right to informed consent is delineated in the federal regulation Protection of Human Subjects, 45 CFR 46 also known as the Common Rule under the authority granted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Belmont Report was written concerning the Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. Since 1945, various codes for the proper and responsible conduct of human experimentation in medical research have been adopted by different organizations. The best known of these codes are the Nuremberg Code of 1947, the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 (revised in 1975), and the 1971 Guidelines (codified into Federal Regulations in 1974) issued by the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Codes for the conduct of social and behavioral research have also been adopted, the best known being that of the American Psychological Association, published in 1973.

Respect for persons requires that patients, to the degree that they are capable, be given the opportunity to choose what shall or shall not happen to them. Information about risks should never be withheld for the purpose of eliciting the cooperation of a patient and truthful answers should always be given to direct questions about the treatment and research. But a lack of informed consent is exactly what has happened to many mental health patients. The medical information about these drugs is often conveyed to the legal guardian in a technical, disorganized and rapid fashion and thus there is often not sufficient time to consider the information or to question it. Often there is no substantive discussion with hospital or clinic staffs in which the views of the patient and the legal guardian were honored and listened to; instead patients are often ignored as if they did not have any rights to express their dislike for medications or treatment options. There is often no voluntary agreement to participate in research thus there was no valid consent. Informed consent requires conditions free of coercion and undue influence and it is clear that while incarcerated in a locked psychiatric hospital ward there is the use of coercion. There can also be the use of undue influence by the court appointed attorney through offers of inappropriate or improper reward in order to obtain compliance vulnerable patients. The doctor in his/her position of authority who can exert a commanding influence and who can threaten sanctions can easily force patients to take drugs against their consent.

The first priority for any mental health professional should be the identification of biological causes for the patients’ behavior and to rule out the role of any known pre-existing medical condition such as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder or physical brain trauma.

Neuroleptic Induced Deficit Syndrome (NIDS) can be caused by these medications which change in emotional awareness, sense of aliveness, and in the speed, and clarity of thought. The treatment effects felt by many people who have taken these medications are described as feeling like a zombie. Neuroleptic effect is present when the following features are observed:

1. Psychomotor Retardation – motor slowing, body not moving so well
2. Emotional indifference - not being emotionally responsive / not caring
3. Reduced initiative – not showing interest in initiating activity
4. Slowing of thought

As the dose of the medication increases, and more time elapses, it appears that the effects change – from sedative effects, into anti-psychotic effects, and possibly into other less desirable side effects; akathisia (restless leg syndrome), emotional parkinsonism (emotional blunting) and on into some other unwanted side effects. It is not uncommon when the first symptoms appear like apathy, emotional indifference, motor slowing or slow mentation that these were attributed to the underlying condition of the patient (the patient’s disease) when really they are the effects of the medication itself. A patient on these medications can initially demonstrate an improvement in symptoms only to later over time have that initial improvement go away or to only reach a certain point and then plateau or level off. There is also one more important one effect: neuroleptic dysphoria – which is like depression. When this happens when patients are often given even higher dosages of the drugs, leading to even more severe effects.

Many of the symptoms that are used to justify hospital treatment may actually be caused by the psychiatric medications given. So continuation of these medications only creates a self-filling prophecy that furthers the financial goals of the hospital institution and may cause further permanent brain damage.

A medical review of the complete medical record is necessary. Although dose reductions may or may not improve troublesome symptoms, they are often a good place to start. Dose reductions should be conducted gradually and with careful monitoring, unless an immediate health emergency (such as neuroleptic malignant syndrome) demands abrupt cessation.

Therapeutic drug dependence occurs with psychiatric drugs. Although these drugs produce no tolerance and no euphoria, they produce enduring post-discontinuation changes that are as extensive and long lasting as the changes underpinning current disease models of addiction. Patients also get withdrawal or discontinuation syndromes when they stop taking their medication or when their medication is lowered in dose. When anti-depressant or anti-psychotic medications have been in the brain for a while and then the dose is suddenly lowered, or if the medication is taken away too quickly there is a reaction to that change called Neuroleptic Discontinuation Syndrome. So when a patient runs out of medication or is suddenly put on a lower dosage they can demonstrate exacerbations of psychosis, become delusional or even hallucinate. Seizures can also occur from rapid withdrawal from these psychiatric medications. What usually happens to the patient in withdrawal is that they end up back in the hospital again. These crisis admissions lead to being labeled with a new disease diagnosis – schizophrenia, or delusional or manic depressive and then placed on even greater dosages of even more dangerous drugs. The doctors in these instances are quick to blame the patient, for a relapse rather than considering when the patient last took his medication. Discontinuation syndrome can sometimes last for weeks or months - some people have said they can last as long as six months. (see the article by Psychiatrist Dr. Grace E. Jackson MD)

Once falsely labeled with a severe mental illness or psychiatric diagnosis such as schizophrenia, the patient is then court ordered into treatment and subsequently forcibly drugged. Often forced hospitalization prevents contact and even communication with the patient’s family and friends, thus severing ties to those who are closest to him. While hospitalized the patient is especially vulnerable and thus unable to protect himself from adverse influence, coercion and threat to make him/her to take medications. If the mental health patient is a victim of PTSD, this would make the patient especially vulnerable when he/she is threatened due to the long term effects of trauma on him/her. Patients who are also economically disadvantaged may be because of this dependent status much more easily manipulated due to their socioeconomic situation.

Iatrogenic effects are inadvertent adverse effects or complications resulting from medical treatment and can include complex drug interactions. These kinds of effects are commonplace with psychiatric medications. In the USA an estimated 44,000 to 98,000 people die every year because of iatrogensis. Causes of iatrogensis include medical error, negligence, poor research design as well as inattentiveness to clinical symptoms reported by the patient and the patient’s family.

These psychiatric drugs are not of small risk but instead cause massive changes in the way the brain functions. Long term studies have indicated that there are severe debilitating and sometimes fatal effects of these drugs. Possible negative effects were minimized or not even discussed at all. There are risks of long term psychological harm, physical harm, social harm and economic harm. The probability of developing Parkinsons’ like symptoms is also great.

The so-called “atypical” antipsychotics are neither “atypical” nor “antipsychotic.” Not infrequently, these chemicals induce or enhance bizarre statements (disorganized speech or delusions), social withdrawal (depression), and sedation (encephalopathy), regardless of dose. The processes through which these medications exert destabilizing effects include receptor blockade (D2, ACH, histamine), electrophysiological (depolarization) blockade; direct toxicity (cell death); and induction of other disease processes (pneumonia, diabetes, hypothyroidism, Pulmonary Embolism). Unfortunately many prescribing clinicians are largely unaware of these problems and thus do not inform their patients.

Numerous psychiatric medications are dangerous and even life threatening adverse effects including: weight gain and diabetes, tardive dyskinesia (movement disorder), tremor, akathisia (restless leg syndrome), dyskinesia (uncontrollable movements, tics, tremors), dystonia, as well as the side effects of nausea, dizziness (low blood pressure), and insomnia. Dystonia is a neurological movement disorder, in which sustained muscle contractions cause twisting and repetitive movements or abnormal postures. It is painful to even watch a video of someone with dyskinesia or dystonia. The doctors when prescribing these medications tell patients and their families just to disregard these potentially life threatening and life altering side effects.

Many of these drugs cause symptoms that can themselves be construed as mental illness. One drug Abilify or Aripiprazole, is known to cause neurological side effects, gastrointestinal signs, movement disorders, disturbances in thinking, anxiety disorders, sleep disorders and even suicidal behavior. These are the actually side effects of the drug – yet when these symptoms occur they are attributed often to what they claim is the medical diagnosis. Doctors reported to the FDA that their patients had hallucinations, psychosis, heart rate, diabetes, cardiac problems, liver dysfunction, coma, and blood coagulation problems while on Abilify. Even a very cursory review of the FDA warnings and listing of adverse side effects would cause any responsible legal guardian to reconsider the use of these drugs on a loved one.

The Food and Drug Administration or FDA is the agency charged with protecting the safety of consumers. Hundreds of cases have been brought in the last several years against pharmaceutical companies arising from deaths and injuries attributed to drugs used to treat psychiatric disorders. The most urgent warnings are those known as “black box” warnings, in which drug companies are required to (or voluntarily) post warnings in bold black print in a bold black box. These warnings appear in the Physician’s Desk Reference and in the package inserts for the drugs, which doctors are presumed to read.

The black box warnings of Luvox included the possibility of violent behavior including homicidal thoughts. The drug industry makes it confusing that many psychotropic drugs have different names and different warning labels in different countries and thus what is known about dangerous side effects in one country may not be common knowledge for patients or even prescribing doctors in another country. There is suppression of the research findings of negative outcomes and also suppression of reports of clinical adverse events. There is little adherence to the guidance of the Food and Drug Administration guidelines in these matters, with hospitals and mental health professionals routinely ignoring FDA warning labels and withholding the truth from patients and their families.

Even a cursory view of the serious effects of these drugs would make any person be concerned. One clear possible outcome of the use of the antipsychotic drug Abilify is tardive dyskinesia. Tardive dyskinesia is a difficult-to-treat and causes the patient to have in involuntary, repetitive body movements that started some time after starting the medication. The only way to prevent tardive dyskinesia is to not give these medications to the patient. It frequently appears after long-term or high-dose use of antipsychotic drugs. Tardive dyskinesia is characterized by repetitive, involuntary, purposeless movements, such as grimacing, tongue protrusion, lip smacking, puckering and pursing of the lips, rapid eye blinking and rapid finger movements. To knowingly force someone unnecessarily on medications that cause this outcome could surely be considered cruel and unusual punishment or even torture – because life with tardive dyskinesia is daily torture. Tardive dyskinesia is often misdiagnosed as a mental illness rather than a neurological disorder, and as a result patients are prescribed more drugs which increase the probability that the patient will develop this disabling disability. In such cases, it is critical to properly identify the signs of the disorder and stop drugs as soon as possible. These drugs have a tendency to mask the very symptoms they are causing, thus making it more difficult to determine what the problem is.

Physicians should educate patients and families about the dangers of tardive dyskinesia. The majority of patients who are on the drugs long enough will develop the disorder of tardive dyskinesia, with some getting this problem after only 4 months of treatment with the medication. The published rate for tardive dyskinesia among people who stay on the older drugs is approximately 3-5% per year - if you stay on these medications, for ten years, the risk of developing TD is 50%. (Dr. Grace E. Jackson MD ‘What Doctors May Not Tell You About Psychiatric Drugs’ Public Lecture, UCE Birmingham June 2004)

Many patients who take these drugs also develop Parkinsonian side effects about 40-50% (or more) experience Parkinsonian symptoms. Julia Child, a very famous cook over in the US and the actor Michael J Fox are both famous victims of severe Parkinson’s disease. In Parkinson’s disease people lose these dopamine cells in the substantia nigra area of the brain. With antipsychotic medication, there is not actually death of brain cells but the drug does affect how the brain cells function. So Parkinson’s symptoms do occur in a fairly high rate of patients.

There are also long term affects of these drugs called tardive dysmentia and tardive psychosis which are debilitating conditions caused by these medications. But doctors often blame the patient for these problems and attributing symptoms to the underlying condition and not to the medications own effects. Tardive dementia is caused by long-term use of the neuroleptics resulting in a depressive condition similar to NIDS that involves the frontal lobe of the brain. In some individuals, it seemed that long term treatment with neuroleptics was more likely to affect emotional centers in the human brain, and patients were seen to develop dramatic or euphoric mood swings and this was called tardive dysmentia.

The other antipsychotic Clozapine can cause fatal blood problems as well as other side effects of serious concern. Clozaril (clozapine) is a drug which was known to be associated with fatal cases of aplastic anemia which causes low white blood cell counts and predisposes patients to infections. Clozapine has also been linked to high blood sugar and diabetes. Doctors are supposed to watch for unexplained fever, fatigue and low energy levels in patients taking Clozaril. Clozaril has been strongly associated with possible fatal heart problems. [Presto v. Sandoz, 226 Ga. App. 547 (1997)]. Clozapine is also associated with neuroleptic malignant syndrome (NMS) which is a rare, but life-threatening, idiosyncratic reaction to a neuroleptic medication which can be fatal.

Serotonin is a neurotransmitter that affects the brain and plays a role in aggression, memory, learning, pain, sleep, appetite, anxiety, depression, migraine, and vomiting. Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors or SSRI's inhibit the uptake of serotonin or 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) which is a neurotransmitter. Several different classes of psychiatric drugs like anti-depressants, anti-psychotics, anti-anxiety drugs, anti- migraine drugs and psychedelic drugs affect the level of this neurotransmitter inside the neuro-synapses of the brain.

Some drugs such as tricyclic antidepressants (TCA’s) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) inhibit the reuptake of serotonin, making it stay in the synapse longer. Serotonin syndrome which can also be called serotonin toxicity is really a poisoning and is the predictable consequence of excess serotonin activity in the brain and elsewhere in the body which can be caused by therapeutic use of these medications.

The Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome is characterized by fever, muscle cramps, unstable blood pressure and muscular tremors. Neuroleptic malignant syndrome (NMS) causes changes in mental status, difficulty thinking, agitation, delirium and even coma. It can be life threatening and often fatal and requires immediate cessation of the offending medication and emergency treatment.

Serotonin syndrome may be mistaken for a viral illness, anxiety, neurological disorder, various kinds of poisonings, or a worsening psychiatric condition. Serotonin Syndrome which is less severe than Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome. What many people might not have been told by their doctors is that this problem can develop with SSRI medications. Serotonin Syndrome does not appear to cause death as often does Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome. Serotonin Syndrome can cause headache, agitation, hypomania, mental confusion, hallucinations, coma, shivering, sweating, hyperthermia (temperature as high as 104 degrees F and even go as high as 106 degrees F, hypertension (high blood pressure), tachycardia (fast heart rate), nausea, and diarrhea. In addition there can also be muscle twitching and tremor. No laboratory tests can currently confirm the diagnosis of Serotonin Syndrome and it is usually diagnosed base on the patient’s symptoms and clinical history.

Libby Zion died when she was admitted to the hospital for "flu-like" symptoms and the resident interns who treated her did not recognize that she was suffering serotonin syndrome, her temperature rose to 107 degrees Fahrenheit, and she had tremors and the interns gave inappropriate medication which caused her death. But in reality, Libby Zion died because physicians in general are not trained to identify the effects of psychiatric medications and to know their side effects and withdrawal symptoms. Therefore many psychiatric patients suffering serious side effects are given combinations of drugs that are often dangerous and sometimes life threatening due to physician error. Prior to her hospital visit, Libby Zion had been prescribed the antidepressant, phenelzine, and was given merpedine by the resident/interns in the ER - this combination lead to her death. The New York Libby Zion law, which is a regulation that limits the amount of time resident physicians' work in New York State hospitals to roughly 80 hours per week because it was assumed that the overworked intern and resident physicians who treated her made a mistake due to exhaustion and overwork.

Mental health professionals have an ethical duty to inform parents about the potential lethality of drug combinations as well as adverse effects of individual drugs. Yet some psychiatric drugs actually are combinations of drugs. As a medication for ADHD, Adderall was approved for unrestricted use for treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder or ADHD by the FDA in March 1996. Adderall is a combination of stimulants (a combination of dextroamphetamine and amphetamine). In 2005 Adderall XR was pulled off the market in Canada after regulators linked the drug to 20 sudden deaths and 12 strokes. Fourteen of the deaths and two of the 12 strokes were in children. According to Canadian researchers the adverse reactions were not associated with overdose, misuse or abuse of Adderall XR. The effects of amphetamines and methamphetamine are similar to cocaine, but their onset is slower and their duration is longer. (U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) fact sheet).

Stimulants are sometimes used in combination with anti-psychotics. The use of stimulant plus atypical antipsychotic places the patient at risk of sudden death due to stroke or dysrhythmia (heart arrhythmia); neuroleptic malignant syndrome; tardive phenomena (irreversible movement abnormalities of face, tongue, neck, limbs, trunk); and diabetes. Stimulants are designed to enhance dopamine transmission. Atypical antipsychotics are intended to block it. In one sense, the pharmacodynamic effects of stimulants plus antipsychotics would be expected to oppose each other. In another sense, the brain’s adaptations to each class of medication might be synergistic. This enhances the risk of movement abnormalities, dysphoria (an emotional condition in which a person experiences intense feelings of depression and discontent) , and psychosis. There are neurotoxic effects of use of stimulants and antipsychotics together; the dangers include the inhibition of neurogenesis (creation of new neuron cells) and the induction of neurodegenerative changes. In other words, they prevent the healing process and can cause permanent brain damage and dysfunction. Thus the drugs currently given for psychiatric treatment are also likely to increase the likelihood of psychosis and other disabling effects.

A new drug recently put on the market is Saphris or asenapine by Merck. Saphris like other atypical antipsychotic drugs is known to increase mortality. This drug causes very serious side effects including the permanent and totally disabling disorder called Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome, and also Tardive Dyskinesia, Hyperglycemia and Diabetes Mellitus, Weight Gain, Hypersensitivity Reactions, Orthostatic Hypotension and Syncope (fainting), Leukopenia, Neutropenia, and Agranulocytosis (white blood cell problems), QT Prolongation: (heart rhythm problems), Seizures: Potential for Cognitive and Motor Impairment and Suicide (a mother’s worst nightmare). Adverse reactions to the drug Saphris include causing akathisia (restless leg syndrome, unpleasant sensations of inner restlessness that manifests itself with an inability to sit still or remain motionless) oral hypoesthesia (loss of sensation in the mouth causes difficulty in eating and talking), somnolence (sleepiness) and dizziness.

Effective humane alternatives to these drug treatments for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder or PTSD do exist now and should be promoted and offered to patients. Don’t mental health patients deserve an unbiased independent second medical and legal opinion before being condemned to lifelong mind altering drug treatment that could cause his death from one of the many side effects and with drugs which are known to shorten life expectancy?

The patient’s faith belief should be honored with what would be considered to be culturally appropriate alternatives to the medical and biochemical approaches to treatment. There should also be an effort to provide appropriate peer support or other alternatives to the traditional mental health system.

Psychotherapy is preferable to psychopharmacological treatment, and in many studies it has shown to be more effective than drugs (especially for PTSD) without the potentially troublesome and dangerous side effects. There are proven psychosocial techniques for modifying inappropriate behavior or speech. Mind/body connecting/focusing activities can be helpful. It is valuable to “make contact” with individuals who are unresponsive to usual forms of communication. Also, the mere act of “being with” a person who is experiencing profound emotional distress can provide great solace. [See Dan Dorman’s book, Dante’s Cure, for a real-life story of a woman who made a complete recovery from psychosis, and how that journey occurred.]

People labeled with psychiatric disabilities should be able to select from a menu of independently available services and programs, including mental health services, housing, vocational training, and job placement, and should be free to reject any service or program. Mental health treatment should be about healing, not punishment. Accordingly, the use of aversive treatments, including physical and chemical restraints, seclusion, and similar techniques that restrict freedom of movement, should be banned. Moreover, in part in response to the Supreme Court's decision in Olmstead v. L C., state and federal governments should work with people labeled with psychiatric disabilities and others receiving publicly-funded care in institutions to expand culturally appropriate home- and community-based supports so that people are able to leave institutional care and, if they choose, access an effective, flexible, consumer/survivor-driven system of supports and services in the community.

Reference on effects of psychiatric medications:

Dr. Grace E. Jackson MD ‘What Doctors May Not Tell You About Psychiatric Drugs’ Public Lecture, UCE Birmingham June 2004

Reference on Iatrogensis:

Weingart SN, Ship AN, Aronson MD (2000). "Confidential clinician-reported surveillance of adverse events among medical inpatients". J Gen Intern Med 15 (7): 470–7. doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.2000.06269.x. PMC 1495482. PMID 10940133.)

References on Tardive dyskinesia:

Breggin, Peter R., M.D. (2001), Tardive Dyskinesia Legal Settlement, Breggin.com
Brašić, James Robert, MD; Bronson, Brian, MD (21 January 2010), Tardive Dyskinesia: Treatment & Medication

Crane, George E. (Sep 1973a), "Is tardive dyskinesia a drug effect?", AJP (American Psychiatric Association: American Journal of Psychiatry) vol.130 (no.9): 1043–4, ISSN 0002-953X, OCLC 104768868, PMID 4727768

Crane, George E. (Oct 1973b), "Rapid reversal of tardive dyskinesia", AJP (American Psychiatric Association: American Journal of Psychiatry) vol.130 (no.10): 1159, ISSN 0002-953X, OCLC 104790755, PMID 4728916

Fernandez, Hubert H., MD; Friedman, Joseph H., MD (Jan 2003), "Classification and Treatment of Tardive Syndromes", Neurologist (Baltimore US-MD: Williams & Wilkins: The Neurologist) vol.9 (no.1): 16–27, doi:10.1097/01.nrl.0000038585.58012.97, ISSN 1074-7931, OCLC 111183504, PMID 12801428

Glazer, William M.; Morgenstern, Hal; Doucette, John T. (Apr 1993), "Predicting the Long-Term Risk of Tardive Dyskinesia in Outpatients Maintained on Neuroleptic Medications" JCP (Memphis US-TN: Physicians Postgraduate Press: Journal of Clinical Psychiatry) vol.54 (no.4): 133–9, ISSN 0160-6689, OCLC 119262955, PMID 8098030

Glenmullen, Joseph (2000), "Ch.1.", Prozac Backlash, New York: Joseph Glenmullen. Simon & Schuster, p. 38 .pdf

Gualtieri, C. Thomas; Barnhill, L.J. (1988), Wolf, Marion E.; Mosnaim, A.D., eds., "Tardive Dyskinesia, Biological Mechanisms & Clinical Aspects", Tardive Dyskinesia in Special Populations (Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Press): pp. 137–154, ISBN 0-88048-176-5

Hoerger, Michael (2007), "The primacy of neuroleptic-induced D2 receptor hypersensitivity in tardive dyskinesia", Psychiatry Online (Psychiatry Online) vol.13 (no.12): 18–26

Jeste, Dilip V.; Caligiuri, Michael P. (Feb 1993), "Tardive Dyskinesia", Schizophr Bull (Schizophrenia Bulletin) vol.19 (no.2): 303–315, doi:10.1093/schbul/19.2.303, PMID 8100643

Saltz, Bruce L., MD; Woerner, Margaret G., PhD; Kane, John M., MD; Lieberman, JA; Alvir, JM; Bergmann, KJ; Blank, K; Koblenzer, J et al. (6 November 1991), "Prospective Study of Tardive Dyskinesia Incidence in the Elderly", JAMA (Chicago US-IL: American Medical Association: Journal of the American Medical Association) vol.266 (no.17): 2402–6, doi:10.1001/jama.266.17.2402, ISSN 0098-7484, OCLC
116673469, PMID 1681122

References Libby Zion:

"Libby Zion". New York Times. March 6, 1984.

Philibert I.; Friedmann P.; Williams W. T.; for the members of the ACGME Work Group on Resident Duty Hours (2002). "New Requirements for Resident Duty Hours". Journal of the American Medical Association 288 (9): 1112–1114. doi:10.1001/jama.288.9.1112. PMID 12204081.

Zion, Sidney (December 18, 1997). "Hospitals Flout My Daughter's Law". New York Daily News. "After it became clear to everybody, including a New York County grand jury, that Libby's death was caused by overworked and unsupervised interns and residents, the Libby Zion law was passed: No more 36-hour shifts for interns and residents; from now on, attending physicians would be at the ready to supervise the young, inexperienced student-doctors."

Fox, Margalit (March 5, 2005). "Elsa Zion, 70. Helped Cut Doctor Workloads.". New York Times.

Jane Ellen Brody (February 27, 2007). "A Mix of Medicines That Can Be Lethal". New York Times.

Spritz, N. (August 1991). "Oversight of physicians' conduct by state licensing agencies. Lessons from New York's Libby Zion case". Annals of Internal Medicine 115 (3): 219–22. PMID 2058876.

Mental Health Visions - Using Human Rights Language in a Mental Health Context #14 Tina Minkowitz , Lawyer

Contrived Shortages of Drugs and Political Pressure by Big Pharma

2011-10-02T14:29:00.000-07:00

We are being told that hospitals are running out of drugs used in everything from cancer to surgery, anesthesia and intravenous feeding, according to the Food and Drug Administration. This year, approximately 180 drugs have been in short supply. According to the American Hospital Association, virtually all U.S. hospitals say they've been affected by the shortages that have reached a crisis situation resulting in delayed care for patients. Henri R. Manasse Jr., CEO of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists in Bethesda, MD stated that drug shortages are a serious national health care crisis with very real consequences for patients with doctors and hospitals are postponing surgery or making do with costlier and less effective substitutes.

Drug makers claim that they’re doing everything they can to relieve the shortages – but are they really???? Suddenly we have a shortage of critical pharmaceutical drugs but perhaps this really is a ploy to get political support for the push for legislation that will help maximize profits for the drug companies. Whenever the drug manufacturers have a need to put pressure on Congress to pass legislation favorable to the pharmaceutical industry, we suddenly have problems with drug shortages.

The Pharmaceutical Industry is Very Profitable

The economic picture for other industries in the U.S.A. may be bleak but in the US the pharmaceutical industry has proven to be the most profitable of all businesses. In the annual Fortune 500 survey, the pharmaceutical industry topped the list of the most profitable industries with a return of 17% of revenue. Global spending on prescription drugs topped $643 billion in 2006. The United States accounts for half of the global market in pharmaceutical products. Pfizer had annual sales of one of their cholesterol medications Lipitor of $12.9 billion. Pfizer had total revenues of $67,809 million and net income of $19,337 million in 2006. Merck & Co. had total revenues of $45,987 million and Johnson and Johnson had total revenues of $37,020 million. The future of the pharmaceutical industry is expected to be rosy with increasing profits in most sectors despite loss of some patients. One of the most profitable of the pharmaceutical products is the rapidly expanding market for psychotropic or psychiatric drugs – especially non-typical SSRI’s.

The phrase Big Pharma is often used to refer to companies with revenue in excess of $3 billion, and/or research and development expenditure in excess of $500 million. The primary trade group for the pharmaceutical industry spent $4.7 million in the second quarter of this year lobbying the federal government on prices that federal health programs pay for prescription medicines and on other issues including patents, drug shortages and reimportation of drugs, according to a quarterly disclosure report.

The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, known as PhRMA, lobbied on implementation of aspects of the 2010 health care overhaul, including prices and rebates for drugs bought through the Medicare program. The lobbyists pushed for legislation that would bar marketing of authorized generic drugs, legislation which allow makers of brand-name drugs to partner with a generic company to retain more revenue after their patents expire. PhRMA also lobbied on the 2012 federal budget and 2011 appropriations for the Food and Drug Administration, National Institutes of Health and other agencies and departments.

According to the Center for Public Integrity the pharmaceutical and health products industry has spent more than $800 million in federal lobbying and campaign donations at both federal and state levels in the past seven years. Its lobbying operation, on which it reports spending more than $675 million, is the biggest in the nation. Only the insurance industry has spent more money to sway public policy. The claim that the profits of the industry are put back into to research and development does bear scrutiny because in reality more than a third of pharmaceutical companies' resources go into promotion and marketing.

But we really cannot assume that the pharmaceutical industry has the best interests of the American public or patients when putting pressure on the US Congress. Are these drug shortages real or are they created in order to sway public opinion and put pressure on the US Congress to win political battles over legislation? These companies claim that it is expensive to bring drugs to market and that they need greater profits in order to spend money on research and development. But let’s look what they really spend their money on. Reports estimate that the industry spent between $30 billion to $60 billion on marketing in 2004.

Let’s look at the history of the pharmaceutical industry and whether it’s lobbying efforts are actually in the public interest. Let’s see if the claims of drug shortages and inadequate profits on drugs are really true. According to PublicIntegrity.org, more than a third of pharmaceutical companies' resources go into promotion and marketing. In 2003, the pharmaceutical industry spent nearly $116 million to lobby the government. That year the Congress passed, and President George W. Bush signed, the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003, which created a taxpayer-funded prescription drug benefit for senior citizens. Pfizer $16.90 billion in marketing and only $7.68 billion in research & development. The trade group PhRMA estimates its members spent a total of only $39 billion on R&D in 2004.

The Texas Medication Algorithm Project (TMAP)

The controversial New Freedom Commission on Mental Health was established by the 43rd U.S.A. president, George W. Bush, in April, 2002. The Commission was established to conduct a comprehensive study of the U.S.A. mental health service delivery system and make recommendations based on its findings. The New Freedom Commission on Mental Health recommended increased use of pharmaceutical interventions despite the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) response, with regulatory steps, to reports of increased rates of suicide, especially during the first months of drug use. Allan Jones was the former investigator in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Office of Inspector General (OIG), Bureau of Special Investigations. As a human rights defender and medical whistleblower, Alan Jones, investigated for the Office of Inspector General of FDA. He delivered a scathing report on the fraudulent behavior of the pharmaceutical industry and its political control over both legislation and regulatory functions. Civil liberties groups also became vocal opponents of the Texas Medication Algorithm Project (TMAP). The TMAP was described as a thinly veiled proxy for the pharmaceutical industry, which pursued profits by recommending more psychotropic medication interventions. TMAP had been created in 1995 while President Bush was governor of Texas. It formed as an alliance of individuals from the University of Texas, the pharmaceutical industry, the mental health and the corrections systems of Texas.

Through TMAP, critics contend, the drug industry has methodically influenced decision-making of elected and appointed public officials. The strategy increased access to citizens in prisons and state psychiatric hospitals. Some opponents of TMAP believe its objectives are to foster chemical-mediated behavior control of American citizens. The Commission used TMAP as a blueprint and began to recommend screening of American adults for untreated mental illnesses and children for emotional disturbances. This targeted more vulnerable populations who could be coerced to use the newer psychotropic medications. Some of these drugs were still in clinical trials or were to be prescribed as extra-label use (i.e., not specifically authorized but tolerated). As a U.S.A. regulatory agency, however, the FDA initiated regulatory actions to address reports of increased suicide rates. One of these actions was to require a “black box” warning label for the new anti-depressants that warned of increased risk for violent tendencies, including suicide, caused by these medications.

The pharmaceutical industry works to change our public policy and to maximize profits for themselves. So when suddenly critical drugs are in short supply, we need to ask as informed voting citizens, is this for real?? Or is it a contrived drug shortage meant to put pressure on the US Congress and to divert even more federal funding to pharmaceutical research and to pay unnecessarily high prices for pharmaceutical drugs.

References and Citations:

1. Forum piece by Susan Kennedy, "Column: Drug shortage: What can I do?"
http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/American+Hospital+Association

2, "Why We Pay So Much," TIME magazine, Feb. 2, 2004

3, Top 50 Pharmaceutical Companies Charts & Lists, Med Ad News, September 2007, http://www.pharmalive.com/magazines/medad/?date=09%2F2007

4. The controversial New Freedom Commission on Mental Health was established by U.S. President George W. Bush in April 2002 to conduct a comprehensive study of the U.S. mental health service delivery system and make recommendations based on its findings. The commission, using the Texas Medication Algorithm Project (TMAP) as a blueprint, subsequently recommended screening of American adults for possible mental illnesses, and children for emotional disturbances, thereby identifying those with suspected disabilities who could then be provided the newer psychoactive drugs. The strategy behind the commission was developed by the pharmaceutical industry, advancing the theory that the primary purpose of the commission was to recommend implementation of TMAP based algorithms on a nationwide basis. TMAP, which advises the use of newer, more expensive psychiatric medications based on a protocol developed by pharmaceutical industry consultants at the University of Texas. The goal was to help pharmaceutical companies to get human subjects for clinical trials and access to citizens locked in prisons and state and private psychiatric hospitals and to get these clinical trials paid for by Medicaid.

5, New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, Achieving the Promise: Transforming Mental Health Care in America. Final Report. DHHS Pub. No. SMA-03-3832. Rockville, MD: 2003. President Bush’s plan, Achieving the Promise: Transforming Mental Health Care in America, is available at MentalHealthCommission.gov, . www.mentalhealthcommission.gov/reports/FinalReport/FullReport.htm.

6. Allen Jones, “TMAP Critique,” January 20, 2004, PschRights.org, http://psychrights.org/Drugs/AllenJonesTMAPJanuary20.pdf.

7. Lenzer, Jeanne, “Secret US report surfaces on antidepressants in children,” British Medical Journal, Vol 329, p 307 August 7, 2004, PsychRights.org, http://psychrights.org/Research/Digest/AntiDepressants/BMJ-SecretReportSurfaces.pdf .

8. Lenzer, Jeanne, “Bush Plans To Screen Whole US Population for Mental Illness,” Jeanne Lenzer, British Medical Journal, Vol 328, pp1458, June 19, 2004, http://psychrights.org/Articles/BMJBushtoScreenUSpop.pdf .

9. Ismail, M. Asif, “Special Report: Drug Lobby Second to None, How the pharmaceutical industry gets its way in Washington,” PublicIntegrity.org, http://projects.publicintegrity.org/rx//report.aspx?aid=723&sid=200

10. Jones, Alex, “New Freedom Initiative/Mandatory Mental Health Screening of American Children Passes,” Infowars.com, November 23, 2004, One of the nation's leading medical groups, the Association of American Physicians & Surgeons (AAPS), decried a move by the U.S. Senate to join with the House in funding a federal program AAPS says will lead to mandatory psychological testing of every child in America – without the consent of parents. The New Freedom Initiative passed sans amendment, as it stood. http://www.infowars.com/articles/brave_new_world/new_freedom_paul_amendment.htm.

11. Breggin PhD, Peter, Recent regulatory changes in antidepressant labels: Implications for activation (stimulation), A Harvard-trained psychiatrist and former full-time consultant at NIMH, Dr. Breggin's private practice is in Ithaca, New York, where he treats adults, couples, and families with children. He also offers consultations in clinical psychopharmacology and often acts as a medical expert in criminal, malpractice and product liability suits. He is the author of many scientific articles and books including Medication Madness: The Role of Psychiatric Drugs in Cases of Violence, Suicide and Crime (2008). http://www.breggin.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=55&Itemid=79Breggin.com, www.Breggin.com. http://breggin.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=65&Itemid=37.

12. Breggin, Peter, “Paxil Special Report III,” The third special report in a series providing excerpts from Dr. Breggin's 1999 product liability report in the CA case of Lacuzong v. GlaxoSmithKline, alleging that Paxil (paroxetine) caused a double murder and suicide. Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry 8 (2006) 255-263. www.Breggin.com.

13. Breggin, Peter, Evidence from many sources confirm SSRIs commonly cause or exacerbate a wide range of abnormal mental and behavioral conditions. International Journal of Risk & Safety in Medicine 16 (2003/2004) 31-49. www.Breggin.com.

14. Breggin, Peter, Report presented at the September 14, 2004 press conference sponsored by the Alliance for Human Research Protection (AHRP) at the FDA Public Hearing on Antidepressants and Suicide available at Breggin.com. www.Breggin.com.

15. A report Dr. Breggin presented to the FDA in August 2004 detailing the relation of suicidality and violence to antidepressants available at Breggin.com. www.Breggin.com.

16. According to PublicIntegrity.org, more than a third of pharmaceutical companies' resources go into promotion and marketing.
Company Marketing costs vs costs of Research and Development

Pfizer $16.90 billion in marketing and only $7.68 billion in research & development
Glaxo Smith Kline $12.93 billion marketing and only $5.20 billion research & dev.
Sanofi-Aventis $5.59 billion in marketing $9.26 billion in research & development
Johnson & Johnson $15.86 billion in marketing $5.20 billion in research & development
Merck $7.35 billion in marketing $4.01 billion in research & development
Novartis $8.87 billion in marketing $4.21 billion in research & development
AstraZeneca $7.84 billion in marketing $3.80 billion in research & development
Hoffman La Roche $7.24 billion in marketing $4.01 billion in research & development
Bristol-Myers Squibb $6.43 billion in marketing $2.50 billion in research & development
Wyeth $5.80 billion $2.46 billion in marketing in research & development

Abbott Labs $4.92 billion in marketing $1.70 billion in research & development

Annually, the industry spends nearly twice as much on marketing as it spends on research and development, although drug companies report neither total precisely. Various news reports estimate that the industry spent anywhere between $30 billion to $60 billion on marketing in 2004. The trade group PhRMA estimates its members spent $39 billion on R&D that year. As this information shows, the same year, 11 major companies reported spending close to $100 billion on marketing, along with administrative expenses not categorized separately. Those companies reported spending $50 billion on R&D. In 2004, Pfizer spent almost $120 million for media ads for Lipitor, the world's number-one selling prescription drug, while companies promoting erectile dysfunction treatments Viagra, Levitra and Cialis spent $425 million. Direct to consumer advertisement has also grown significantly: from $791 million in 1996 to $3.8 billion in 2004.

Silencing the Truth about the Drug Luvox and Homicidal Thoughts

2011-09-30T14:29:00.000-07:00

Mark Taylor was only a high school student when he had sustained terrible injuries during the violent shooting spree at the Columbine school. Mark had suffered incredible blood loss resulting from 7 - 13 bullets as he laid on the ground at Columbine for almost 2 hours help could arrive. That traumatic memory will always remain with Mark Taylor, the memories of the shooting and lying there helpless for two hours with bullets whizzing around him while bleeding from nearly a dozen bullet wounds. Some bullets still even now remain embedded in his spine and near his aorta. Because of the way the bullets ravaged Mark’s body, it was even impossible for the surgeons to count the wounds. The estimated bullet count ranges from 8 to 13. Miraculously, Mark showed courage, strength and resiliency and eventually went on to a full medical recovery. Mark even wrote a book about his experience and went on a book tour, and even was brave enough to testify before the FDA. Because of the notoriety of the case, Mark Taylor was interviewed on numerous television broadcasts and his story in public eye . - -

- -

Because of his horrendous experience, Mark Taylor became a truth teller regarding the dangers of antidepressants and SSRI medications and how those medications cause patients to have violent thoughts,homicidal ideations and thoughts of suicide. These drugs have long been known to have these severe side effects and there is a black box warning about this required by the FDA to be put on these medications. But doctors ignore these warnings and give these medications to patients anyway. One of these patients receiving this kind of medication was Eric Harris, the student who decided that fateful day to shoot and kill his fellow students at Columbine. This antidepressant, Luvox is still on the market and now has "homicidal ideation" listed as a side effect. Homicidal ideation is not just one thought of homicide, but constant ruminating thoughts of killing and how to accomplish that. This warning about tendencies to violence, based on pre-marketing research data - before the drug ever hit the market or was approved by the FDA, was kept from an unsuspecting public and the drug marketed to patients for years. Eric Harris, one of the Columbine shooters, was taking the anti-depressant Luvox when he decided to kill his fellow students. The first antidepressant Eric Harris was given was Zoloft. Within six weeks of taking the drug Eric reported he was having homicidal and suicidal thoughts. Clearly doctors suspected the antidepressant of causing these violent thoughts because they took him off the drug immediately. Eric Harris was taken off that drug but then was put on Luvox. The drug Luvox also caused him to have violent thoughts and with homicidal intent Eric Harris killed students at Columbine. The Columbine families filed a legal law suit against Solvay, the maker of the antidepressant Luvox for continuing to market and sell the drug even after multiple cases of violent behavior of persons taking their product. The drug companies threatened to counter sue to Columbine victims so as a result all the victims retracted their law suits except Mark Allen Taylor. Mark stood up to the pressure and intimidation by the big drug company which had much to loose by the publicity brought by Mark's tragic victims story. Solvay already had bad press about their drug hitting the news because a patient, Matthew Beck, who was also on Luvox, went on a shooting spree at the Connecticut Lottery killing four co-workers before taking his own life. In another Luvox case, a decorated police officer from New Jersey was prescribed Luvox and while on this medication he shot six persons – killing them. This police officer, Edward L. Lutes along with Mark Allen Taylor filed a lawsuit against Luvox. This lawsuit caused the drug manufacturer to pull the drug off the market in the U.S.A. Mark Taylor had survived more gunshot wounds during the shooting rampage than anyone else. Mark's courage and that of a decorated police officer in New Jersey, Edward L. Lutes, stopped the sale of this dangerous drug, Luvox.

- - - -

But this stop on the marketing and sale of this dangerous drug, Luvox, which had already caused these violent deaths was short lived. Mark Taylor was subsequently legally ill advised by an attorney who encouraged him to sign a settlement agreement anyway even though he was clearly emotionally suffering PTSD as a result of the shooting trauma. Mark was that day in negotiations with the opposing attorneys for hours and was lead to believe that he was himself in legal trouble. Mark Taylor was deceived and coerced into signing a settlement with the drug maker Solvay. This attorney, it was later determined, had formerly worked for the drug giant GlaxoSmithKline and was on friendly terms with the pharmaceutical industry and was urging Mark Taylor to sign settlement papers so as to rapidly close the case. Then after the settlement was signed the judge decided to seal the evidence on the case. This made the evidence of the homicidal effects of this drug Luvox unavailable to public scrutiny. Then Solvay sold the market rights to Luvox in the USA to Jazz Pharmaceuticals. The pharmaceutical industry has great political and financial power over what happens in mental health care. Now years later, to silence Mark Taylor's efforts to expose the dangers of antidepressants and how they cause patients to have homicidal thoughts, Mark Taylor is now being treated with the very class of drugs that he warned the public about and he is also threatened with permanent imprisonment by mental health authorities. After many public appearances about the dangers of psychiatric medications like Luvox, Mark and his mother, Donna Taylor were traveling in Arizona when suddenly he seemed to be having seizures. Going immediately to the emergency hospital, Mark and his mother were ill prepared for the actions of the mental health professionals who then unexpectedly decided to keep him hospitalized on a long term basis. Mark then ended up in a hospital while his family was prevented from communicating with him and he was ultimately held without his family's consent for over a year, while being force drugged. While hospitalized the Arizona, Mental Health Officials choose to put Mark on a psychiatric drug that is considered a “last resort” medication: Clozapine.

Clozapine (sold as Clozaril, Azaleptin, Leponex, Fazaclo, Froidir; Denzapine, Zaponex in the UK; Klozapol in Poland, Clopine in NZ/Aus) is an antipsychotic medication used in the treatment of schizophrenia, and is also used off-label in the treatment of bipolar disorder. There are three pharmaceutical companies that market this drug at present: Novartis Pharmaceuticals (manufacturer), Mylan Laboratories and Ivax Pharmaceuticals (market generic clozapine). Clozapine was the first of the atypical antipsychotics to be developed. It was first introduced in Europe in 1971, but was voluntarily withdrawn by the manufacturer in 1975 after it was shown to cause agranulocytosis, a condition involving a dangerous decrease in the number of white blood cells, that led to death in some patients. In 1989, after studies demonstrated that it was more effective than any other antipsychotic for treating schizophrenia, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved clozapine’s use but only for treatment-resistant schizophrenia. The FDA requires blood testing for patients taking clozapine. The FDA also requires clozapine to carry five black box warnings for agranulocytosis, seizures, myocarditis, for “other adverse cardiovascular and respiratory effects”, and for “increased mortality in elderly patients with dementia-related psychosis.” In 2002 the FDA approved clozapine for reducing the risk of suicidal behavior for patients with schizophrenia.Clozapine is usually used as a last resort in patients that have not responded to other anti-psychotic treatments due to its danger of causing agranulocytosis as well as the costs of having to have blood tests continually during treatment. The withdrawal effects Clozapine are severe and life-threatening.

Mark, the courageous Columbine miracle boy, who survived what many did not, and who lived to be an advocate for others, is now hospitalized long term with doctors forcing on him the very type of drug that he advocated should be removed off the market. This drugging regime has left Mark unable to communicate and to care for himself. His mother, Donna Taylor, has been appointed as his legal guardian. Now, under the best of circumstances, Mark Taylor faces one to two years of recovery. Mark has been victimized again by the pharmaceutical industry and the medical professionals who support this forced drugging with anti-depressants and SSRI's and he may never fully recover from this continued misuse and abuse of psychiatric medications.

See these videos of the Columbine Shooting:
1. http://youtu.be/4u2j7hM8MPo
2. http://youtu.be/sHo8vK9CY8E
3. http://youtu.be/nwFw0feUpxI
4. http://youtu.be/l853KaRheqw
5. http://youtu.be/juPWiyciE7U

Mass Violence caused by Anti-depressants and SSRI drugs

2011-09-30T13:44:00.000-07:00

---------

Recent cases of mass violence such as the Joseph Wesbecker in Virginia that shot his co-workers, the Virginia Tech murders, the Columbine Shootings, and the shootings at Fort Hood, all point to the fact that anti-depressant and SSRI medication are dangerous to the public. These medications can cause homicidal thinking which results in public violence and also in suicides. The pharmaceutical industry wants to use the returning veterans as a huge potential pharmaceutical drug customer base. All veterans are trained to use weapons and often have weapons easily at hand. With Post Traumatic Stress a major problem in the returning troops, we have a social problem to deal with their mental health needs. With the US government picking up the tab, the pharmaceutical companies are lobbying heavily to increase their expected profits from the sales of drugs for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) sufferers. The huge numbers of returning veterans are a prime target of their sales efforts. Big Pharma pours lots of money into the political campaigns of those who support their agenda. These huge pharmaceutical companies have persons on the President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health that are pushing to do wholesale marketing of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI's) and other mind altering drugs to veterans with PTSD. The constantly expanding prison population is another target for the SSRI drug marketing and especially those prisoners facing re-entry and who will soon have Medicaid/Medicare to pay their pharmaceutical bills. -

-

When SSRI antidepressants such as Prozac, Paxil and Zoloft were first introduced in the late 1980's and early 1990's there were reports of increasing violent behavior including suicide and homicide. There were in 2003 reports by British authorities and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration about unpublished studies showing an increased risk of suicide in children and teenagers taking Paxil. Prior reports of suicidal and homicidal acts in adults taking SSRIs have been minimized by the pharmaceutical company defenders and mainstream doctors, who claim that suicide is common in depression anyway. ---

---

The recent violence Nov. 5, 2009 at Fort Hood in Texas in which a military psychiatrist shot and killed 13 people and wounded 30 others gives us good reason to reconsider these psychiatric drug treatments for military personnel and veterans. This incident reminded me of the Northern Illinois University mass shootings where former grad student Stephen Kazmierczak killed 5 students and wounding dozens of others before committing suicide himself. This gunman had been taking the drug Paxil prior to his mass killings. The drug manufacturer had been deliberately withholding information about violent behavior as an adverse effect of the medication. Now the drug Paxil carries a black box warning about homicide and suicide. On Sept 14, 2004, an FDA panel voted 18 to 5 to require manufacturers of all antidepressants to add black box warnings to their product labeling. A month later, the FDA adopted the panel's recommendations. The warning reads in part: "Antidepressants increased the risk of suicidal thinking and behavior (suicidality) in short-term studies in children and adolescents with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and other psychiatric disorders. Anyone considering the use of [Drug Name] or any other antidepressant in a child or adolescent must balance this risk with the clinical need. Patients who are started on therapy should be observed closely for clinical worsening, suicidality, or unusual changes in behavior." The warning specifically links antidepressant use to suicidal behavior in four percent of kids on these drugs compared to two percent for kids on placebos. -

-

No type of antidepressant is helpful in every clinical case or even indicated. These drugs can actually make the situation worse. As a class of drugs SSRIs can create a unique combination of side effects that may severely impair judgment and impulse control in individual patients. Excessive doses of antidepressants can cause brain dysfunctions including disorientation, confusion, and cognitive disturbances. In combat veterans suffering PTSD, impulsive behavior, especially if coupled with impaired cognitive functioning, can be dangerous. Antidepressants can also trigger similar, manic-like symptoms in people whose depression is part of a manic-depressive syndrome, which often gets overlooked when people are given SSRIs. Is public safety enhanced when “patients” are given SSRI’s and are persons on SSRI’s less likely to do gun violence? The pharmaceutical corporations would lead you to believe that a person taking these drugs is less likely to commit suicide and less likely to do gun violence to others. But is that really true? --

---

The use of secret settlements to withhold information about a known harm of a pharmaceutical drug was very evident in the Fentress case, in which the Kentucky Supreme Court found that lawyers who engaged in an ongoing trial after a secret settlement had already been reached. Judge Potter said their conduct showed "a serious lack of candor with the trial court, and there may have been deception, bad faith conduct, abuse of the judicial process or perhaps even fraud." [Potter v. Eli Lilly & Co., 926 S.W.2d 449, 454 (Ky. 1996).] In summary the Fentress case was about a violent incident in September 1989. Joseph Wesbecker armed himself with an AK-47, walked into the Louisville printing plant where he had worked, and started shooting his former co-workers. After killing eight people, wounded twelve more, and the man finished matters by committing suicide with his gun. Only one month before, Wesbecker had begun taking Prozac. The known problems of violent behavior of patients on this medication had been withheld from the public, governmental regulators and even medical professionals. The lawyers for the shooting victims soon focused on the drug Prozac, manufactured by Eli Lilly, as the cause for Wesbecker's unexpected violence. With the sales of the drug Prozac at $1.7 billion in 1994 there was a lot at stake in this legal case. The Plaintiff's counsel had information about the withholding of research findings regarding another Eli Lilly drug Oraflex. In 1985, Lilly had pled guilty to twenty-five criminal counts of failing to report adverse reactions to Oraflex, including four deaths, to the Food & Drug Administration. But then suddenly during the trial the Oraflex evidence was no longer going to be presented to the court. There was an experienced and astute Judge on the case, John Potter, who suspected something was afoul despite the lawyers' denials and their references to a damages phase, Potter suspected that a deal had been made before closing argument. When the plaintiffs didn't file a notice of appeal, Judge Potter became suspicious and thus called in the lawyers from both sides for consultation. But the lawyers continued to deny that a settlement had been reached. When the appeals court ruled against Judge Potter saying he no longer had jurisdiction, Potter was not satisfied and appealed the case to the Kentucky Supreme Court. Finally in a Supreme Court hearing, lawyers for both sides finally acknowledged that they had indeed settled all money issues and had agreed to go through only the liability phase of the trial no matter what the result. Judge John Potter took the "high road," acting consistently with the judiciary's responsibility, and protecting the public interest. Thus the role of the judiciary in deciding matters of privacy and sealed records is an important balancing act of sometimes competing interests but which must also take into account the public's right to know especially when there is a compelling public interest. But in most cases the judge opts for sealing the court record and hiding the evidence of wrongdoing by pharmaceutical companies from the public scrutiny. Many cases are settled secretly out of court with a gag order against the plaintiff and an exemption from discovery. Thus even when hundreds of cases of death and injury result, the public is rarely informed. Pharmaceutical companies pay a lot in legal fees to do "risk management" and this often involves counter suits against the victims of the pharmaceutical fraud. In addition, the pharmaceutical companies also use intimidation tactics against witnesses, especially against medical professionals who might act as expert witnesses in court. So when it comes to psychiatric drugs our court system and our regulatory agencies are not protecting the American public.

Aerotoxic Syndrome - Caused by Dangerous Chemical in Airplane Cabin Air

2011-09-29T13:20:00.000-07:00

Aerotoxic Syndrome - Caused by Dangerous Chemicals in Airplane Cabin Air Cranfield University will be hosting a seminar on Tuesday 11th October 2011 10.00 - 17.00 (Registration from 09.30)

----

The Cranfield University final circular is now available on the website:
http://www.aerotoxic.org/download/docs/news_and_articles/Final_Circular.pdf

**Attendees are reminded that they must register prior to the seminar**

What is Aerotoxic Syndrome?

Aerotoxic Syndrome is the term given to the illness caused by breathing contaminated air in jet aircraft. It was introduced on 20th October 1999 by Dr Harry Hoffman, Professor Chris Winder and Jean Christophe Balouet, Ph.D. Why does the cabin air get contaminated? In order to have a comfortable environment and sufficient air pressure to breathe at the altitudes at which jet airliners fly, a supply of warm compressed air is required. This is supplied direct from the jet engines and is known as "bleed air". It is mixed inside the aircraft with recirculated cabin air at a ratio of 50/50. Although some of the air is recirculated, all of the air originates from the jet engines. Bleed air comes from the compressor section of the jet engine that has to be lubricated. Jet engines have "wet seals" which are designed to keep the oil and air apart. However these seals, like any mechanical component, are subject to wear. They cannot be 100% effective, may fail and will then let a certain amount of oil into the bleed air."

What are the symptoms?

Symptoms may be acute, i.e. for a short time or chronic, i.e. long-lasting. Any combination of the following may be experienced: Fatigue – feeling exhausted, even after sleep Blurred or tunnel vision Shaking and tremors Loss of balance and vertigo Seizures Loss of consciousness Memory impairment Headache Tinnitus Light-headedness, dizziness Confusion / cognitive problems Feeling intoxicated Nausea Diarrhoea Vomiting Coughs Breathing difficulties (shortness of breath) Tightness in chest Respiratory failure requiring oxygen Increased heart rate and palpitations Irritation of eyes, nose and upper airways. As the term “Aerotoxic Syndrome” has yet to be officially recognized, many medical practitioners are unaware of the condition and misdiagnose sufferers. --

---

Conference now scheduled in London on this issue at Cranfield University which will be hosting a seminar on Tuesday 11th October 2011 10.00 - 17.00.

'Inhalable toxic chemicals on board aircraft: priorities for research and action'

Following a published Department of Transport report on 10th May 2011 which concluded that: ‘There was no evidence of pollutants occurring in cabin air levels at levels exceeding available health and safety standards’, it has been decided to review evidence which was not previously considered. This meeting will be a “think tank” event, with the aim of strengthening the scientific foundations. Individuals and organizations with an interest or contrary evidence to offer are invited to attend in an effort to fill the gap of knowledge and discuss priorities for further research and technical solutions. If speakers wish to submit a written version of their talks, the entire proceedings can be published in a special number of The Journal of Biological Physics and Chemistry before the end of the year. If you wish to take part in the seminar, either as a speaker or a delegate please contact: Professor Jeremy Ramsden, Department of Nanotechnology, Cranfield University, B-70, Bedfordshire, MK43 0AL. United Kingdom or email him: J.Ramsden@cranfield.ac.uk and the Aerotoxic Association christine@aerotoxic.org who will be undertaking the registration process

Remembering the tragedy of 9/11

2011-09-08T04:43:00.000-07:00

This September 11th will mark the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attack that inflicted so much tragedy on so many. The tragic events of September 11, 2001 were like nothing this country has experienced before and hopefully will not experience again. The sheer magnitude of the tragedy and the loss of American life on American soil stunned us. We grieve now the lives lost at the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and in the four planes that were hijacked and crashed. But the United States as a nation was not alone in this great loss. The World Trade Center housed employees from countries from all around the world and they also lost loved ones in this disaster, as well as the international passengers on the planes. So this event united the world in grief, as we struggled to try to explain the unexplainable.

For the families who lost loved ones this September 11th this will be a day of sad remembrance. For many it marks a day that they will never forget, one that changed their life forever. For those who lost someone in the towers that day, there was initially such shock that it was hard to grasp the finality of the event or even conceive what outcome might lie ahead. The sorrow we felt in our hearts was our memory’s way of holding on to things we never wanted to lose. We also wished we could deny that fellow human beings were capable of such atrocities and such hatred. There are things that we didn't want to happen but in the finality of these events we had to accept, things we didn't want to know but had to learn, and people we cherished and lost.

There also was an incalculable loss of our sense of safety and security as individuals and as a nation. Prior to these tragic events, we took for granted our safety and security but also our freedoms. Much has changed since that fateful day; our lives will never be the same. There were many secondary victims--those who have been traumatized by watching and hearing of the events. We have also heard and watched the stories of courage and bravery of the firefighters, police officers and paramedics, and those who were evacuating the building. We have heard of the courage and bravery of "ordinary" people who responded to help others still trapped in the building. Many responded in an extraordinary ways, those who helped strangers down the many flights of stairs to safety, and the rescue workers who searched seemingly tirelessly for survivors. And there were also those in our national service jumped into action to try to protect the nation.

Because of the suddenness of the attacks we questioned the capabilities of our government intelligence to detect terrorist acts and we were also left wondering about the safety procedures of airlines, the effectiveness of our disaster preparedness and our general defense systems. Those who struggled with the chaos and confusion following the attacks were trying to piece together the pieces, trying to comprehend how this could possibly happen, and attempting to plan for our continued defense and even our diplomatic policy. There were many who served honorably and valiantly in our national security and intelligence services.

Now, ten years after the 9/11 attack there are still many questions about why and how this happened; questions that were not answered by the 9/11 commission or our governmental officials. Some suspect a deeper problem within our national security system – one that is not related to the external enemy we faced; some believe we were not defeated that day by a superior opponent, but rather succumbed to an enemy within. Many whistleblowers had warned about the terrorism threat and also warned about other internal weaknesses within our national security system. There were courageous whistleblowers who dared to speak the truth, they were mostly ignored.

There were many qualified and dedicated professionals who sought to protect the nation and rose in service that day and in the weeks and months to follow. In the aftermath of the 9/11 event, we did not improve our ability to see through the political smokescreen of power, but instead bolstered its opacity by making scape goats of innocent Muslims and creating a reign of oppressed civil rights for our own people. We as a nation had lost our moral compass. Using hatred to fuel animosity, we, as a nation acted dishonorably. The government lawyers suspended moral and ethical values and authorized the use of abhorrent methods against our presumed enemies, only to find that we harmed ourselves by uniting the Muslim world against us. We lost the high moral ground and authorized the use of enhanced interrogation methods, including water boarding and other methods of torture. We arranged for extrajudicial sites to hold enemy combatants and sent persons to places of torture. We even authorized the curtailment of the civil rights and liberties of our own people through the Patriot Act. If we do not learn from the mistakes of the past, we are doomed to repeat them. We must hold those in government accountable to the American people. We must make take seriously the international standards of human rights and the Geneva Conventions and we must support peaceful means for our nation’s future.

This is a time for prayer, meditation and reflection in respect for those who perished. Hopefully by this process of remembrance, we have found a way to come to know who we are in new and unexpected ways. We have gained a more profound understanding of our past and our future. We are humbled by our mortality but more aware of how adversity has enriched our meaning and purpose of life. We journeyed inwardly to discover connections previously not understood or acknowledged and found ourselves again.

International Criminal Court - Arrest Warrants for Libyan war criminals

2011-06-29T11:38:00.000-07:00

In May 2011 Chief Prosecutor of International Criminal Court Tells Security Council He Will Seek Arrest Warrants Soon against Three Individuals in First Libya Case

Says Credible Evidence Indicates up to 700 Killed in February Alone; ‘Such

Atrocities Seared the Human Conscience’, Says Member, Lauding Referral to Court

The Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court told the Security Council today that he planned to seek arrest warrants in the coming weeks against three Libyans who appeared to bear “the greatest criminal responsibility” for crimes against humanity committed during Colonel Muammar al-Qadhafi’s brutal, months-long crackdown against the anti-Government uprising in the North African country.

Briefing the Council on the initial results of his investigation, launched following the 15-member body’s unanimous 26 February decision to refer the situation in Libya to the Court, Mr. Moreno-Ocampo laid out evidence in support of charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity, including shooting peaceful demonstrators, as well as ongoing violent repression and systematic persecutions, together with murder, imprisonment, rape and torture. Reporting that civilians had been used as human shields and targeted with heavy weapons and cluster munitions, he also said that Libyan forces had blocked delivery of humanitarian supplies.

“The evidence collected has confirmed the fears and concerns expressed in [Security Council] resolution 1970,” he said, noting that two months ago the body had deplored the “gross and systematic violation of human rights”. The evidence collected thus far had also revealed that events in neighbouring Egypt and Tunisia had promoted Libyan security forces to begin preparations for the possibility of demonstrations there. “As early as January, mercenaries were being hired and brought into Libya,” he said.

While he acknowledged that efforts to cover up the crimes committed in the wake of the popular uprising made it difficult to ascertain the precise number of victims, he told the Council that there was credible information that estimated that some 500 to 700 persons had been killed in February alone when Libyan security forces had fired live ammunition at demonstrators gathered in Benghazi’s High Court Square.

The difficulty of obtaining concrete figures on the number of dead was compounded by the fact that countless bodies had been removed from the streets and hospitals of Benghazi, Misrata and elsewhere. Doctors were not allowed to document the number of dead and injured admitted to their care, and many people were afraid to report incidents to the authorities: “Being injured became evidence of opposing the regime, and challenging the authority of the regime is a crime under Libyan law,” he said.

Providing no names for those who would be the subject of the arrest warrants, Mr. Moreno-Ocampo stressed that, in all the incidents he would present to the judges at the Hague-based Court, the victims who had been shot at by security forces had been unarmed civilians, and there was no evidence of any attack against security forces. “To prove the case, the Office [of the Prosecutor] has collected different types of evidence: there are at least two eyewitnesses for each incident, documents and, in many cases, corroboration of details by pictures or videos,” he said. Cases would be opened as necessary, taking into account the full scope of criminality — including war crimes — allegedly committed by different individuals. He would inform the Council in advance before proceeding.

He said that arresting those who had ordered the commission of crimes would contribute to the protection of Libyan civilians because it would deter ongoing crimes, remove those who had ordered them, and send a serious message to other potential perpetrators, in Libya and elsewhere, that the international community would not condone such acts. Mr. Ocampo capped his briefing with a quote from a speech delivered by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to the recent review of the Rome Statute in Kampala, Uganda: “‘Now we have the [International Criminal Court], permanent, increasingly powerful, casting a long shadow. There is no going back. In this new age of accountability, those who commit the worst of human crimes will be held accountable.’”

All members of the Council took the floor, expressing their appreciation for the speed with which Mr. Moreno-Ocampo’s Office had launched its investigation and the diligence shown by Court officials and staff thus far. The representative of the United States said that as the investigations continued, it was important for the international community to remain united in its efforts to protect civilians and areas under civilian control. The United States supported the Prosecutor’s swift work on the mandate given to him by the Council, and considered that the outcome was “serious and imminent, and should warn those around Qadhafi about the perils of continuing to tie their fate to his”, she said.

While the representative of the Russian federation emphasized that his Government was concerned by the mounting civilian casualties and ongoing violence in Libya, he said it was unfortunate to note that some civilian deaths had occurred as a result of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) air strikes. He, therefore, stressed that all parties must ensure the safety of civilians and that all actions must be carried out in strict compliance with resolution 1973 (2011). Going beyond the ambit of that resolution was “unacceptable”.

The representative of France, whose delegation holds the Council’s rotating presidency for the month, said that, when a Government attacked its citizens instead of protecting them, “such atrocities seared the human conscience”. In referring the situation in Libya to the Court, the Council had taken an important, informed decision so that those responsible for such crimes would be prosecuted. The judicial process must continue. While the Court would prosecute those who organized, ordered or financed crimes, there was still time for those who had been misguided to disassociate themselves from that campaign.

Also speaking were the representatives of the United Kingdom, Germany, Portugal, India, Gabon, Brazil, Colombia, China, Nigeria, South Africa, Lebanon and Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The meeting began at 10:10 a.m. and ended at 11:30 p.m.

Background

The Security Council met this morning to consider the situation in Libya and was expected to hear a briefing by the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court on his initial report of the investigations carried out under Council resolution 1970 (2011). (For details of a briefing yesterday on that situation by the Secretary-General’s Special Envoy to Libya, see Press Release SC/10240.)

Briefing by Prosecutor of International Criminal Court

LUIS MORENO-OCAMPO, Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, introduced his Office’s report on activities in furtherance of resolution 1970 (2011), which stressed the need to “hold to account those responsible for attacks, including by forces under their control, on civilians”. The report presented the factual and legal analysis conducted by the Office to implement that referral. An investigation had been opened on 3 March, requiring his Office to apply the norms established by the Rome Statute: to establish the truth on crimes alleged to have been committed in Libya, through an independent and impartial investigation.

To that end, he said, his Office had conducted more than 15 missions to 10 States, and, as of 26 April, had initiated or completed 45 interviews with individuals with direct knowledge of crimes committed and had collected and reviewed more than 569 documents. The Prosecution had taken no statement inside Libya to fulfil its duty to protect its witnesses. Noting that cooperation received from States, regional and other international organizations had been critical to the “fast progress” of the investigation, he noted also that the Commission of Inquiry created by the Human Rights Council had been cooperating with his Office and had indicated its willingness to continue to do so.

Indeed, he said, the Commission was in the process of preparing its report to the Human Rights Council, which was to be completed by May. The Court was looking forward to that report and having access to the data it compiled, which would be very useful to the Prosecution for future action. “We are discussing with the Commission Chair the difficulties to unveil the truth while an armed conflict is ongoing and the importance of the Commission’s field activities,” he added.

“The evidence collected has confirmed the fears and concerns expressed in resolution 1970,” he continued, noting that two months ago the Security Council had expressed “grave concern at the situation in Libya” and had deplored the “gross and systematic violation of human rights, including the repression of peaceful demonstrators”. The evidence collected thus far established reasonable grounds to believe that the widespread and systematic attacks, including murder and persecution, which had been and continued to be committed against the civilian population in Libya, were crimes against humanity. Additionally, and since February, there had been an armed conflict in Libya and, in that context, there was also relevant information on alleged commission of war crimes. The Commission of Inquiry would be very crucial to fully understand the armed conflict, he added.

Continuing, he described for Council members the incidence of crimes against humanity investigated by his Office thus far, and noted that the evidence showed that security forces had been systematically shooting at peaceful protestors, following the same modus operandi in multiple locations. The evidence also showed that events in neighbouring Egypt and Tunisia had promoted Libyan security forces to begin preparations for the possibility of demonstrations there. “As early as January, mercenaries were being hired and brought into Libya.” The incidents had begun on 15 and 16 February. Security forces had arrested two lawyers who were requesting justice for the 1,400 victims of the 1996 Abu Salim prison massacres. On 17 February, thousands of peaceful demonstrators protesting those arrests had congregated in the square around the High Court of Benghazi. Security forces had entered the square and reportedly fired live ammunition into the crowd, killing numerous demonstrators. That had been the beginning of a series of similar incidents in different cities across Libya.

“The efforts to cover up the crimes have made it difficult to ascertain the precise number of victims, but there is credible information that estimates that, just as the result of such shootings, 500 to 700 persons died in February alone,” he said, noting that the difficulty was compounded by the fact that numbers of bodies had been removed from the streets and hospitals. Additionally, doctors had not been allowed to document the number of dead and injured admitted to their care. “Being injured became evidence of opposing the regime, and challenging the authority of the regime is a crime under Libyan law,” he said. Moreover, to avoid punishment and risk of death, some protestors had sought medical attention in private homes and did not bring injured or dead persons to the hospitals.

He went on to report that the investigation had revealed that civilians in Tripoli and other areas under the regime’s control were reportedly subjected to different forms of persecution. Systematic arrests, torture and killings and enforced disappearances had been reported in Tripoli, Zawiyah, Zintan and the area of the Nafousa Mountains. The victims were civilians who had participated in the demonstrations, were considered disloyal to the regime or had talked to international journalists or activists. “In addition, citizens of Egypt and Tunisia were arrested and expelled en masse because of their perceived association with the popular uprising; the mosques they prayed in were destroyed,” he said.

Continuing to lay out the evidence, Prosecutor Moreno-Ocampo said that there was also relevant information concerning the alleged commission of rape; victims of rape had reportedly been arrested and subjected to harassment. In one high-profile case, a woman had given a report to international media of how she had been raped by security forces because of her suspected association with rebels, and his Office was investigating those allegations. Sources had also reported the unlawful arrest, mistreatment and killing of sub-Saharan African civilians wrongly perceived to be mercenaries.

In all that, he said, specific allegations of war crimes included the use of imprecise weaponry, such as cluster munitions, multiple rocket launchers and mortars, and other forms of heavy weaponry, in crowded urban areas, in particular, Misrata. There were also reports of forces blocking humanitarian supplies, and some sources had also reported the use of civilians as human shields and the torture of prisoners of war or civilians in the context of the armed conflict. The total number of persons who had died since the beginning of the conflict “is in the thousands”, while the numbers of displaced, according to the United Nations, included some 535,000 migrant workers, refugees and asylum-seekers, and 327,342 internally displaced Libyans.

Explaining his Office’s next steps, Mr. Moreno-Ocampo said that, in accordance with the Rome Statute, in the coming weeks he planned to present a case before the pretrial chamber of the International Criminal Court. Implementing the mandate established by Security Council resolution 1970 (2011), he said: “I plan to request the judges to issue arrest warrants against three individuals who appear to bear the greatest responsibility for the crimes against humanity committed in the territory of Libya since 15 February 2011.”

In all the incidents to be presented to the judges, the victims who had been shot at by security forces had been unarmed civilians, and there was no evidence of any attack against security forces, he said. “To prove the case, the Office has collected different types of evidence: there are at least two eyewitnesses for each incident, documents and, in many cases, corroboration of details by pictures or videos,” he said. Cases would be opened as necessary, taking into account the full scope of criminality — including war crimes — allegedly committed by different individuals. He would inform the Council in advance before proceeding.

He said that the pretrial chamber might decide to accept the application or reject it; or it might ask his Office for additional information. Should the judges decide to issue arrest warrants, the primary responsibility of executing them would fall to the territorial authorities. The Interim National Council had committed itself to implementing any such warrants, and had requested the international community’s cooperation to that end. His Office was still awaiting a response from the regime in Tripoli on the question of arrest warrants.

“Arresting those who ordered the commission of crimes will contribute to the protection of civilians in Libya because it will deter ongoing crimes,” he continued, adding that it would also deter crimes by removing those who had ordered them and by sending a serious message to other potential perpetrators, in Libya and elsewhere, that the international community would not condone such crimes. Arrests could not successfully be conducted without serious planning and preparation, which took time. The international community should take steps now to help with such practical planning.

He ended his briefing with a quote from a speech delivered by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to the recent review of the Rome Statute in Kampala, Uganda: “‘Now we have the [International Criminal Court], permanent, increasingly powerful, casting a long shadow. There is no going back. In this new age of accountability, those who commit the worst of human crimes will be held accountable.’”

Statements

MARK LYALL GRANT (United Kingdom) said that when resolution 1970 (2011) was adopted, the Council had stressed the need to hold to account those responsible for attacks on civilians, and his Government was grateful for the Prosecutor’s work to implement that text. Indeed, the situation in Libya had demanded such decisive action, as the report had noted systematic shooting at protesters; the death of hundreds or even thousands of protestors; and commission of massive crimes on the order of a few. Despite repeated promises of a ceasefire, Libyan authorities continued their appalling attacks and an excessive use of force, as had been seen in Misrata with intensified rocket attacks, where hundreds had landed in civilian areas, disrupting water and other supplies. That represented an ongoing campaign to disrupt Misrata.

Others had highlighted the deliberate targeting of medical facilities, denial of humanitarian activities and use of sexual violence as a weapon, he said, noting: “We, as the international community, must continue to support you in investigating these allegations.” The United Kingdom would assist such work wherever possible and all United Nations Member States should do the same. Those holding power in Libya must fulfil their obligations under resolution 1970 (2011) and swiftly hand over any individual who might be indicted.

As a State party to the International Criminal Court, the United Kingdom strongly supported its mandate to find impunity in Libya and elsewhere, including Syria, he said. “There can be no impunity,” he stressed, supporting the Secretary-General’s call to look into the killings in Syria and be prepared to consider various avenues, including through the Court, to investigate those crimes. It was not too late for Syria to bring about peace and stability.

PETER WITTIG ( Germany), fully supporting the Court’s actions in Libya, said the perpetrators of alleged crimes in that country must be made to answer for their actions and justice must be rendered. In adopting resolution 1970 (2011) and deciding to refer the situation in Libya to the Court, the Council had been far-sighted. The resolution was based on the protection of civilians, a primary duty borne by each State. That was the second message contained in that resolution, the importance of which transcended Libya. “Violence must stop as soon as possible in Libya and a solid ceasefire must be reached” to allow for the possibility of reaching a political solution. The Doha and Cairo meetings had contributed considerably to solutions beyond military actions, and it was important to involve all parties in the political process. The Qadhafi regime had lost its legitimacy and a new Government would work to open Libya to democracy, which would require national reconciliation and clarity about the injustices committed.

Welcoming that the Prosecutor’s investigation was being carried out with due caution for witness protection, he said initial progress had been encouraging and Germany attached the greatest importance to justice being done as quickly as possible for the victims. Those continuing serious crimes in Libya must know that the Council, the United Nations and the Court, together if necessary, would ensure that crimes under international law would not go unpunished. Cooperation with the Court was essential to shed light on the alleged crimes in Libya, he said, urging the country to undertake its obligations under resolution 1970 (2011) and cooperate with the Court. Serious human rights violations were still the “order of the day”. Condemning the use of rape, torture and cluster weapons against civilians, he demanded that all parties to the conflict observe international humanitarian law. The situation in Misrata remained worrying, and Germany had provided $700,000 to support transport of humanitarian aid to that city.

JOÃO MARIA CABRAL ( Portugal) said his Government remained very troubled by the humanitarian situation in Libya, as serious violations of international humanitarian law continued, including alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes. Portugal also was disturbed by recent statements by the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights, among others, referring to those breaches and to serious human rights violations. Given that situation, a political solution was becoming “all the more pressing” and a sustainable, verifiable ceasefire must be achieved.

He stressed the importance of justice as a fundamental value and inherent part of the process to bring peace to victimized communities. The international community had an essential role in punishing perpetrators and preventing the escalation of violence. Expressing full support for the Prosecutor’s investigation, he said cooperation with the Court was essential for the success of the investigations and criminal proceedings. Commending the Prosecutor for exercising the utmost caution in not placing at risk those providing testimonies, he also welcomed the Human Rights Council’s international Commission of Inquiry in Libya, saying that the Prosecutor should closely liaise with that body. He expressed Portugal’s support for the Court.

HARDEEP SINGH PURI (India), noting that his country was not a signatory to the Rome Statute or a member of the Court, recalled that, in its explanation of vote on resolution 1970 (2011), his Government had noted that of the 192 United Nations Member States only 114 were members of the Court. Five of the 15 Council members, including three permanent members, were not party to the Statute. Nonetheless, India had voted in favour of the resolution in the belief that referral of the Libyan situation would lead to an immediate cessation of violence.

Unfortunately, that situation continued to deteriorate, he said, expressing serious concern at recent developments and condemning the use of force against civilians. He reiterated India’s call to immediately cease attacks on civilians and engage in political dialogue. Noting that the Prosecutor had decided there were reasonable grounds to conclude that war crimes had been committed, and that he would soon submit the first arrest warrant, he said the Prosecutor should carry out an impartial investigation and not be influenced by non-judicial considerations. “Political considerations should not exonerate anyone from the prosecution of crimes,” he stressed, citing the resolution’s operative paragraph 6 concerning States not party to the Rome Statute.

NELSON MESSONE ( Gabon) said his delegation appreciated the Prosecutor’s briefing and the clear conclusions reached on the path of the Court’s investigation. He also noted the difficulties affecting any investigations being carried out in situations of armed conflict. He reiterated his Government’s staunch opposition to any form of impunity and its equally staunch support of all efforts to protect and promote human rights and to keep citizens from harm. In that light, Gabon remained gravely concerned by the events in Libya and would stress that the aims of Security Council resolution 1970 (2011) be carried out to the fullest.

He also called on all parties to cooperate with the Court’s investigators and specifically for the Government to not impede that work. He welcomed the initial cooperation between the Human Rights Council and the International Criminal Court. He called on all States to cooperate with those bodies to ensure that all those responsible for the crisis in Libya would be brought to justice.

MARIA LUIZA RIBEIRO VIOTTI ( Brazil) said her delegation was deeply concerned by the continuation of hostilities in Libya, and she called for an immediate ceasefire, in line with Security Council resolution 1973 (2011), leading to the end of hostilities and the establishment of a representative Government for the Libyan people. As the situation on the ground continued to deteriorate, such a course of action was more urgent than ever.

She said Brazil was also deeply concerned by the continued targeting of civilians, including reports of, among others, forced disappearance and rape. Those perpetrating such acts must cease all violence against civilians. As developments on the ground unfolded, Brazil hoped the work of the International Criminal Court would have a positive impact, leading to the cessation of all violence and contributing to the achievement of a durable peace. The Chief Prosecutor’s investigations must be thorough, transparent and impartial, and she urged all parties in Libya to cooperate with the Court.

VITALY CHURKIN ( Russian Federation) said the Council had adopted resolution 1970 (2011) out of serious concern that actions being perpetrated in Libya had led to widespread casualties among civilians. The Prosecutor’s briefing, outlining the steps of his investigation into those actions, had been encouraging. It had also made clear that the aims of resolution 1973 (2011), calling for an immediate ceasefire and finding a political solution to the crisis, were vitally important.

Yet, he said, the Russian Federation was still concerned by developments on the ground, and unfortunately, actions by North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) forces had also led to civilian casualties. In that regard, the Russian Federation stressed that all actions must be carried out in strict compliance with 1973 (2011). Going beyond the ambit of that resolution was unacceptable. His delegation appreciated the work of the Court to bring to justice individuals alleged to have perpetrated war crimes.

NÉSTOR OSORIO ( Colombia) said those who had drawn up the Rome Statue were aware that the new body was not going to operate in a vacuum and that its work was bound to overlap with the efforts to maintain international peace and security. As such, the Security Council had been charged with reporting certain instances of breach of international law to the Court. The investigation, as presented today, revealed that armed repression of innocent civilians and deliberate targeting of peaceful demonstrators fell within the purview of the Court.

He said that those responsible for such actions must be made to answer for them. “We believe that the work carried out by the [International Criminal Court] regarding the situation in Libya was of the utmost importance towards the full implementation of 1970 and deserves our full support,” he said. It was clear that the Court and the Chief Prosecutor had been thorough and diligent in carrying out the mandate charged to them under resolution 1970 (2011).

LI BAODONG ( China), attaching great importance to the fight against impunity, said the pursuit of justice should be based on the core values of peace and harmony. Indeed, the crisis in Libya showed no signs of abating — the humanitarian situation continued to worsen and the civilian population continued to suffer. He called for complete and strict implementation of Council resolutions, saying also that the international community must respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Libya.

At the same time, he said, his country did not favour arbitrary interpretation of Council resolutions or actions that went beyond the Council’s mandate. Noting the importance of establishing a ceasefire monitoring system under United Nations auspices, he said negotiations were the right way forward to find a political solution to the situation in Libya. Endorsing the five-point road map proposed by the African Union, he said the Council must play a lead role in resolving the crisis. Further, the Special Envoy should play a stronger role on the political track. At the same time, China wished to see the Court weigh properly the unfolding events and play a positive role in restoring peace and order to that country.

KIO SOLOMON AMIEYEOFORI ( Nigeria) said the fight for justice and against impunity was at the heart of the values shared by most Member States. As a State party to the Rome Statute, Nigeria supported the Court. The situation in Libya posed a major test for the Court as an indispensable tool in collective conflict resolution efforts. The first article of the United Nations Charter charged the Council with taking collective measures to remove threats to peace, and in that regard, he welcomed the Prosecutor’s report, calling it “measured” and “logical” in its approach to the investigation into charges of human rights violations. Its factual analysis provided a picture of the extent of violations endured by Libyans. The evidence presented made even stronger the case for the Court’s investigation. Indeed, the systematic nature of the attacks against civilians and attempts to conceal those crimes warranted rigorous investigation.

Resolving the crisis required that resolutions 1970 (2011) and 1973 (2011) operated together, as they were complementary and reinforcing, he said, which was why efforts of the Special Envoy and the Libyan Contact Group, among others, were recognized. All such activities were central to facilitating dialogue. It was important that the Prosecutor’s activities were calibrated to support efforts to find a peaceful solution. It also was essential that justice was pursued in a manner that did not jeopardize efforts to promote lasting peace. The Prosecutor’s team must hold to high evidentiary standards and maintain independence. Regarding the fate of sub-Saharan Africans, he urged the Prosecutor to ensure that their cases were handled according to due process. It was difficult to see how justice would be served without international cooperation. The Court’s involvement should further international efforts to achieve lasting peace in Libya.

DOCTOR MASHABANE ( South Africa) said his Government’s support for the Court was based on respect for the international fight against impunity. As a State party to the Rome Statute, South Africa would support the Prosecutor’s work on the situation in Libya. Expressing concern at the alleged crimes against civilians, he noted that the standard of proof for initiating an investigation was less than what was required for successful prosecution. The Prosecutor should “leave no stone unturned” in finding those who had committed atrocities, and examine abuses committed on either side of the conflict.

Indeed, he said, crimes might have been committed by the Government and opposition forces, and all crimes, regardless of the perpetrators, should be considered. Noting that questions had been asked about the implementation of resolution 1970 (2011), he said that operative paragraph 6 established a caveat designed to exclude the Court’s jurisdiction. But that caveat was limited to actions authorized by the Council. Actions outside the scope of resolution 1970 (2011) should not benefit from the protection offered by that caveat. In sum, he assured the Prosecutor of South Africa’s continued cooperation with the Court.

SUSAN RICE (United States) said that by adopting resolution 1970 (2011), the Council had unanimously decided to refer the situation in Libya to the Court’s Prosecutor, reflecting the importance the international community attached to ensuring that those responsible for widespread attacks against innocent civilians in Libya were held responsible. The Prosecutor had described a grave picture of the situation on the ground since the beginning of the crisis three months ago, including the targeting of innocent civilians, repression of peaceful demonstrations, use of heavy weapons and cluster munitions in crowded urban areas and the blocking of humanitarian supplies, all revealing the gravity of what was going in Libya even today.

She said international reports of ongoing widespread attacks by the Qadhafi regime were proof of the ongoing need for justice and accountability. They also revealed what had been reiterated by the United States and other Governments for months: Qadhafi had lost any and all legitimacy to lead Libya. As the Court’s investigations continued, it was important for the international community to remain united in its efforts to protect civilians and areas under civilian control.

The United States supported the Prosecutor’s swift work on the mandate given to him by the Council, and it considered that the outcome was “serious and imminent, and should warn those around Qadhafi about the perils of continuing to tie their fate to his”, she said. Tomorrow, members of the international community would gather in Rome to weigh solutions in an effort to help lay the groundwork for a political process that would answer to and respect the legitimate rights of the Libyan people. The United States would continue to discuss such measures with its allies and colleagues. It would also continue to support the Libyan people, who deserved a leader that respected their legitimate aspirations and human rights. “Through his brutal oppression”, it was clear that Qadhafi was not that leader.

NAWAF SALAM ( Lebanon) reminded the Council that the League of Arab States had earlier condemned the acts on the ground in Libya as violations of human rights and international law. Lebanon was deeply concerned by the deteriorating situation in Libya being carried out by the country’s discredited regime, including continued persecution of civilians and their targeting with heavy weapons and cluster munitions.

He said Lebanon was also concerned by the initial reports that had been issued by the High Commissioner for Human Rights. He emphasized the importance of holding responsible those hindering the Libyan people from exercising their legitimate rights. Lebanon believed that the work of the Court and its Chief Prosecutor would be a deterrent to the commission of future crimes. That work would also help ease the suffering of the Libyan people and promote the return of peace, stability and security to their country.

IVAN BARBALIĆ (Bosnia and Herzegovina), citing the report’s mention of serious and constant violations of international humanitarian and human rights law, as well as a deteriorating situation marked by systemic violence against civilians, strongly condemned such violence. He expressed grave concern at the reported crimes and the manner in which they were committed, saying that only reinforced his belief that referral of the Libyan situation to the Court was in line with the Council’s obligations. After two months of investigation, the Prosecutor had found evidence of incidents that constituted alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Addressing such crimes and punishing those responsible was “beyond any doubt” the main precondition for reconciliation and sustainable peace, he said, stressing: “Impunity is not an option and I am certain that we all can agree on that.” For those reasons, full implementation of resolutions 1970 (2011) and 1973 (2011) was of utmost importance; obligations deriving from those texts were not optional. Condemnation of grave atrocities placed under the Court’s jurisdiction was unanimous. Bosnia and Herzegovina remained committed to the ideals and goals of the Court.

GÉRARD ARAUD ( France) said that when a Government attacked civilians instead of protecting them and such atrocities “seared the human conscience”, the international community had the responsibility to intervene and protect civilians. Faced with abuses by Libyan authorities, the Arab League and the Secretary-General of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) had condemned grave violations of human rights and international humanitarian law. The Council, unanimously adopting resolution 1970 (2011), had referred the situation to the Court. In his report, the Prosecutor had confirmed the Council’s fears: that attacks launched against peaceful demonstrators had been systematic and widespread. Civilians suspected of participating in demonstrations had been abducted and tortured.

Indeed, it was not military targets but rather civilian populations that were the priority, he said, citing attacks against hospitals and ports to hinder evaluation of civilians. In referring the situation to the Court, the Council had taken an important, informed decision so that those responsible for crimes would be prosecuted. The judicial process must continue. While the Court would prosecute those who organized, ordered or financed crimes, there was still time for those who had been misguided to disassociate themselves from that campaign. France welcomed the fact that States and regional organizations had offered their full cooperation to the Prosecutor. In the future, the Council would have to support the judges’ decisions in a “united and determined” manner.

* *** *

Bosian Serb War Criminal - charged with genocide at The Hague

2011-06-29T11:32:00.000-07:00

Ratko Mladic will be facing charges of War Crimes at the International War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague. He will be formally charged with genocide and 10 other counts of war crimes concerning the Bosnian conflict of the early 1990s. He is being held in the custody of the tribunal.

Serge Brammertz is the Chief prosecutor for the United Nations war crimes tribunal. The Bosnian war criminal Ratko Mladic will be asked to enter a plea to charges of genocide, murder and persecution. Mladic will be asked about his involvement in the three-year siege of the Bosnian capital, Sarajevo, and the 1995 Srebrenica massacre of some 8,000 Muslim men and boys.

"He was the most powerful military figure in Bosnia during the war," said Brammertz. "He’s charged with crimes that shock the conscience of the international community. These crimes symbolize the brutality of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina." (June 1, 2011)

June 8, 2011 International Criminal Court - Arrest Warrant for Sudan President

2011-06-29T11:23:00.001-07:00

Press Conference by Chief Prosecutor of International Criminal Court

Strong political decisions were needed to ensure the execution of the International Criminal Court warrants for the arrest of President Omer al-Bashir of Sudan and other powerful Government figures, Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo said at a Headquarters press conference today.

“Our warrants are not going away,” said Mr. Moreno-Ocampo, following his briefing to the Security Council on the situation in Sudan. (See Press Release SC/10274) Pointing to international community’s growing willingness to fight impunity, he said it had been demonstrated by the recent arrest of Ratko Mladić, for 16 years a fugitive from the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.

The problem with the passing of time when executing a warrant was that it left potential victims vulnerable to further crimes, he said, stressing that it was up to the Security Council to meet the challenges posed by President Bashir. He added that he had not himself requested any action by the Council, although some ambassadors had suggested adding names to the Sudan sanctions list.

Mr. Moreno-Ocampo said the progress made in the case against rebel commanders accused of having led a 2007 attack on the base of the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS) had been a highlight of his briefing to the Council. In March, pretrial judges had confirmed the war crimes charges against those commanders, showing the Court’s impartiality and the importance of its mandate to protect peacekeepers. They had admitted their role in the attack, but were challenging the neutrality of the peacekeeping bases, he said, adding that the case therefore concerned the very nature of peacekeeping.

Asked to comment on a recent report on the use of a United Nations helicopter to transport Ahmad Harun, another Sudanese official indicted by the Court, the Prosecutor said he had sent a letter about the incident to the United Nations Legal Adviser, who, in informal comments, had said that the use of the helicopter appeared to be supportable, but should be restricted as much as possible.

Commenting on situations in other countries, he said in regard to Libya that evidence was still being presented and a decision was awaited on charges related to the killing of protesters at the beginning of the crisis, as well as the continuing arrest, torture and disappearance of civilians. After that decision, other evidence would be presented in the interest of adding a new charge relating to the use of mass rape in efforts to contain protests.

Protecting civilians in Libya meant stopping the crimes, the Prosecutor continued. If the judges issued a warrant it could loosen the grip of fear in Libya, which had been used to maintain control for the past 30 years. It was to be hoped that when the warrant was issued there would be momentum to resolve the crisis.

Asked about details of the rape allegations, the Prosecutor said the victims could number in the hundreds. Whether such attacks could be attributed to directives from [Colonel Muammar al-]Qadhafi himself, as indicated by new information, or had arisen in the barracks, was under investigation. He also raised the possibly of receiving information that would confirm related reports of an alleged Government policy to issue Viagra-like drugs to soldiers.

Turning to Côte d’Ivoire, he said President Alassane Ouattara had requested an investigation, and it was planned to take place before the end of the month. All crimes in the jurisdiction would be the focus, he said, emphasizing that the President himself had insisted on impartiality to help him build a new foundation for Government.

Assessing the nearly eight years that he had been on the International Criminal Court, Mr. Moreno-Ocampo said that during that time the Court had grown into a “normal” institution and was therefore starting to fulfil its purpose of helping to protect civilians.

He went on to say that he could not comment on events in Syria, since the situation there was beyond his jurisdiction, which was restricted to the 150 States parties to the Court’s founding Rome Statute, or to situations referred by the Security Council. Affirming that he had responded to a Palestinian request to discuss the Court’s jurisdiction in their area, he declined to comment on whether a General Assembly vote on Palestinian statehood would affect such jurisdiction.

However, the Prosecutor did say he looked forward to universal accession to the Rome Statute. It was only a matter of time before all countries were in the system, he said, pointing to the fact that citizens in some non-States parties were requesting accession. It was crucial, however, that prosecutors and judges respect the actual legal limits, he emphasized. “When we have to operate we operate; when we cannot, we do not,” he added.

* *** *

Patients not Consumers Debate - the Nuances of Language

2011-04-27T18:08:00.000-07:00

The “patients – not consumers” debate has started again with an article by NY Times columnist Paul Krugman, Patients are Not Consumers.

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=V%2F9a%2Fg5s%2BH%2BkXCrZxtZb3aOAQdU2M1cf

Paul Krugman is right that medical care is very different from any other consumer good and it is fundamentally true that choice in medical care is different from other products we buy as consumers. But let us remember that the use of the word “consumer” came from human rights advocates working with the disabled. So it is important to understand this war of words in an historical context of human rights for the disabled. Disabled persons may be needing care and medical attention but still be healthy in other aspects of their lives and needing autonomy to make responsible choices for their own lives.

Originally every one used the word patient but as socialized welfare took over many people’s medical care there came into the decision making process the use of tertiary decision makers – guardians, case management professionals, risk management managers and social workers. Social workers also used another word “client” which means someone receiving services. Often persons who used the word “patient” were emphasizing that the patient didn’t know what was best for him/her and so instead the “professionals” should make all the decisions. This is especially true for those who are disabled physically, cognitively or mentally. Thus the disabled were stripped of their rights as human beings while others made decisions on the “patient’s behalf”. All that was needed to strip a patient of their right to choice in care or informed choice in treatment was to claim that someone in the “administration” or “management” knew better than the patient what was good for him/her.

Thus the consumer movement in health care - the disabled person as a consumer has the right to choice in how to spend their health care dollars. The consumer meant that the disabled person was purchasing medical care and thus had rights that could not be subverted by hospital management or managed care providers. Thus the word “consumer” allowed the patient choice and demanded “informed choice” be applied to medical care.

Those who wished to control the patient’s choices within medicine – funneling patients to programs and treatments that maximize profits, wanted to use the word “patient” as a patient was a person without power and was required to obey the hierarchy of the managed care system. Anyone who really believes that doctors these days make decisions based on what is best for the patient, is clearly not aware of the daily pressures on doctors to do what management tells them to do. Thus a “patient” is someone so injured, diseased, damaged that they can’t make choices for themselves. A consumer is someone empowered to make choices and with money to spend and thus a financial stake in the decision making process.

I agree with the sentiments of the reporter Paul Krugman but he was apparently unaware that human rights advocates for the disabled have been using the word “consumer” to empower disabled persons in their choices for their lives and their health care choices.

The Independent Living Movement is facing a takeover of people’s lives where they live in managed housing which is controlled and all decisions made by management – case management required and no “informed choice” option. Independent Living principles affirm the rights of human persons to make informed choices in their lives. Those asserting “patient” as the correct language see all elderly as managed “patients” needing case management so decisions are made with no discussion and no notice to the person involved. Those who have suffered elder abuse in such managed care facilities would insist that they were “consumers” and human beings not just damaged patients needing to be told what was best for them.

We are all disabled when seeking emergency or hospital care - thus when we need the care we are a person who needs to be respected for our choices. A woman may wish as a consumer to chose to get pregnant, refuse experimental treatment, chose a more natural pain control remedy, or chose to not have invasive end of life care. All these choices could be subverted by a tertiary decision maker.

10 Principles of Independent Living
Source: Statewide Independent Living Council of Illinois

1. Civil Rights – equal rights and opportunities for all; no segregation by disability type or stereotype.
2. Consumerism – a person ("consumer" or "customer") using or buying a service or product decides what is best for him/herself.
3. De-institutionalization – no person should be institutionalized (formally by a building, program, or family) on the basis of a disability.
4. De-medicalization – individuals with disabilities are not "sick," as prescribed by the assumption of the medical model and so not require help from certified medical professionals for daily living.
5. Self-help – people learn and grow from discussing their needs, concerns, and issues with people who have had similar experiences; "professionals" are not the source of the help provided.
6. Advocacy – systemic, systematic, long-term, and community-wide change activities are needed to ensure that people with disabilities benefit from all the society has to offer.
7. Barrier-removal – in order for civil rights, consumerism, de-institutionalization, de-medicalization, and self-help to occur, architectural, communication and attitudinal barriers must be removed.
8. Consumer control – the organizations best suited to support and assist individuals with disabilities are governed, managed, staffed, and operated by individuals with disabilities.
9. Peer role models – leadership for independent living and disability rights is vested in individuals with disabilities (not parents, service providers or other representatives).
10. Cross-disability – activities designed to achieve the first five principles must be cross-disability in approach, meaning that the work to be done must be carried out by people with different types of disabilities for the benefit of all persons with disabilities.

Medical Whistleblower Advocacy Network submission to the UN 2010 UPR

2011-04-27T17:00:00.000-07:00

Medical Whistleblower Advocacy Network submission to the UPR on U.S.A. 2010.

This report to the UN Universal Periodic Review is provided by Medical Whistleblower both as an individual stakeholder and as an advocacy network, including - Whistleblowing Airline Employees Association, and the Illinois Family Court Accountability Advocates. Medical Whistleblower joins with an array of U.S.A. organizations and individuals that are concerned about U.S.A.’s failure to implement its international human rights commitments to human rights defenders. Medical Whistleblower is located in Lawrence, KS, USA and was established in 2001 to meet the advocacy needs of persons who have stepped forward to provide information about medical fraud against vulnerable populations, patient abuse and neglect, and human rights violations. Many are mandated reporters under state or US federal law.

http://lib.ohchr.org/HRBodies/UPR/Documents/session9/US/JS14_JointSubmission14.pdf

http://www.slideshare.net/MedicalWhistleblower/j-s14-joint-submission14-medical-whistleblower

Protection of Human Rights Defenders

2011-04-24T14:51:00.000-07:00

"Have we not come to such an impasse in the modern
world that we must love our enemies—or else?
The chain reaction of evil—hate begetting hate, wars producing
more wars—must be broken, or else we shall be plunged
into the dark abyss of annihilation."
—Martin Luther King Jr.

The UN Resolution on Human Rights Defenders

The USA is a permanent member of the UN Security Council. The USA joined the UN Human Rights Council in 2009.

15 April 2010 Resolution adopted by the Human Rights Council*
13/13

Protection of human rights defenders
The Human Rights Council,

Recalling General Assembly resolution 53/144 of 9 December 1998, by which the Assembly adopted by consensus the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms annexed to that resolution, and reiterating the importance of the Declaration and its promotion and implementation, Recalling also the continued validity and application of all the provisions of the above-mentioned Declaration,

Recalling further all previous resolutions on this subject, in particular General Assembly resolution 64/163 of 18 December 2009 and Human Rights Council resolution 7/8 of 27 March 2008,

Stressing that the level of respect and support for human rights defenders and their work is important to the overall enjoyment of human rights,

Gravely concerned by threats, harassment, violence, including gender-based violence, and attacks faced by many human rights defenders, reflected, inter alia, in the reports of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders and other human rights mechanisms,

Gravely concerned also that, in some instances, national security and counterterrorism legislation and other measures have been misused to target human rights defenders or have hindered their work and endangered their safety in a manner contrary to international law,

* The resolutions and decisions of the Human Rights Council will be contained in the report of the Council on its thirteenth session (A/HRC/13/56), chap. I.
United Nations A/HRC/RES/13/13 General Assembly Distr.: General 15 April 2010 Original: English A/HRC/RES/13/13

Recognizing the immediate need to put an end to and take concrete steps to prevent reats, harassment, violence, including gender-based violence, and attacks by States and non-State actors against all those engaged in the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all,

1. Takes note of the report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders (A/HRC/13/22) on the security and protection of human rights defenders;

2. Urges States to promote a safe and enabling environment in which human
rights defenders can operate free from hindrance and insecurity;

3. Underscores that the legal framework within which human rights defenders work peacefully to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms is that of national legislation consistent with the Charter of the United Nations and international human rights law;

4. Urges States to publicly acknowledge the legitimate role of human rights defenders and the importance of their work as an essential component of ensuring their protection;

5 Encourages States to create and strengthen mechanisms for consultation and dialogue with human rights defenders, including through establishing a focal point for human rights defenders within the public administration where it does not exist, with the aim of, inter alia, identifying specific needs for protection, including those of women human rights defenders, and ensuring the participation of human rights defenders in the development and implementation of targeted protection measures;

6. Urges States to take timely and effective action to prevent and protect against attacks on and threats to persons engaged in promoting and defending human rights and fundamental freedoms in accordance with the Declaration and their relatives, when they are attacked or threatened as a result of these activities, including through the possibility of developing, in consultation with human rights defenders, an early warning system to facilitate broader awareness of imminent risks and to enable effective responses;

7. Also urges States not to discriminate against human rights defenders on any grounds, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status, and to desist, in this context, from any discriminatory measures against them, including intimidation, profiling, confiscation of assets, suspension of activities and exclusion from national consultative processes;

8. Calls upon States to fully support the role of human rights defenders in
situations of armed conflict and provide them with the protection due to all civilians in such situations;

9. Welcomes the role of national human rights institutions as human rights
defenders and protectors, and encourages States to strengthen the mandate and capacity of national human rights institutions where they exist, as necessary, to enable them to fulfill this role effectively and in accordance with the Paris Principles;

10. Calls upon States to ensure both coordination within national and local levels and that those involved in the protection of human rights defenders and their relatives are trained in human rights and the protection-related needs of human rights defenders at risk, including those promoting the rights of members of marginalized groups;

11. Also calls upon States to allocate resources for the effective implementation of necessary protection measures, including specific training for persons involved in their implementation;

12. Urges States to investigate, in a prompt, effective, independent and accountable manner, complaints and allegations regarding threats or human rights violations perpetrated against human rights defenders or their relatives and to initiate, when appropriate, proceedings against the perpetrators so as to ensure that impunity for such acts is eliminated;

42nd meeting
25 March 2010
[Adopted without a vote]

The makeup of the United Nations Human Rights Council

8 States serve on the Human Rights Council for three-year terms, five of which will be sitting on the Geneva-based panel for the first time in 2009: Belgium, Hungary, Kyrgyzstan, Norway and the United States.

Re-elected for an additional term were the following 13 members: Bangladesh, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Jordan, Mauritius, Mexico, Nigeria, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal and Uruguay.

The Human Rights Council was created by the General Assembly in May 2006 (resolution 60/251) as the United Nations principal political human rights body. It replaced the much-criticized Commission on Human Rights (abolished in June 2006), and is composed of 47 elected Member States that must uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights.

Based on equitable geographical distribution, seats are allocated to the five regional groups as follows: African Group, 13 seats; Asian Group, 13 seats; Eastern European Group, 6 seats; Latin American and Caribbean Group, 8 seats; and Western and Others Group, 7 seats.

Victim Impact Statement - USA v Scott Bloch

2011-04-20T05:45:00.000-07:00

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ))) ) ) Magistrate Case No:
v. )
SCOTT BLOCH ))DEFENDANT )

_________________________________________ )

VICTIM IMPACT STATEMENT OF JANET LOUISE PARKER,

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MEDICAL WHISTLEBLOWER

My name is Janet Louise Parker and I am the Executive Director of Medical Whistleblower, in Lawrence, Kansas. As a human rights defender, Medical Whistleblower steps forward to directly advocate for those who report medical fraud, abuse and neglect and human rights violations.(1) Medical Whistleblower provides educational materials to enhance understanding of human rights issues especially those issues involving health care and the medical community. Medical Whistleblower also runs a non-profit human rights advocacy network, the Medical Whistleblower Advocacy Network. The Medical Whistleblower Advocacy Network works in collaboration and cooperation with other non-profit organizations and individuals, to publicly promote human rights advocacy and enforcement. The Medical Whistleblower Advocacy Network provides public petitions for purposes of encouraging legislation that will promote human rights and protect human rights defenders. In 2010 the Medical Whistleblower Advocacy Network provided the United Nations with a report for the USA’s Universal Periodic Review. (2)

I advocate for other whistleblowers, human rights defenders2 and mandated reporters, such as a foster parents (3) and medical professionals 4 to file this victim impact statement, under 18 U.S.C. ' 3771(e) (5) Victims’ Rights Laws 6 and Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 32. (7 8 9 10) I wish to advocate for all persons who have been harmed because of Scott Bloch’s lack of enforcement of whistleblower protections, lack of enforcement of civil rights protections and refusal to enforce international human rights law. I was a cooperating witness to a US House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and Chairman Congressman Henry Waxman. Scott Bloch as his role as Special Counsel for the Office of Special Counsel did not do his duty to protect those who provided valid whistleblower complaints even those brought forward by human rights defenders and mandated reporters and also failed to protect the human rights of US citizens and to protect human rights defenders. All US Attorneys have the responsibility and obligation under United Nations Declaration on human rights defenders, General Assembly resolution 53/144 of 8 March 1999 and A/RES/58/178 of 22 December 2003. A defender of human rights is defined under international law and is a person who, individually or with others, acts to promote or protect human rights. Human rights defenders are those women and men who act peacefully for the promotion and protection of those rights.

In order to protect our civil liberties and rights guaranteed under the US Constitution and all of its amendments and the Bill of Rights, we as a nation must ensure the protection of human rights defenders. The United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Defenders A/RES/58/178 of 22 December 2003 (11) is addressed not only to States and human rights defenders but to all individuals, groups and organs of society. Article 10 of the Declaration states that “No one shall participate, by act or by failure to act where required, in violating human rights and fundamental

3

freedoms.” The United States of America has an obligation as a nation state to protect the rights of defenders against abuses by third parties. (12 13)

A whistleblower is a person/informant who raises a concern about wrongdoing occurring in an organization or body of people, often from within their workplace. Usually the whistleblower is from within that same organization. A whistleblower exposes the wrongdoing in the hope of stopping it and who feels the public has a right to know. Whistleblowers are usually workers who have attained professional competence in their field. Whistleblowers have access to information at a high enough level to be able to detect fraud, governmental corruption, abuse and neglect but also brave enough to alert others to the problem. Whistleblowers come from all walks of life and many professional disciplines. Nowhere is it more important to have persons of honor and ethical and moral character than in our governmental service.

Persons who are whistleblowers are often by definition defenders of human rights as well, when they are persons who have stepped forward to provide information about public health issues, medical fraud against vulnerable populations, patient abuse and neglect, and human rights violations. These defenders of human rights are concerned about human rights involving violations of minor children, elderly, disabled, mental health patients, prisoners, migrants, immigrants and patients in hospital treatment for addiction. Patient abuse can be physical, financial, emotional, psychological or sexual abuse. Human rights defenders who are in the medical community are called upon to report inequality and discrimination in regards to the delivery of health care. They often are face to face with the difficult realities of the managed care system in the U.S.A. and on the front line against medical fraud against vulnerable populations like those economically disadvantaged, immigrants, migrants, the elderly, persons of color, those of different religious faiths or national origin, those who have a disability or

4

different sexual orientation. Medical professionals who are also human rights defenders also need to speak out about gender related inequality in health care.
There are state and federal mandated reporter laws in the U.S. A. requiring medical personnel and other professionals to report certain types of concerns for public health and safety, abuse, neglect and human rights violations. Mandated reporters can be medical professionals but they can also be airline pilots, certified public accountants, prison guards, law enforcement personnel, civil engineers, nuclear safety officials, NIH researchers, FDA inspectors, educators, patent attorneys and many other professionals. For example a civil engineer might be reporting a problem of toxic waste leaking into a public water supply or an airline pilot might be reporting toxins leaking into the cabin air of an airplane. A certified public account might be reporting Medicaid/Medicare fraud against a vulnerable population. A prison guard might step forward to report a problem of prison rape and a FBI agent might be reporting sexual assaults on Native American women on Bureau of Indian Affairs land.

It takes great courage to be a whistleblower within our national government and human rights defender especially for those in national security or intelligence positions who are already working in a dangerous environment. But brave defenders have stood up for human rights and braved the stigma of being a whistleblower within the U.S. government including those in national security, law enforcement or intelligence professions. It must be pointed out that many of these professionals although not in the medical profession may have contact with those who need medical care and assistance or who have suffered abuse, mistreatment or even torture. There has been an increased use of governmental contractors in many capacities, especially in the Department of Defense, airline security, and in the private prison/corrections facilities. These subcontractors perform duties normally considered functions of government without direct

5

governmental supervision and control. So protection of whistleblowers who are acting as defenders of human rights by providing us valid complaints against federal contractors is critical. Defenders of human rights who work in governmental service represent significant sources of intelligence about criminal activity and violation of public trust and issues in regards to the public welfare due to their unique access to information not readily available to law enforcement. Nowhere is this more evident than in the FDA and in complaints regarding the Food Safety Act and in regulation of prescription drugs where whistleblowers bring forward issues critical to the health and safety of the American public. In addition, many medical professionals do serve in national security positions or work with the security forces.

Scott Bloch, who was formally nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to protect the public trust, has instead repeatedly violated that trust. Scott Bloch’s misconduct has had a very negative impact on the lives hundreds of individual whistleblowers and on the entire federal workforce because of his dismissal of hundreds of whistleblower complaints. Some of these whistleblower complaints were brought forward by those who were defending human rights or reporting under mandated reporter laws. Scott Bloch therefore did not perform his duty and obligation as a federal officer to uphold international standards regarding human rights. Scott Bloch did not investigate these valid complaints of whistleblowers and human rights defenders which left hundreds of dedicated federal employees potentially subjected to unlawful retaliatory conduct with no remedy. In addition, Scott Bloch did not abide by the principles of international human rights law or even longstanding federal policy when he discriminated against federal employees on the basis of their sexual orientation. He therefore left numerous federal employees discriminated against on this basis, who previously would have been protected by the OSC, with no remedy. Scott Bloch’s retaliatory actions against these

6

governmental whistleblowers had a tremendous negative impact on the lives and careers of the OSC employees who he terminated or forced into involuntarily transferring. Scott Bloch’s retaliatory actions created tremendous anxiety, emotional distress, financial losses, and career damage to these loyal federal employees, which continues to this day.

Executive orders and administrative measures have been used to limit the action of human rights defenders, in the name of security. Governmental personnel often face retaliation when reporting to the Merit Systems Protection Board or the appropriate Office of Inspector General. The Office of Special Counsel under Scott Bloch’s leadership has not responded properly to whistleblower complaints, nor provided proper protection to mandated reporters. Federal employees continue to suffer when they raise concerns about waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government. Instead legal protections for federal employees should be enhanced and current existing rights protected. Protecting their right to provide testimony regarding issues of fundamental human rights is critical to our national health and safety and also to our national security and defense as well. The use of the States Secrets privilege has been used so that the government could throw out valid whistleblower cases including those of defenders of human rights.

Persons who step forward to report under mandated reporter statutes are promised on paper that they will be protected when they disclose problems but in reality there is no agency in the state or federal government empowered to protect them or to track the progress of a human rights defender case through the system from initial intake to final resolution. Instead what usually happens is that the human rights defender’s identity is leaked to the person, organization or corporation that they are making the allegation against. This means almost immediate retaliation against the human rights defender and possible loss of employment and even

7

potentially the loss of their career. Systems such as the Merit Systems Protection Board and the Office of Special Counsel which are expected to protect defenders of human rights and mandated reporters fail to protect them and under Scott Bloch’s tenure there was little or no protection for whistleblowers even if they were mandated reporters or defenders of human rights. Mandated reporters encounter a corrupted judicial system that denies due process through covert activities and ineffective legal representation. Professionals often lose license to practice or their right to employment in chosen careers if they perform their mandated legal duty. It is important that our government publicly reaffirm the importance of the work carried out by human rights defenders. Human rights defenders helping victims to access justice for violations of human rights law or international humanitarian law, even attorneys, are regularly subjected to threats, violence and harassment. Human rights defenders can be prevented even from providing humanitarian aid to victims of human rights violations.

When facing this kind of retaliation human rights defenders in the U.S.A. do not have a known agency that they can turn to for protection because the Office of Special Counsel has not adequately protected whistleblower rights. The Department of Justice does not cover protection for investigations that occur in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or the Health and Human Services Department (HHS). The investigators for the FDA are not trained law enforcement officers and therefore do not have law enforcement authority to initiate protection for persons who provide them testimony. Local departments of Child Protective Services (CPS) also do not have the authority to protect their witnesses when an investigation regarding child abuse is launched. Therefore the person who comes forward to provide information regarding human rights abuses such as child abuse are immediately targeted for reprisals and there is nowhere they can effectively go for protection or to report the retaliation. In addition, those

8

wishing to silence the defender of human rights can come anonymously against the defender’s professional license and/or security clearance. Violators of human rights, in order to defend themselves, launch counter attacks on the defender’s professional and personal reputation. Lack of proper training of investigators on how to protect both the integrity of the investigation and the professional reputation of the mandated reporter has often negatively impacted the well being and safety of the defender. Defenders who are women or who are from a minority group are particularly vulnerable to particular kinds of abuse when they step forward to report human rights violations.

Whistleblower retaliation is a form of abuse or assault (psychological violence), which has serious and devastating consequences not only for those targeted, but also for any organization within which it is allowed to prevail. Although it can be an overt form of abuse, in the workplace the perpetrators usually act covertly and systematically to undermine, control, and their targets. It has been observed that elements of psychological abuse in the workplace correspond with elements of torture and have similar emotional outcomes for the target. The perpetrators are often superficially charming and may appear to others to be an asset to the organization. In the workplace, the underlying cause of retaliation or bullying is usually power abuse, with the perpetrators choosing as their targets anyone whom they perceive as a threat to their assumed power. When those targeted resist the perpetrators' attempts to control and intimidate them, the perpetrators will simply intensify the abuse until the targets either leave or break down under the stress of what is happening. Most whistleblowers are originally of a very strong constitution. They are usually self confident adults who have good self esteem and were fully capable of handling difficulties in their own lives. Therefore whistleblowers have many coping mechanisms to hide the emotional damage the retaliation has caused them and just try

9

harder. But under extreme or prolonged stress even very emotionally strong people often undergo an apparent personality change. It is important to remember that there needs to be intervention from outside to protect the whistleblower and prevent further retaliatory abuse.

Thus when Scott Bloch in his position in the Office of Special Counsel did not protect whistleblowers from further retaliatory abuse, he permitted continuing retaliatory abuse and thus long term emotional and psychological consequences for the whistleblowers. This retaliatory abuse or psychological violence can eventually lead to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The whistleblower who is the victim of the retaliation is not inherently weak or inferior. In fact, any human being has the potential to develop PTSD. Whistleblowers who are being bullied should be encouraged to seek support sooner, rather than later, and should be able to do so with the assurance that they will be believed and effectively supported, rather than be treated as if they themselves were the problem. But this did not happen because of lack of response by Scott Bloch on the OSC whistleblower complaints. The stressed and/or bullied whistleblower found themselves facing disciplinary proceedings when what they really need is rest and support. In addition the use of forced hostile workplace psychiatric evaluations were used to discredit the whistleblowers’ allegations. This hostile workplace evaluation action, often taken by those accused by the whistleblower, then renders it almost impossible for whistleblowers to seek adequate professional help for their stress induced needs without risking their creditability on their whistleblower complaint. It is a common tactic to remove classified security clearances, medical licenses, pilot’s licenses and other professional credentials from human rights defenders in order to halt their advocacy.

These competent whistleblowers when faced with the effects of workplace bullying and whistleblower retaliation may become unassertive, overanxious, compliant and even unable to

10

cope with even the most trivial of stressors. The symptoms of stress breakdown and PTSD are frequently misunderstood (by family, friends, co-workers and employers) as those of inadequacy or inefficiency. Some typical human reactions to severe and persistent stress are the loss of emotional control, apparent over-reactions to seemingly trivial stimuli, showing hypervigilance, and being on constant alert for further abuse. Being targeted for whistleblower retaliation almost always leads to feelings of powerless. Those retaliated against usually feel ashamed of what is happening to them, and by the time they seek help are likely to be already showing signs of stress breakdown. At the point these competent whistleblowers finally admit they need help, they are likely to present as over emotional. In these circumstances it is all too easy believe the person's account of workplace psychological violence or bullying as over-reacting when in fact the symptoms of emotional stress should be recognized as actually corroborating what they are saying. There can be secondary traumatization when the persons, whose misdeeds the whistleblower is reporting, retaliate by fabricating complaints against the whistleblower. These fabricated complaints against the whistleblower do not need to even have the appearance of truth in order for the bully to be protected by the Good Samaritan Laws and their false allegations protected by governmental immunity. People may also disbelieve the whistleblower, and side instead with those in power or authority. Co-workers may ridicule him/her, abandon, blame, ostracize, sabotage, threaten, and betray him/her. These painful and dangerous reactions can come from family, friends, and authorities as well as from people associated with the perpetrator. Co-workers may fault the whistleblower for the hostility in the workplace. The whistleblower may be unable to recover until they leave the stressful position, but may be unable to find a new position until they have recovered. Employers, therefore, need to be aware of the potential for compounding the problems of stressed/bullied whistleblowers by unjustly disciplining them.

11

Where the stress has been caused by workplace bullying, it also allows the perpetrators to switch the focus of attention away from their own abusive behavior by inferring, (usually under the guise of sympathy and support), that the person they are targeting is mentally ill, and that it is their "mental illness" which is responsible for the current problems. Whistleblowers need ongoing reassurance that they are not to blame for what has happened. Referring stressed people for work-based counseling helps perpetuate the myth that it is the person who is the problem, rather than the working environment. It is important that employers and service providers take stress reactions seriously and remove the whistleblower from the stress before the damage becomes more serious or permanent. Whistleblowers, who are generally highly committed people, are particularly likely to ignore their own symptoms and struggle on, since seeking help is too often regarded as an admission of weakness or professional inadequacy. It is also common to put the stressed/bullied whistleblower back into the same stressful/bullying situation and expect them to "prove" themselves. Thus protection at the level of the Office of Special Counsel is particularly important to prevent whistleblower retaliation trauma and its long term after effects and the loss of human potential for the whistleblower.

Scott Bloch as former Special Counsel at the United States Office of Special Counsel (OSC) failed to uphold anti-discrimination laws and whistleblower protections for federal employees and also failed in his duties at the Office of Special Counsel to protect human rights defenders as required under international human rights law. We need to see the Office of Special Counsel abide by its nondiscretionary statutory duties to enforce the laws within its jurisdiction, particularly 5 U.S.C. §1214(e), as well as ascertaining that the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) studies whether federal employees are adequately protected from reprisal and other

12

prohibited personnel practices (PPP’s), per 5 U.S.C. §1204(a)(3), and how agency heads have interpreted their nondiscretionary statutory duty to “prevent PPPs,” per 5 U.S.C. §2302(c).

Many whistleblowers and human rights defenders reported human rights violations within programs funded by grants from the White House Office for Faith-based and Community Initiatives. The United States of America has a primary responsibility for protecting the human rights of its citizens (14) and for protecting human rights defenders. Scott Bloch refused to “investigate complaints relating to the provision or violation of the rights of a crime victim” and did “willfully or wantonly fail” to protect those rights. (18 U.S.C. ' 3771(f)(2))(15). All US Attorneys have obligations under State and Federal law to report suspected child abuse. In this great nation, the United States of America, we have a blemish on our record of defending human rights, because high governmental officials turned a blind eye while children were neglected and abused in Teen Challenge and other residential treatment centers.(16 17) Scott Bloch, former Deputy Director and counsel to the Department of Justice's Task Force for Faith-based and Community Initiatives (2001-03) was responsible for failing to protect the human rights of US citizens in the Teen Challenge programs and other non-governmental organizations funded by that office. We cannot stand as an example for other nations when we have not yet secured the protection of human rights for our own children on our own soil. When mandated reporters or human rights defenders come forward to report concerns to governmental authorities such as the Office of Special Counsel, we must provide them adequate, and meaningful protections and effective action on their complaints. Whistleblowers within the US government deserve the right to be made whole, including compensatory damages.

When Scott Bloch was appointed as Deputy Director and counsel to the Department of Justice's Task Force for Faith-based and Community Initiatives, Teen Challenge centers already

13

had a well known public reputation for child abuse. Their tactics were known to be remarkably similar to documented abuse within Straight, Inc. which was the most abusive "behavior modification" clinical trials (18) and insurance fraud ever documented in the U.S.A. (50,000 children and adults were in Straight Inc.).(19) Melvin Sembler, former head of Straight, Inc., now operates the Drug Free America Foundation, (20) which endorsed and made direct referrals to Teen Challenge. Thus Teen Challenge may be acting as the de facto inheritor of Straight, Inc.'s legacy of child abuse and neglect as well as their business model using troubled teens for profit. The abuse of children in residential centers has not stopped but has gotten even more governmental power to hide its true nature from law enforcement and regulators. Abusive teen rehabilitation centers are now even more numerous and the industry is still not regulated by the US federal government. There is no adequate means to monitor these facilities for human rights abuses.

Teens who ended up in the Teen Challenge programs did not really “volunteer.” Teen Challenge gets the vast majority of its residents either directly from the jails or from courts which sentence them to a live-in program in lieu of jail. This usually happens after the judge gives the individual a choice to go to a correctional facility or Teen Challenge for year. (21) Any student leaving Teen Challenge without completion of the 12 month program can be court ordered to a correctional facility for non-completion of the courts requirements. Teen Challenge also actively recruits right from the jails. Law Enforcement Assistance Agency (LEAA)(22) grants were responsible for the rapid growth of teen rehabilitation centers which did not need to meet the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) standards for clinical research using human subjects.

Teen Challenge in Texas was the first facility exempted from licensing and inspection regulation. (23) The arrangement between governmental financial support and Teen Challenge

14

raises questions about the constitutional separation of church and state. As exempt faith-based drug treatment centers, Teen Challenge facilities are not required to have licensed chemical dependency counselors, conduct staff training or criminal background checks, protect client confidentiality rights, adhere to state health and safety standards, or report abuse, neglect, emergencies and medication errors.
(24) Amid continuing complaints of physical, emotional, psychological and sexual abuse, (25) Teen Challenge programs are reported to foster a deliberate atmosphere that was both anti-gay (26) and anti-Semitic. (27) Several former students of Teen Challenge say that staff 1) use physical punishment (28) 2) ridicule intimidate and/or verbally abuse children (29) 3) use chemical restraints (30) 4) employ cruel or humiliating treatment or other emotionally abusive behavior (31) 5) abuse sexually (32) 6) assign excessive exercise or work duties 7) deny food, clothing, shelter, medical care (33) and/or prescribed therapeutic activities (34) 8) deny contacts with family, counselors, or legal representatives as a form of punishment (35) 9) force them to do missionary activity (36) which may be also a violation of child labor laws (37) and 10) force them to sign over paychecks to Teen Challenge.(38) Teens confined to Teen Challenge have also been victims of forced labor scams (39) such as an unlicensed telemarketing scam in Florida that paid workers only 33 cents a day for a 40 hour work week while at the same time swindling the public with a fraud scheme.(40) There are cases where teens have been subjected to cruel and degrading treatment and even what could be considered torture (41) with no possibility to escape from their abusers as they are court ordered into the facility and refused contact with the outside world even their families.

Teen Challenge facilities were cited for abuse as early as 1998. (42) As a US Attorney, Scott Bloch demonstrated a lack of proper due diligence in his work and clear bias, as he awarded start up grant money (2001-03) to Teen Challenge programs even though the facilities

15

were not required to meet regulatory health and safety standards, and were not inspected. Amidst all the media coverage over Teen Challenge child abuse and without this influx of federal funding, the centers would surely have lost clients and probably closed. But the combination of jail recruitment strategies and extensive funding supplied by the Faith-based and Community Initiative grants along with an exemption from having to demonstrate compliance with existing standards, faith based facilities were flourishing. In Florida and Texas, Teen Challenge centers were being accredited by the Texas Association of Christian Child Care Agencies (TACCCA) and the Florida Association of Christian Child Care Agencies (FACCCA). The programs have no medical component and center instead of around prayer, Bible study and religious conversion. With no regulatory control over the quality of the staffing, Teen Challenge in Winthrop Maine hired registered sex offenders for staff. (43) Teen Challenge facilities did not uphold First Amendment rights and also did not enforce workplace anti-bias laws. (44) There was also lack of proper oversight over the educational standards of the program. (45)

Torture is the calculated physical and psychological assault on the individual, a practice used to instill fear, punish or degrade, to dehumanize, or to obliterate the self. The true goal of torture is soul murder. It is often said that anyone who has been tortured remains tortured, long after the physical wounds have healed. Torture is the deliberate infliction of severe pain by one human being against another, thus it leaves particular kinds of mental and psychological scars. This soul wrenching trauma is different from other traumas because torture is a violation committed in secret and in spite of official denial. Many believe that torture only occurs in the most repressive regimes, but the reality is that torture is widespread in all parts of the world. Although it is often perpetuated by police or security forces, it can also be carried out by detaining authorities such as immigration officials, prison staff, hospital staff, and in Teen

16

Challenge it is done by peer mentors and staff. Torture can be physical or psychological. Many can understand severe physical abuse as being torture. But psychological torture like that practiced by the staff at Teen Challenge or any of the Straight Inc. derivative centers can be just as traumatic. The psychological wounds of both physical and psychological torture last a lifetime. The coercive and abusive methods of Straight Inc. which were mimicked by Teen Challenge staff were designed to obliterate the sense of self and instill fear and obedience to authority in young teens. These abusive methods included sleep deprivation, beatings, sexual humiliation, sexual assault, prolonged sitting or standing in forced positions, isolation and detention for prolonged and indefinite periods of time, forcing one teen to abuse another and prolonged denial of rest, sleep, food, water, and adequate hygiene.

Many victims continue to suffer in silence and torture victims commonly report feelings of fear, guilt, shame, anger, disillusionment, insecurity and humiliation. For victims of torture coming forward to speak about what happened to them is very difficult. This is true for the tens of thousands of US children who were physically and psychologically abused and even sometimes sexually abused in the program called Straight Inc. and its legacy program Teen Challenge. What happened behind the closed doors of Teen Challenge is very deeply personal and highly traumatizing and so speaking about it can evoke for survivors a range of emotions. Survivors are afraid to speak publicly and may not have fully revealed their experiences to families and friends, in some instances they may not have come to terms with it themselves.

Survivors of torture find it very difficult and challenging to try to move forward with their lives. Many who had spent time in Straight Inc. and other abusive teen rehabilitative centers such as Teen Challenge speak with frustration that the fact, that their torture actually occurred, has never been publicly acknowledged. This denial wounds the soul. Teen Challenge

17

survivors have individual and often different conceptions of justice, some speak of the importance of criminal prosecutions, and others speak about civil compensation, rehabilitation or prevention of recurrence. But for everyone there is a need to restore that sense of dignity and control that was taken from them when they were tortured.

The United States of America which has signed the UN Convention Against Torture and therefore has an obligation to investigate, prosecute and punish those who do torture. But the reality is that society has a deep seated prejudice toward the weak or powerless and there is a special stigma in the cases of persons who claim to be psychologically injured and who need to seek compensation or support. Governments are a reflection of the pervasive reactions to the horror of torture and so therefore denial, indifference, avoidance and repression are common. Impunity of the perpetrators will prolong, or in some cases deepen, the mental scars borne by the victim or by members of their families, as denial of the wrong makes psychological healing difficult. To obtain any justice through the court system, the torture victim is expected to testify to and provide a recounting of the violation suffered in order to create a public record of the event, and while this truth– telling may have a reparative value for many victims, it may also be deeply traumatic bringing to the surface old emotional wounds. In addition those suffering from the mental anguish of torture do not always show physical scars and thus it is easier to deny the extent of their trauma and suffering. The right to reparation for victims of a wrongful act is a well-established principle of international law. (46) I believe that we can no longer afford to endorse the kinds of political compromises that give rise to de jure or de facto amnesties for perpetrators or enablers of torture within the teen residential treatment industry.
The Special Counsel at the United States Office of Special Counsel should scrupulously comply with the law in discharging his/her duty and that includes communicating with Congress

18

and cooperating with the US Department of Justice. The US Congress has just newly enacted Public Law 111-122 The Human Rights Enforcement Act of 2009 passed on Dec. 22, 2009. Participating for the first time in the Universal Periodic Review Process, President Barack Obama has publicly announced our nation’s renewed commitment to the principles embodied in international human rights law. So now is the time to enforce the protection of human rights here in the U.S.A.

I believe that the highest officials of Department of Justice should keep faith and human solidarity with victims, survivors and future human generations, and reaffirm the international legal principles of accountability, justice and the rule of law, by demanding accountability for those who did not take action to stop the abuse of children and adults in Teen Challenge.

Many victims of Teen Challenge feel that a public apology including acknowledgment of the facts and acceptance of responsibility is particularly pertinent. Officials such as Scott Bloch, former Special Counsel at the United States Office of Special Counsel (OSC), were supposed to uphold whistleblower protections for federal employees and act on their complaints, especially complaints regarding the abuse of children.

I submit this victim statement not just for myself as a human rights defender but also for all who have had their human rights violated because of the lack of enforcement of whistleblower rights, civil rights, and human rights. I hope the Court will consider that there have been grave violations of human rights due to the lack of proper enforcement of both federal law and international human rights law by Scott Bloch. Scott Bloch plead guilty to criminal contempt of Congress for withholding from the US Congress and the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee "pertinent" evidence concerning his misconduct in office. Scott Bloch’s actions could be construed as intent to hide these human rights violations from the US

19

Congress, the US President and the Supreme Court of the United States. Scott Bloch’s actions withheld critical whistleblower information regarding concerns for the health, safety and wellbeing of the US public. I believe this should be considered when determining his sentence in this criminal case and the range of time he could be incarcerated. Sentencing Scott Bloch to incarceration would send a clear message that US public officials need to properly discharge their duties prior to giving out federal grant moneys to unlicensed, uninspected and unregulated residential facilities. Sentencing Scott Bloch to incarceration would also reaffirm the obligation of the Office of Special Counsel to uphold the civil rights and international human rights of whistleblowers, mandated reporters and defenders of human rights.

Respectfully Submitted,

___________________________

Executive Director, Medical Whistleblower
Medical Whistleblower Advocacy Network

20

1 The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has supported this right of every individual to form and freely participate in organizations and non-governmental groups for the purpose of observing, denouncing/reporting, and promoting human rights, Kawas Fernández v. Honduras
2 United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Defenders A/RES/58/178 of 22 December 2003 The United Nations Charter and The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the General Assembly resolution 53/144 of 8 March 1999
3 42 U.S.C. ' 13031(b)
4 42 U.S.C. ' 13031 Attorney General Guidelines for Victim and Witness Assistance – Federal victims’ rights laws - The core statutes are 18 U.S.C. ' 3771 and 42 U.S.C. ' 10607, Mandated Reporters (Covered Professionals). Healthcare professionals subject to the Federal child abuse reporting requirements.
5 18 U.S.C. ' 3771(e) Enforcing the rights enumerated in article I.B, a victim is “a person directly and proximately harmed as a result of the commission of a Federal offense or an offense in the District of Columbia” (18 U.S.C. ' 3771(e)) if the offense is charged in Federal district court.
6 18 U.S.C. ' 3771(a) Rights of Crime Victims
7 Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 32(d)(2)(B) Victim Impact Statement
8 Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 32 “Before imposing sentence, the court must address any victim of the crime who is present at sentencing and must permit the victim to be reasonably heard.”
9 Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 32 “In Camera proceedings, Upon a party’s motion and for good cause, the court may hear in camera any statement made under Rule 32(i)(4).”
10 18 U.S.C. ' 3771(a)(8) With respect victims’ privacy and dignity

21

11 A/RES/58/178 of 22 December 2003 The United Nations Charter and The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the General Assembly resolution 53/144 of 8 March 1999, adopted the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, known as the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders and subsequent resolutions.
12 United States has a responsibility in relation to actions and omissions of non-State actors Article 12, paragraph 3, of the Declaration, also reiterated by numerous human rights bodies, the Human Rights Committee and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.
13 The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, including the right to life and freedom of association and expression, should be protected from violations not only by State agents, but also private persons or entities. Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 31 on article 2 of the Covenant on the nature of the general legal obligation imposed on States parties to the Covenant, 26 May 2004.
14 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights
15 A crime victim may also file an administrative complaint if Department employees fail to respect the victim’s rights. The Attorney General must take and “investigate complaints relating to the provision or violation of the rights of a crime victim” and provide for disciplinary sanctions for Department employees who “willfully or wantonly fail” to protect those rights. (18 U.S.C. ' 3771(f)(2))
16 42 U.S.C. ' 13031 All Federal law enforcement personnel have obligations under State and Federal law to report suspected child abuse.
17 The US House under the leadership of Congressman George Miller conducted investigations by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) during the 110th Congress uncovered thousands of cases and allegations of child abuse and neglect since the early 1990’s at teen residential programs. Currently, these programs are governed only by a weak patchwork of state and federal standards. A separate GAO report, also conducted by at the committee’s request, found major gaps in the licensing and oversight of residential programs – some of which are not covered by any state licensing standards at all. GAO concluded that without adequate oversight “the well-being and civil rights of youth in some facilities will remain at risk.” State reported data to the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System in 2005 found

22

that 34 states reported 1503 incidents of youth maltreatment by residential facility staff. Of the states surveyed by GAO, 28 reported at least one youth fatality in a residential facility in 2006. GAO concluded both of these statistics understate the incidents of maltreatment and death.
18 In 1971 the United States Senate's Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights under the directorship of Senator Sam Ervin began an investigation of the US government's role in behavior modification. Senator Ervin's 650 page report was published in November 1974 under the title "Individual Rights and the Federal Role in Behavior Modification."
19 The Seed, a network of teen drug rehabilitation centers was closed after a US Congressional Investigation into child abuse at their facilities. Melvin Sembler, Betty Sembler and some other Seed parents formed their own Seed-like program which they called Straight, Inc. Straight was quickly accused of criminal child abuse by Florida's licensing and investigating agency the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) with Bob Marshall as the principal investigator. But Straight Inc. still went on to become the largest juvenile drug rehabilitation program in the world and one of the most destructive. There were many lawsuits by victims of abuse with large jury awards of damages. Other suits were settled out of court. In 1985 the Semblers fearing civil suits by the victims of the abuse and fearing possible criminal prosecution, changed the mission of Straight, Inc. from "treatment" to "education" and its name from "Straight, Inc." to "Straight Foundation, Inc."
20 After Straight Inc. had to be closed, the name of the educational foundation became the Drug Free America Foundation (DFAF). So today Straight has morphed into an organization called the Drug Free America Foundation, which specializes in helping small businesses set up Drug Free Workplaces, and in promoting national and international drug policy that allows coercive and abusive treatment methods.
21 UN Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhumane and Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Article 10.1
22 Straight Inc. managed to get two startup grants from the Law Enforcement Assistance Agency (LEAA) in 1976 and again in 1977 for $50,000 each. Unlike the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), the Law Enforcement Assistance Agency (LEAA) had not been setup to fund programs involved in human experimentation and thus it had no policy for human consent forms.

23

23 Lester Roloff, who founded Roloff Homes, had a showdown with the Texas Attorney General and left Texas in 1985. Wiley Cameron Sr., assumed control of the Roloff Holmes and strategically lobbied for the alternative accreditation law. Then Cameron was appointed to serve on the board of directors of Texas Association of Child Care Agencies (TACCCA). Roloff Homes moved back to Texas and was able to open 5 facilities accredited by the TACCCA. By 2000, reports of physical abuse, beatings and sadistic punishments resurfaced. Roloff Homes’ administrators were criminally convicted in 2001. Teen Challenge facilities were also cited for abuse as early as 1998. Other law suits involved the Texas InnerChange Prison Program. All these were faith-based programs.
24 Florida Association of Christian Child Caring Agencies is just the same as the Texas agency and Teen Challenge center in Florida are members of Florida Association of Christian Child Care Agencies or FACCCA. Not surprisingly, evidence of extensive abuse has turned up with the Florida facility of almost an identical manner to what was documented in Texas. http://www.heal-online.org/childtortureusa.htm#teenchallenge West Florida Teen Challenge Boys’ Ranch in Bonifay, Florida is a confirmed abusive teen program. The contract parents must sign with Teen Challenge states that the Florida Association of Christian Child-Caring Agencies’ (FACCCA) "intent" is to "insure the physical and spiritual health, safety, and well being" of the children and therefore that the boy’s ranch must meet FACCCA’s "minimum standards." Parents have to agree to hold the ranch and its employees harmless from "any and all liability" for injury to the child "even injury resulting in death." Parents must agree "that God desires that they resolve their dispute with one another within the church and that they be reconciled in their relationships in accordance with the principles stated in I Corinthians 6:1-8, Matthew 5:23-24, and Matthew 18:15-20." If they cannot resolve their disagreement privately within the church, parents must accept resolution through "biblically based mediation" by rules of the Association of Christian Conciliation Services. There is no refund of tuition or deposits if the boy leaves the ranch before 15 months even if the ranch has expelled him. A detailed report provided by Children’s Healthcare Is a Legal Duty, Inc. Nov. 4th, 2004 newsletter. http://childrenshealthcare.org/

25 Dallas Teen Challenge Boys Ranch in Winnsboro in January 1996 was sued because a counselor and convicted drug trafficker sexually molested a young man there and two other boys, one of whom also was 16 or younger. The law suit alleged that "(The counselor) sexually molested (the plaintiff) on at least six different occasions at the ranch." The lawsuit further alleged that the church, ranch executive director Paul Ecker and the ranch's board knowingly employed men with criminal histories as counselors despite being informed by state regulators the practice was illegal. According to the lawsuit, most of the residents

24

were there as a condition of probation or deferred adjudication and had psychological or substance abuse problems. During the day, they performed chores, including caring for livestock, and took part in religious education. At night, they were "locked down" and monitored by alarm systems, to prevent unauthorized departures. Many of them had substance abuse problems and were admitted to the program as part of their probation despite the repeated citations from state regulatory authorities, The Assemblies of God entities continued to send men who had criminal records involving narcotics and physical violence to the facility.
26 Minnesota Teen Challenge is run by the Assemblies of God, the world’s largest Pentecostal denomination and in their The Official Teen Challenge Student Handbook instructs students to “conduct themselves in a manner pleasing to God” and strictly forbids any “homosexual behavior”, as being gay, along with addiction, is a sin.
27 Proselytizing Report: "Teen Challenge" July 26, 1984, by Rick Ross to the Religious Advisory Committee to the Arizona Department of (ADOC) on May 10, 1984. Chaplains throughout the ADOC are expected to facilitate religious programming in a neutral, non-biased manner. Teen Challenge which openly admitted that its’ primary purpose is the promotion of a specific religious belief system through confrontational evangelism. Teen Challenge is run by the Assemblies of God. Any chaplain who engages in facilitating a program for Teen Challenge could easily be seen as assisting in proselytizing. The Teen Challenge program has often been equated to a drug rehabilitation theme however they do not do substance abuse treatment and do very little medical treatment at all due to a lack of medically qualified staff. However, in the organization's literature the "Teen Challenge Cure" is stated as follows: "The only cure for . . . drug abuse, is Jesus Christ." The connections between Teen Challenge and the penal system of the State of Arizona are numerous. Many full time jail and prison chaplains have dual positions as both volunteers and/or coordinators for Teen Challenge in addition to their staff position funded by the State of Arizona. Teen Challenge therefore presents an obvious problem. Teen Challenge also poses a serious problem regarding the abrogating of parental authority with minor children within ADOC juvenile facilities.
28Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 5 No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
29 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 16.1 & 2

25

30 UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 7
31 UN CAT, Article 1. 1 “For the purposes of this Convention, the term "torture" means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.”
32 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 34
33 UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 12.1
34 UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 10
35 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 13.1
36 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 18
37 UN Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 7
38 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 4
39 UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 8
40 Former Sanford, Fla. Teen Challenge director Wayne Gray was forced to resign when his unlicensed telemarketing scam discovered that Teen Challenge only paid workers 33 cents a day for a 40 hour work week. They pretended to sell timeshare vacations form the “Disney Planning Center Resort”. Men convicted of financial crimes took the customer’s credit card information over the phone. The

26

investigation revealed that this scam which had no relationship to Disney. Wayne Gray moved on to Oklahoma Teen Challenge as Executive Director. (Action 9 news)
41 UN Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhumane and Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Article 1.1
42 In 1998, a boy filed suit against Dallas Teen Challenge Boys Ranch and Assemblies of God, alleging that a counselor, who was a convicted drug trafficker, sexually molested him and two other boys. The lawsuit also claimed that the ranch’s Executive Director, the church and the ranch’s board knowingly hired people with criminal histories to serve as counselors." (Austin American-Statesman, 5/13/1998) More here: http://www.texnews.com/1998/texas/molest0513.html
43 Registered sex offender, Shondi Fabiano was director of Teen Challenge in Winthrop, Maine and was convicted of Second Degree Child Molestation in Rhode Island. She is listed on the National Sex Offender Public Registry http://www.nsopr.gov She is listed officially as a co-head of Teen Challenge New England by the website of the Northern New England District of the Assemblies of God, and who is officially listed as a lifetime-registered sex offender for second-degree child molestation and sexual assault in the third degree. An online check of sex offender registries, including the Florida sex-offender registry run by Florida Department of Law Enforcement, also shows Shondi Fabiano also has a history of 2nd degree sexual assault conviction in Kent, RI. 3rd degree sexual assault in Rhode Island is essentially statutory rape of a 14- to 16-year old minor by a person over the age of 18, 2nd degree sexual assault is sexual assault of an incapacitated person or sexual assault using force or coercion, and second degree child molestation is what is generally termed as frank pedophile rape--sexual assault of a minor under the age of 14. Fabiano would have been nearly 24 years old at the time of the offense. Fabiano apparently in Rhode Island committed the crimes 10 years ago under her maiden name Shondi Barbato; she was originally charged with 1st degree child abuse (which involves sexual penetration of a child under the age of 14). It also appears Fabiano (under her maiden name of Barbato) has additional criminal history for she has a conviction for fraud (specifically attempts to obtain money under false pretenses, insurance fraud, and conspiracy) and a dismissed charge of possession of a controlled substance. Fabiano is still head of Teen Challenge New England despite not only state laws that prohibit sex offenders and persons convicted of crimes against children from working in children's homes. In fact, technically Fabiano should not legally be able to work at Teen Challenge at all, much less have her residence listed as Teen Challenge in Maine's sex offender registry; Maine has some pretty strict laws regarding contact with

27

minors by registered sex offenders. But Shondi Fabiano is not the only rapist employed by Teen Challenge in Winthrop, Maine. They also hired Dennis Knox who was convicted of gross sexual assault after raping an unconscious female. He is listed on the Maine Sex Offender Registry http://sor.informe.org
44 UN International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination Article 5
45 UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 13.1
46 The right of torture survivors to reparations as a matter of international law. Chorzow Factory Case (Germany v Poland), 1928, PCIJ, ser. A, no. 17, p. 47

Scott Bloch Protects Teen Challenge - Food Stamp Fraud & Child Abuse

2011-04-12T05:11:00.000-07:00

"Reality is the murder of a beautiful theory by a gang of ugly facts".

What is the role of the Office of Special Counsel in Protecting Human Rights?

Whistleblowers and Mandated Reporters constitute our human rights national alert system and tell us when there is something seriously wrong within our community or within the governmental bureaucracy. Mandated reporters are critical to the protection of our citizen's human rights and report human rights violations including elder abuse, sexual assault on children, and sometimes report serious violations of international treaty obligations. Mandated reporters are supposed to have protection for their disclosures. But where does that protection reside, in what respective agency- Health and Human Services (HHS), SAMSHA, National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) or in the US Department of Justice? Well in reality it is a myth that mandated reporters are protected for their disclosures of serious governmental wrongdoing. There is no federal agency that is empowered or obligated to protect them. One of the crucial links in the possible protections for those who are human rights defenders is the expected review of whistleblower complaints that should be provided through the Merit Systems Protections Board and the Office of Special Counsel. The Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) hears whistleblower complaints from those who have classified security clearances. The Office of Special Counsel (OSC) hears whistleblower complaints from all whistleblowers from all the federal agencies and is the place of final appeal for those denied their complaint under the MSPB. Neither agency hears mandated reporter reports or is obligated to protect mandated reporters. The Office of Special Counsel is the governmental agency tasked to hear all complaints of whistleblower retaliation (after it has already happened that is). In addition it is also the federal agency empowered to investigate violations of the Hatch Act and also and the Uniformed Services Employment & Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA). Cases in front of the Office of Special Counsel take years to get to a hearing meanwhile there are no meaningful protections for the personal security and safety of the whistleblower nor are there protocols that will protect their personal and professional reputation. Therefore those who do criminal behavior and don’t want to get caught quickly realize that discrediting the whistleblower, using whatever dirty tricks that will get that accomplished, is the way to prevent federal investigation.

Scott Bloch served as Special Counsel for the Office of Special Counsel from 2004 until his removal in 2008. During that time there was essentially no protection for any whistleblower in federal service - this includes no protection for members of the Department of Justice (FBI agents) or any of the investigative agents of any federal agency (FDA, USDA, SAMSHA, Bureau of Prisons, HHS etc.) Thus no investigation into criminal activity occurring within any federal governmental agency would receive a sympathetic ear at the Office of Special Counsel in Washington DC. Hundreds of whistleblower complaints were summarily dismissed by Scott Bloch without any investigation at all. This included all whistleblower complaints from any agency investigating Teen Challenge or any whistleblower that had information regarding Karl Rove's alleged Hatch Act violations.

As President, George W. Bush, sought to duplicate the same regulatory rollbacks for faith-based groups nationwide that he enacted in Texas. This was a political promise he made to the fundamental religious right which had helped him garner the political support to win the Presidential campaign. After gaining the presidency, George W. Bush almost immediately established the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. This was tied to the Charitable Choice legislation (which was part of the 1996 Personal Work and Responsibility Act) and made possible by the Office of the President Executive Order 13199 of President George W. Bush. President George W. Bush asked that new White House office to "identify and act to remedy statutory, regulatory, and bureaucratic barriers that stand in the way of effective faith-based and community social programs." This is almost the same wording that had been used in Texas. In addition, President George W. Bush placed Don Willett to serve as the director of law and policy for the White House office. Don Willet had drafted the Texas legislative bill that allowed the Roloff Homes return to Texas with an exemption from state regulatory oversight and thus evade child abuse investigation by the Texas Attorney General. (see the case of Deanne Dawsey http://www.nospank.net/colloff.htm) Don Willett had listened to Cameron Wiley's theological opposition to state oversight of religious child care facilities and had Cameron Wiley speak to Texas Governor Bush's "Faith in Action" task force. This Faith in Action task force was to recommend in their written report that faith-based child-care facilities be allowed to exempt themselves from state licensure and instead submit to "alternative accreditation"-that is, oversight by a non-governmental body, such as a group of pastors.

Local child protective services first investigated possible abuse at the Rebekah Home in 1973. Lester Roloff took the verse in Proverbs very literally, "Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die." This was the discipline mantra of Roloff Homes. Lester Roloff refused to submit to state regulation and after his death in 1982 Wiley Cameron took over Roloff Homes ministry. Wiley Cameron then ran Roloff Homes and the Roloff Evangelistic Enterprises. All the facilities in Texas owned by Roloff Homes including Rebekah Home were been closed for child abuse in 1985 after a series of defeats in the courtroom and by the actions of the Texas Attorney General John Hill.

Texas Governor George W. Bush had used the political support from the fundamentalist churches and to secure votes to win the Presidency. George W. Bush knew that in the upcoming re-election for President it would be necessary to continue to support legislation that would allow church-run child-care institutions to opt out of state licensing. This legislative policy choice allowed George W. Bush to tap into the support of the huge fundamentalist evangelical unregistered voters and get them to vote for him, support his candidates and his policies in the elections.

George W. Bush had shaken a drinking problem in 1986 and thus was supportive of faith based addiction treatment. George W. Bush was later to say that he had experienced a profound spiritual awakening and knew the role that faith could play in recovery. The belief in faith based redemption curing addiction was at the heart of George W. Bush's political campaign strategy. George Herbert Walker Bush, 41st President of the USA, along with Melvin Sembler (of Straight Inc.) had influenced George W. Bush, 43rd President and Jeb Bush, Florida Governor, in their drug addiction rehabilitation. Both George W. Bush and Jeb Bush remained active in the Drug Free America Foundation work. The Drug Free America Foundation was the offshoot of Straight Inc.

Attorney Scott Bloch was appointed by President George W. Bush and served as the Chief Counsel for the White House Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives from 2001-2003. Thus Scott Bloch worked directly with Don Willett to roll out the Faith-based and Community Initiative program as envisioned by George W. Bush. Remember that Don Willett, while working under George W. Bush in the Texas Governor's Office, had argued that the Texas Association of Christian Child-Care Agencies (TACCCA,) should be allowed to be an child care accrediting agency in the state of Texas. This governmental action permitted TACCCA to exempt their child care facilities from state regulation in and inspection in Texas and thus avoid being shut down for child abuse allegations by the Texas AG and thus re-open facilities with a long history of child abuse. Cameron Wiley and other directors of religious facilities being investigated for child abuse made up the 6 person TACCCA board.

For Scott Bloch to use his position as the Deputy Director of the Faith-based and Community Initiative program for political purposes would be a violation of the Hatch Act. The Office of Special Counsel is the government office in charge of protecting government whistleblowers and enforcing the Hatch Act — a law that forbids government employees from using federal resources for political ends. But the agency empowered to investigate violations of the Hatch Act was the Office of Special Counsel, an office of which Scott Bloch was appointed to head in 2004. So in this sequence of political choices by President George W. Bush, Scott Bloch would have had to investigate himself for whistleblower allegations of using the OFBCI program for political purposes.

http://www.osc.gov/hatchact.htm

After a long criminal investigation, involving allegations of obstruction of justice, evidence tampering, destruction of official files, impeding an official federal investigation, civil right violations, as well Hatch act violations and violations of the Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA), Scott Bloch on April 27, 2010 pleaded guilty to criminal contempt of Congress. Scott Bloch, the former Bush administration official who was given the responsibility and obligation to protect whistleblowers instead plead guilty to misdemeanor criminal contempt of Congress. Scott Bloch after pleading guilty attempted to withdraw that plea because Judge Deborah A. Robinson sentenced him to one month in prison. A group of government whistleblowers have requested in a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder that a special prosecutor appointed to handle the case of former Bush administration official Scott Bloch.

Whistleblowers request special prosecutor in Scott Bloch case
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/documents/2011/02/an-open-letter-from-the-community-of-whistleblowers-to-attorney-general-eric-holder.php?page=1

Financial Support by Charitable Choice Preferentially Given to Political Ally Chuck Colson

Scott Bloch served as Deputy Director of the DOJ Task Force for the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (OFBCI). Attorney Scott Bloch, as a US Attorney, certainly did not do due diligence in determining whether it was appropriate to funnel funds to facilities that would be housing vulnerable children and adults and who were also hiring staff at those facilities who were ex-cons with known criminal convictions for sexual abuse of children, drug dealing, domestic violence and money laundering. Why? Perhaps it is because it was the wish of the new President of the United States, George W. Bush (January 20, 2001 – January 20, 2009), to provide an open field for Charles Colson’s InnerChange Prison program and the expansion of Teen Challenge and the ministries of the Assembly of God. So protecting Teen Challenge and those who protected Roloff Homes and Chuck Colson’s new prison ministry was politically more important than protecting children from physical, psychological and sexual abuse or even protecting the federal tax payer from fraud.

Charles "Chuck" Wendell Colson is a Christian leader, cultural commentator, and former Special Counsel for President Richard Nixon from 1969 to 1973. Chuck Colson was named as one of the Watergate Seven and pled guilty to obstruction of justice for attempting to defame Pentagon Papers defendant Daniel Ellsberg. Charles “Chuck” Colson was known as a man valuable to President Nixon because he was willing to be ruthless in getting things done according to David Plotz in a Slate March 10, 2000 article called " Charles Colson - How a Watergate crook became America's greatest Christian conservative"

Chuck Colson was known as Nixon's "hatchet man". Colson was described by some of his colleagues as "evil genius" in the Nixon administration. Many can still remember that it was Chuck Colson who was willing to resort to domestic terrorism and who discussed possible firebombing the Brookings Institution. In 1974, Attorney Chuck Colson entered a plea of guilty to Watergate-related charges. Colson was the first member of the Nixon administration to be incarcerated for Watergate-related charges. Chuck Colson plead guilty to obstruction of justice in the Daniel Ellsberg case. Although he was given a one-to-three year sentence, Colson only served seven months at Alabama's Maxwell Prison. Colson was then a convicted felon with no right to vote but he received a pardon from Florida Governor Jeb Bush so he could again vote, once again practice law or serve on a jury. These were rights Colson had lost when he became a convicted felon. Charles Colson was converted to a born-again Christian while in prison. President George W. Bush was supporting his “faith-based” prison fellowship ministries program and promoting it in the Texas penal system.

Watergate-convict-turned-Christian evangelist converted to Christianity in 1973. Chuck Colson had a Jails for Jesus solution which was touted as a cheap fundamentalist Christian alternative to clinical programs for prisoners. Colson began working with a non-profit organization devoted to prison ministry which was called the Prison Fellowship. Through a radio broadcast called BreakPoint Colson promoted this prison program. Upon being released from prison, Chuck Colson's Innerchange worked with the new Faith-based and Community Initiatives program. These programs already exist in Iowa, Minnesota, Kansas and Texas.
http://www.nptimes.com/Feb02/npt2.html

InnerChange Prison Fellowship

InnerChange Freedom Initiative (IFI) is a publicly supported, pervasively religious program that was established in Texas, Minnesota, Kansas and Iowa. The contractual and monetary relationship between Prison Fellowship, InnerChange, and the Department of Corrections(DOC) developed over a number of years. The Texas Department of Criminal Justice support from the 77th Texas Legislature of $1.5 million (FY 2002-2003) was the first allocation of state funds given to the InnerChange program. Since the initial IFI program began in Texas, IFI has started two additional prison programs in the United States. In October of 1999, a second program was opened in Iowa, which has the potential to serve 192 inmates. In January 2000, the third IFI program began operation in Kansas with a capacity of 158 inmates. But constitutional questions regarding separation of church and state were raised at the level of the Eighth Circuit US Court of Appeals. In March 2008 the InnerChange Fellowship Initiative in the Iowa prison system was terminated by the State of Iowa.

The InnerChange program in Iowa’s Newton Correctional Facility was a program where inmates participated in "24-hour per day Christ-centered Bible-based programming" conducted by IFI employees, and were required by policy to be Christian. In 1997, the new Newton facility faced budgetary restraints, overcrowding, and lack of appropriate programs. In 1998, Iowa’s General Services Department publicly issued a request for proposals to establish a non-compensated, values-based, pre-release program at Newton. Prison Fellowship and InnerChange, jointly, submitted the only proposal but they sought public state funding to pay part of the expenses of the program.

The Department of Corrections in March 1999 did contract with Prison Fellowship and InnerChange for program services (September 1999 to June 2002), with public tax payer money going for reimbursement for non-religious costs and expenses. Prisoners in IFI were housed in a separate prison unit. In the first year of the contract, the DOC paid InnerChange $229,950, with all the money coming from the Inmate Telephone Rebate Fund which is designated for discretionary use for the benefit of inmates. The second year InnerChange received from the Department of Corrections $191,625 from the same fund. In 2002, the General Services Department accepted the InnerChange proposal for a pre-release program at Newton under a renewable one year contract from July 2002 to June 2005 which was to provide state funding only for the non-religious parts of the program. The DOC paid InnerChange $191,625 from the Telephone Rebate Fund. The Iowa legislature appropriated $172,591 from the Healthy Iowans Tobacco Trust to the DOC “for a values-based treatment program at the Newton correctional facility.” This appropriation was used to expand the InnerChange program to the Release Center at Newton (a minimum-security facility one mile from the main facility). The payment from the Trust to the DOC for InnerChange was $276,909. In the third year, 2004 to 2005, the contract was changed to a per diem payment of $3.47 for each inmate participating in the program. The legislature again appropriated $310,000, with actual payment to InnerChange of $236,532.55.

In 2005 the DOC accepted InnerChange’s proposal for a pre-release substance abuse treatment program. In the contract’s first and second years, July 2005 to June 2007, the Iowa legislature appropriated $310,000 each year. But there never was a clear distinction in the billing to the taxpayers regarding religious and non-religious expenditures. Until July 2007, the DOC’s funding accounted for 30 to 40 percent of InnerChange’s operating costs.

There were concerns from even the first 1999 contract whether there was a clear definition of what was religious and what was not. Salaries and benefits for InnerChange’s personnel were paid by the DOC on a percentage basis. The state paid 82% of the Local Director’s salary; 9% for the Program Manager; 93% for the Aftercare Manager; 77% for the Office Administrator; and 16% for each of four Biblical Counselors (also called Case Workers). All land and cell phone costs were billed to the DOC. InnerChange’s postal meter and thermal tape were billed to the state without detailed accounting. The DOC paid for InnerChange’s computer hardware, software, repair, and internet account. The DOC also paid for InnerChange’s letterhead, envelopes, printer and copier toner, paper, blank videotapes, and standard office supplies. Each month, every photocopy up to 40,000 was charged to the DOC. Copies over 40,000 were designated as religious (although the record does not reflect how many total copies were made each month). Building M – a modular building housing InnerChange’s offices and classrooms – was constructed in 2000. By the lease-purchase contract, the Telephone Fund paid $294,017 for Building M. When the DOC reimbursed InnerChange for costs or paid the per diem amount, the money was deposited in InnerChange’s bank account. From that account, InnerChange periodically transferred funds to Prison Fellowship’s general accounts, to cover program operating expenses. These general accounts also contain funds from private sources. This mixing of public tax payer money with private funds (non-profit charities) makes it difficult if not impossible to ascertain that the money was used for secular purposes only and not for exclusively religious purposes. In addition some of the charity funds these monies were mixed with had been potentially implicated in certain kinds of affinity fraud and other types of fraud. Money was moved around from account to account with little accounting transparency to the state government as to who actually got the money eventually. In addition the portion of InnerChange expenses which was paid by the Prison Fellowship came from these co-mingled funds with other NGO charities.

A law suit was filed against the Prison Fellowship Ministries at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in the case of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State v. Prison Fellowship Ministries. On June 2, 2006, the district court held that the IFI program violated the Establishment Clause, expelled the program from the prison, and directed IFI to repay the Department of Corrections the $1.5 million that it had been paid by the State. Defendants appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in June 2006. Senior Litigation Counsel Alex J. Luchenitser argued the appeal in February 2007 before a panel that included former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor. In December 2007, the Eighth Circuit largely upheld the district court’s decision. The court held that Iowa’s involvement with IFI violated the Establishment Clause by supporting the indoctrination of inmates and IFI’s discrimination against non-Christian inmates.

Ronald A. Lindsay, Esq. of the COUNCIL FOR SECULAR HUMANISM and CENTER FOR INQUIRY stated in their brief "No court has ever endorsed government-funded religious indoctrination, and, as indicated, InnerChange was well aware that their government-funded activities very likely violated the Establishment Clause. Nonetheless, in their zeal to spread their religious message, InnerChange and PFM made a calculated decision to disregard the restrictions of the Establishment Clause in implementing their program. To state that freedom of conscience is a core value under the Constitution would be an understatement. Religious liberty is one of our fundamental freedoms, and it cannot be denied that it advances public policy to preserve religious liberty and to prevent the government from allowing its resources to be used for religious indoctrination. InnerChange and the Iowa DOC deliberately have refused to adhere to recognized limits on government funding of sectarian activity. Furthermore, their blatant disregard for constitutional limits on funding of activities of religious organizations is confirmed not only by the negligible, inadequate effort made to limit funding to secular activities, but by the design of the program itself." Judge Robert Pratt of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa agreed with the plaintiff, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, that the faith-based prison program is unconstitutional and ordered the program shut down. Americans United had won the case at the district level and on appeal.

Although the Prison Fellowship InnerChange claims the program reduces recidivism. Some point to a study that compared “graduates” of the InnerChange program with nonparticipants. One cannot be a graduate of InnerChange unless one remains in the program following release from prison, obtains a job, and avoids being reimprisoned for at least six consecutive months. The cited study does not focus on the numerous participants who never graduated. If one looks at all the InnerChange program participants (both graduates and nongraduates), then the “InnerChange participants did somewhat worse than the controls: They were slightly more likely to be rearrested and noticeably more likely (24 percent versus 20 percent) to be reimprisoned.” Mark A. R. Kleinman, Faith-Based Fudging:How a Bush-Promoted Christian Prison Program Fakes Success by Massaging Data, Slate (Aug. 5, 2003), available at: http://www.slate.com/id/2086617.

Prison Fellowship works through Teen Challenge to provide housing and jobs for recently released prisoners. There are co-mingled funds between these programs. In addition Teen Challenge gets TNAF federal food assistance and also re-entry prisoners get federal funds which support their employment at Teen Challenge. Re-entry prisoners paychecks are handed over to the Teen Challenge staff as well as all state food assitance. In addition a mandatory church tithe is extracted as well as rent from the ex-prisoners federally subsidized paycheck. Historically some Teen Challenge facilities have up to 80% of their funding from federal sources like TNAF. Thus the amount of real non-federal or state sources money that goes into a program like Teen Challenge's Prison Fellowship aftercare program or IFI is difficult to compute due to the lack of accounting procedures to identify and properly source funds.

Teen Challenge hires ex-cons

As you will see below when examining the TNAF Teen Challenge food stamp fraud, the Frank Vennes Minnesota Teen Challenge Ponzi Fraud Scheme and the affinity fraud of Southwestern Indian Foundation that criminal corruption can co-exist inside religious charity non-profits. Teen Challenge in Arizona is associated with a in prison Teen Challenge recruitment program as well as court ordered placement at Teen Challenge in Phoenix AZ. The Don Stewart Association (DSA), a Phoenix-based televangelism ministry , and its affiliated 22 charities (including Southwest Indian Foundation) were accused of performing controversial transactions with supplies that helped inflate their finances. The DSA affiliated charities transferred ownership of goods to other groups including $80 million of goods that the charities never physically handled.

Teen Challenge was already opening its’ doors to hire known criminals (through a federally funded re-entry employment program) those who converted to Christianity. Teen Challenge had many centers in Texas and Florida. George W. Bush was governor of Texas January 17, 1995 – December 21, 2000, and had promoted legislation and administrative actions favorable to Teen Challenge and other evangelical Christian based programs like InnerChange. In 1997 the Texas legislature passed a bill allowing religious child care facilities to be accredited by a private sector regulator, the Texas Association of Christian Child Care Agencies (TACCCA). In 1997, Texas became the first state to use the faith-based effort, run by Chuck Colson's Prison Fellowship Ministries – InnerChange. Governor of Texas George Bush Texas provided funds for the prison program - $1.5 million. The Roloff Homes were the first of eight faith-based child-care facilities accredited by TACCCA. Despite continued complaints of abuse and neglect, TACCCA re-accredited the Roloff Homes in April 2000. Roloff Homes was finally shut down for child abuse in Texas in 2001. Teen Challenge centers in Florida got accredited by an alternative agency just like those in Texas - so they too could avoid being regulated and inspected by state agencies.

The newly rapidly multiplying Teen Challenge facilities were therefore staffed by former prisoners who were recruited by Assemblies of God/Teen Challenge prison Chaplains. The Assemblies of God prison Chaplains often have dual responsibilities and may be also paid prison staff with fairly unlimited access to prisoners. With Teen Challenge staff paid for out of re-entry prison federal funds, the Teen Challenge facilities had low staff overhead. This financially beneficial arrangement permitted the rapid expansion of the Teen Challenge ministries program. This aggressive outreach of the Assemblies of God Teen Challenge program was also fueled by start up grants which were made possible through collaboration with the Faith-based and Community Initiative grant program and other linked programs.

In addition Texas Governor George Bush had exempted Teen Challenge in Texas from state regulation and inspection (following the state closing of Roloff Homes for child abuse). The investigators from the Texas state agencies (mandated to report human rights violations) were refused entry to Texas Teen Challenge facilities. By placing Scott Bloch in charge of reviewing all federal whistleblower complaints in 2001, the avenue for those in federal service to report child abuse as mandated reporters was essentially closed.

These public policy decisions opened the door for prisoners who professed religious conviction to be hired by Teen Challenge for positions working with children. Thus the arrangement of hiring “Christian” prisoners who were in re-entry prison programs (InnerChange) to work as staff, religious counselors and even directors of Teen Challenge facilities. One such prisoner with a record of criminal conviction of sexual child abuse was Shondi Fabiano, who was hired on staff and co-Directed the Teen Challenge Men's facility in Maine. She had previously been the head of the Teen Challenge Women's facility in Rhode Island prior to her marriage to Peter Sabiano.

Prisoners are probated from prison to faith-based outreach at Teen Challenge where they received counseling, study the Bible and attend church. These “Christian” criminals who had spent hard prison time had many criminal associates and criminal connections and were not always under the full control or adequate supervision of their parole officers. Parole officers saw these “Christian” jail coverts as well-behaved parolees as they were gainfully employed at the Teen Challenge facilities. Teen Challenge as an employer would vouch for the employed prisoners and make allowances for their non-compliant conduct in order to keep them “on the path”. These criminals in their re-entry employment at Teen Challenge were tasked to do missionary “outreach” to teens on the streets of New England. Protected by their employer Teen Challenge and poorly supervised by officials from the prison system, these “Christian” employees openly did street “interventions”. But Teen Challenge facilities had long been suspected of abusive practices and the continuing stream of complaints were surfacing but not getting any action by state or federal authorities.

Teen Challenge and Faith-based and Community Initiatives

Scott Bloch was appointed to the position of Special Counsel for the Office of Special Counsel by President George W. Bush. This followed Bloch’s appointment to the Task Force for Faith-Based and Community Initiatives which funneled money to Teen Challenge. Teen Challenge was a residential treatment program which claimed religious treatment for addiction and life challenging problems. Based on strong Christian principles, the intensive program takes residents come from the streets, detoxification facilities, hospitals or jails. Some are referred by pastors and counselors or court-ordered into treatment by judges. Teen Challenge was operated by the Assemblies of God. Scores of pastors, inner-city missionaries and evangelists have graduated from Teen Challenge.

Scott Bloch served as Deputy Director of the DOJ Task Force for the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives (OFBCI). Attorney Scott Bloch, as a US Attorney, did not do due diligence in determining whether it was appropriate to funnel funds to facilities that would be housing vulnerable children and adults and who were also hiring staff at those facilities who were ex-cons with known criminal convictions for sexual abuse of children, drug dealing, domestic violence and money laundering. Why? Perhaps it is because it was the wish of the new President of the United States, George W. Bush (January 20, 2001 – January 20, 2009), to provide an open field for Charles Colson’s InnerChange Prison program and the expansion of Teen Challenge and the ministries of the Assembly of God. Chuck Colson had just been pardoned by Governor Jeb Bush and was moving once again in Republican campaign circles.

What is Charitable Choice?

The "Charitable Choice" provision (section 104) of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (welfare reform legislation) meant to privatize welfare requires states that contract with nonprofit organizations for delivery of social services to include religious organizations as eligible contractees. The goal of Charitable Choice was to end the welfare system of entitlement money that provides a safety net for the poor and needy and instead turn the system into a privatized system where corporate and non-governmental service agencies compete to provide services. Then when entering office, President George W. Bush issued an executive order known as the Faith-Based Initiative which created a bureaucracy with the sole purpose of providing support to faith-based providers of social services.

Although in theory this might sound like a system to save money and be economical with public funds, it ignores the basic reality of possible fraud by corporate entities such as residential treatment facilities, private prisons and pharmaceutical companies, and many others who benefit by the decreased federal oversight and transparency.

The Food Stamp Showdown

Scott Bloch served as the Chief Counsel for the White House Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives from 2001-2003. In that position he funneled grant money to Teen Challenge in spite of mounting evidence of fraud, illegal activity and even sexual abuse of children in Teen Challenge centers. This was a politically important program that would be critical to President Bush’s and Karl Rove’s political strategy to keep the right faithful to the Republican party and would help generate income for Bush’s political campaign. Through the Faith-based and Community Initiatives program political allies were financially rewarded and other deserving NGO’s received little or nothing.

Teen Challenge gained national attention in 1995 when the Texas Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse (TCADA) threatened to shut down Teen Challenge of South Texas because continuing allegations of abuse and fraud. Teen Challenge of South Texas continued to assert that its counselors refused to trade in their faith-based approach for a "medical model" based on the concept that alcoholism is a disease rather than a manifestation of sin. The state regulators were requiring that staff be properly trained and that the facilities be licensed and inspected. Teen Challenge in Texas and in Florida was unlicensed and unregulated and investigators and child protective services were trying to find a way to get some regulatory control over the residential teen rehabilitation industry especially in light of continuing complaints of abuse. The state was demanding licensing and inspection. Teen Challenge had opted for an alternative accreditation program that did no inspections and was based on a faith based model. State and federal regulators were trying to get regulatory and inspection control over Teen Challenge. Teen Challenge wanted no regulation at all.

Political Motives Affect Public Policy Regarding Enforcement Child Protection in Texas

The Rebekah Home for Girls, founded in 1967, was run by Lester Roloff a fundamentalist preacher. In his very successful radio show, the late evangelist, Lester Roloff, praised the use of punitive "Bible discipline" as a method to chasten girls who had fallen from grace. Lester Roloff claimed that the Rebekah Home took in fallen girls from "jail houses, broken homes, hippie hives, and dope dives" who were "walking through the wilderness of sin." Roloff asserted that he remade these girls into scripture-quoting, gospel-singing believers. As a result the faithful showered Roloff Evangelistic Enterprises with checks, jewelry and other valuables and he made millions. Texas State welfare workers received reports of physical abuse and Attorney General John Hill finally filed a suit against Roloff Evangelistic Enterprises. After many lost court battles and faced with forced closure of the Rebekah Girls Home hundreds of fundamental evangelical supporters surrounded the Rebekah Home forming a human barricade to prevent the state officials from closing in. The Rebekah girls were essentially prisoners in this political show down between Roloff and the Texas Attorney General. Lester Roloff was expressing his political power and the hidden support network of thousands of fundamentalists who adhered to similar beliefs and listened to his radio show. So the Roloff Homes was the center of an epic, twelve-year battle between church and state-culminating in a standoff that Roloff called the Christian Alamo-in which the maverick preacher and his successors fought to avoid regulation by the State of Texas. ( For a more personal account of Roloff Homes see http://www.nospank.net/colloff.htm)

The political message was clear – there was a huge following of fervent religious people not just in Texas but throughout the USA. These were American citizens who had previously not engaged in the political arena, many of whom had never even registered to vote and who in large part lived their lives apart from the rest of the general society. They claimed the right to religious freedom and do what they wished within their religious facilities. They claimed Lester Roloff as one of their own and he then embodied their right to separation of church and state. The Texas Attorney General and the social services agencies who wished to shut the facility down were representing the right of the state of Texas to assure that human rights abuses and child abuse did not happen to any minor child regardless of the religious beliefs of the parents.

Hundreds of Lester Roloff’s supporters massed around the Rebekah Home, on Roloff's 557-acre compound south of Corpus Christi, linking arms and forming a human barricade to prevent state officials from moving in. This was a three day stand off between the state of Texas and the religious right. Although Roloff agreed to close his youth homes and send his Rebekah girls to youth homes out of the state, this was only a brief victory for the welfare agencies trying to protect the children from abuse. But the homes later reopened under the auspices of the People's Baptist Church rather than Roloff Evangelistic Envangelical Enterprises.

Because this "Christian Alamo" public rally became the place where, George W. Bush, then governor of Texas, came to the rescue, promising to push forward state legislation that exempted many faith-based social programs from state interference. This gained Governor George W. Bush political support from the religious right. The lure of the support of countless thousands of currently unregistered voters passionate about this issue swayed the political decision making of the Texas Governor George W. Bush. The religious right embraced him as he claimed to support Separation of Church and State as an issue and to exempt religious facilities from state regulation and inspection.

The Christian Alamo event was a major victory for Roloff Homes, Teen Challenge and other fundamentalist religious facilities and the start of what became Mr. Bush's faith-based initiative. There is no question that eliminating basic health and safety standards made operations easier for a few faith-based programs in Texas, however it was also clear that the lack of minimum standards has threatened the safety of those participating in the programs and the ability of the state to assure human rights protections to minor children. The overwhelming majority of faith-based child-care facilities in Texas chose to remain under state oversight; only 7 of 2,015 religious institutions elected to operate under alternative accreditation.

The Federal Agency USDA in coordination with State Child Protection Agencies tries to shut down Teen Challenge

In Dallas Texas in 1998 two boys had filed they had been sexually molested by a staff member who was a convicted drug trafficker. After many reports of child abuse at Teen Centers nationwide, the Director of Teen Challenge San Antonio, received a letter from TCADA stating that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) had determined that residents of Teen Challenge centers in Texas are no longer eligible to receive food stamps because the centers were not state licensed or inspected.

The San Antonio Teen Challenge center admitted that it depended on the food stamps for nearly half its annual food budget. Teen Challenge on the other hand claimed that federal food stamp regulations hindering men and women who are working to overcome addictions at Teen Challenge centers in four states. Reports kept surfacing that the food purchased with the food stamps was being sold on the black market and children in the Teen Challenge Centers fed nothing but water, white bread and peanut butter.

In opposition to state regulation of Teen Challenge, Texas Governor George W. Bush convened a fifteen-member advisory task force in 1995 made up largely of clergy and charged them with two objectives: to identify state laws and regulations that hindered the work of faith-based groups and to recommend ways to lift some of those regulations. The task force was formed because of the ongoing battle between the Texas Commission of Alcohol and Drug Abuse and a faith-based drug-treatment center, Teen Challenge, in San Antonio.

The Rhode Island Women’s Program was being run by a registered sex offender – Shondi Barbato and she was not the only sex offender on staff at Teen Challenge. State regulators in several states wanted to stop the direct access to children by registered sex offenders and violent criminal offenders in the Teen Challenge program. In most Teen Challenge centers food stamp money provides a majority of their funding. Those in child protective services were hopeful that this denial of food stamps would finally put an end to the hiring of registered sex offenders, drug dealers, violent criminals and other convicts to staff Teen Challenge Centers and force them to be licensed, inspected and regulated so that the safety of the children could be assured. In several states, including Massachusetts and Vermont, officials halted benefits to Teen Challenge clients because the programs were not formally recognized by state officials, and because clients were turning their Food Stamps over to administrators of the treatment program. The coupons were pooled together to buy groceries for those who live in dormitory-style housing for 18 months during their treatment. Thus through the actions of the federal USDA, the federal authorities hoped to protect the human rights and body integrity of children in the care of Teen Challenge facilities.

The threatened cutoff of food stamps to Teen Challenge threatened to shut down Teen Challenge centers in Oregon, Florida, and Massachusetts. The Boston field Office for the USDA's Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) shut down food stamps to Teen Challenge New England. In Brockton MA in 2005 food stamps were provided roughly $150 for each man per month in Brockton, Massachusetts. This food stamp support totaled nearly $200,000 a year. The USDA stated to Teen Challenge that "The basis for your denial was that your program is not licensed by the state of Massachusetts."

But there was strong protest from the Director Teen Challenge New England, Rodney Hart who was the supervisor of Shondi Barbato, a registered sex offender hired at Teen Challenge New England. Rodney Hart, who is himself a 1976 graduate of Teen Challenge, advocated politically for creating a separate category for faith-based groups on a federal level which he said was the key to solving "a serious glitch that needs to be fixed at a higher level." Teen Challenge New England’s lawyer, Brad Martin filed a complaint against the government in 2005 on behalf of Teen Challenge New England, which has centers in Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island. Stamped Out http://www.worldmag.com/articles/10969 World Magazine August 27, 2005, Vol. 20, No. 33

The Director of Teen Challenge New England, Rodney Hart, goes on to state "The government does not have a lens to interpret faith-based recovery centers," he says. "It only recognizes the disease model, which is totally irrelevant to us." Mr. Hart adamantly refuses to obtain a state license, saying it would mean "obtaining an identity that doesn't correspond to who we are. . . . It would be like getting a deer-hunting license to hunt crocodiles." Stamped Out http://www.worldmag.com/articles/10969 World Magazine August 27, 2005, Vol. 20, No. 33

"Texas Freedom Network, a 23,000-member non-partisan grassroots watchdog group based in Austin conducted a five-year study of the policy and found, “As exempt faith-based drug treatment centers, [such] facilities are not required to have licensed chemical dependency counselors, conduct staff training or criminal background checks, protect client confidentiality rights, adhere to state health and safety standards, or report abuse, neglect, emergencies and medication errors.” http://www.schaler.net/inthenews/washblade.html

With the influence of President George W. Bush the federal government cleared the way for clients of the faith-based Teen Challenge drug and alcohol recovery program to resume receiving Food Stamps.

“In a joint opinion issued by the Secretaries of the U.S. Departments of Agriculture (USDA), and Health and Human Services (HHS), it has now been determined that residents of such treatment programs are eligible for Food Stamps, so long as the programs are operating in compliance with provisions of the Public Health Services Act. Under the opinion, state agencies which administer Food Stamps must recognize such programs as "operating to further the purposes of Part B of Title XIX" of the act -- however it also specifies that such programs are not required to be licensed by states in order to be eligible.” http://www.ombwatch.org/

What does Rodney Hart have to hide from state regulators and inspectors? Why does he refuse to cooperate with federal USDA inspectors and FBI agents? According to his thesis Teen Challenge New England had in 2007 589 beds and revenue that was about $7 million. The staff of Teen Challenge New England was 95% graduates of the program and there were 125 salaried staff. To learn more about the beliefs of Rodney Hart, Director of Teen Challenge New England see his 185 page thesis - http://www.tcnewengland.org/resources/Rodney%20Hart%20Thesis%20-%20Full%20Version.pdf

Additional Information on the Teen Challenge and Food Stamps:

Teen Challenge New England Intake Form
www.tcbrockton.org/resources/TCNE_intake_form.pdf

Government Teen Challenge Record on Food Stamps
www.ombwatch.org/node/5198

Food stamp fraud in Honolulu and elsewhere
www.the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2001/Jun/08/ln/ln09a.html

http://teenchallengecult.blogspot.com/

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/05/04/504505/-Teen-Challenge:-Your-tax-dollars,-paying-for-institutionalised-abuse

Under Charitable Choice provisions TNAF provided extensive financial support to Teen Challenge.

CRS Report - Charitable Choice, Faith-Based Initiatives, and TANF Vee Burke, Domestic Social Policy Division http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs5458/m1/1/high_res_d/RS20712_2003Sep30.pdf

Additional Information about Sexual Abuse at Teen Challenge:
http://www.topix.net/forum/city/minneapolis-mn/TN94VATH520HE9UQM/p10#lastPost

http://www.tfn.org/religiousfreedom/faithbased/teenchallenge/

http://www.texnews.com/1998/texas/molest0513.html

http://sportsforum.ws/the-tavern/t-the-official-post-all-your-stupid-religious-propaganda-shit-in-here-thread-153972.html

After the Christian Alamo at the Rebekah Home for girls, George W. Bush politically backed Teen Challenge and other residential facilities run by religious groups as it helped him with his political campaign to get votes from the far right – especially the support of the fundamentalist evangelicals and also the Catholic vote. The Alamo standoff was the start of what was to become Mr. Bush's faith-based initiative. Teen Challenge New England Director, Rodney Hart started with Bob Woodson of the Washington, D.C.-based National Center for Neighborhood Enterprise, who fought for Teen Challenge during the Texas controversy in 1995. Rodney Hart also approached Jim Towey, head of the White House Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives under Bush (2002-2006) who worked with Attorney Scott Bloch. and now President of Ave Maria University. George W. Bush made providing food stamp money to Teen Challenge a priority for his administration, so through the Charitable Choice program and changes in the legislation for TNAF the federal government was once again providing money to Teen Challenge without any pesky regulation or inspection.

Teen Challenge and sex offenders

In Dallas Texas in 1998 two boys had filed they had been sexually molested by staff. http://www.texnews.com/1998/texas/molest0513.html But the sexual abuse was covered up and the prison re-entry (re-integration) program that placed ex-convicts in charge of caring for minors had high level political support from the then Governor of Texas George W. Bush.

According to the news report: “The alleged victim was 16 when he went to Dallas Teen Challenge Boys Ranch in Winnsboro in January 1996. According to his lawsuit, a counselor and convicted drug trafficker sexually molested him and two other boys, one of whom also was 16 or younger. "(The counselor) sexually molested (the plaintiff) on at least six different occasions at the ranch," the lawsuit states. The lawsuit further alleges that the church, ranch executive director Paul Ecker and the ranch's board knowingly employed men with criminal histories as counselors despite being informed by state regulators the practice was illegal.”

Teen Challenge in New England has for many years been an established program and was using persons from the prison reintegration program as labor. The Bristol County Sheriff’s office (in Massachusetts) was creating a Teen Challenge unit in the county jail. The 22 men in the minimum-security unit were working through Teen Challenge curriculum under the daily oversight of two Teen Challenge ministers. When men in the unit are released from prison, they are encouraged to enter one of the Teen Challenge centers in Massachusetts.

Peter Fabiano, came to the Brockton Teen Challenge for drug addiction treatment in approximately 2000. By 2005, by all reports, Peter Fabiano had been placed on the leadership fast track and was the supervisor of a center 30 miles south, in Fall River. Mr. Fabiano married Shondi Barbato (her maiden name). Shondi Barbato was supervisor of the Teen Challenge women's center in Rhode Island, and the couple were hoping to open a new center in Maine. Shondi Fabiano has a history of 2nd degree sexual assault conviction in Kent, RI. Shondi Fabiano then moved with her husband into the position of co-director in the Maine center.

http://findarticles.com/p/news-articles/kennebec-journal/mi_8137/is_20080227/winthrop-rehab-center-plan-drawing/ai_n50717768/

Shondi Fabiano was convicted of Second Degree Child Molestation in Rhode Island. She is listed on the National Sex Offender Public Registry. Maine has some pretty strict laws regarding contact with minors by registered sex offenders.

http://www.nsopr.gov

http://offender.fdle.state.fl.us/offender/fly...

http://sor.informe.org/cgi-bin/sor/step3.pl...

http://www.teenchallengeexposed.com

http://evangelicalsunderamicroscope.wordpress.com/2010/05/02/teen-challenge-hires-convicted-sex-offender-and-scam-artist/

Shondi Fabiano actually originally had her address listed on the sex offender database originally as Teen Challenge New England – Augusta, 11 Hudson Lane, Winthrop, ME 04346.

Fabiano apparently, (at least per a search of the records site for Rhode Island's criminal courts) committed the crimes 10 years ago under her maiden name Shondi Barbato; she was originally charged with 1st degree child abuse (which involves sexual penetration of a child under the age of 14). It also appears Fabiano (under her maiden name of Barbato) has a conviction for fraud (specifically attempts to obtain money under false pretenses, insurance fraud, and conspiracy) and a dismissed charge of possession of a controlled substance. Shondi Fabiano then married Teen Challenge "graduate" Peter Fabiano and they both moved to Maine. She in turn promoted the hiring of ex-prisoners for multiple positions throughout Teen Challenge facilities in New England. Dennis Knox, who was convicted of gross sexual assault after raping an unconscious female, was also employed at Teen Challenge New England. Teen Challenge New England is composed of nine centers across New England and New Jersey and also a program in the Dartmouth, MA House of Correction.
http://www.teenchallengeexposed.com/

These are where Teen Challenge New England has facilities:

• Augusta, ME
• Boston, MA
• Brockton, MA
• Fitchburg, MA
• Johnson, VT
• Manchester, NH
• New Haven, CT
• Newark, NJ
• Providence, RI

In 2008 there had been articles about Shondi Fabiano and her convictions for second degree child molestation. So in light of the exposure of Shondi Fabiano’s registration as a sex offender, Rev. Rodney Hart, Director of Teen Challenge New England provided the press the following press release and then her name was removed from their public website of the Northern New England District of the Assemblies of God and put up a new website that does not give the names of any of the staff in direct contact with clients at their facilities.

So in interest of full disclosure – this is the explanation that was the Official Press Release from Rev. Rodney Hart, President & CEO of Teen Challenge New England at the time that Shondi Fabiano was exposed in the press in 2008 for her position at Teen Challenge:

“Shondi Fabiano began using drugs at age 12 and was a heroin addict by the time she was 19 years old. She was living with and using drugs with a 21 year old man who was also an addict. While under the influence of narcotics she had sex with a 14 and a 15 year old boy. The two boys were family members of the 21 year old male that was Shondi’s boyfriend. The family of the boys filed charges against Shondi. Shondi’s public defender told her that if she didn’t want to go to jail for a long time she had better plead guilty. So she did. This was 15 years ago! Shondi sought help for her drug addiction at Teen Challenge and graduated with honors a year later. For the last 10 years she has dedicated her life to helping other drug addicts overcome their addictions and lead normal productive lives. Her life is a stellar example of one that has overcome incredible odds. Her life is a shining example and inspiration to all those who know and love her personally. She has been terribly embarrassed by this story. This was a tragic mistake that she will carry with her the rest of her life. She has completed probation without any violations and is no longer under any supervision. She is married, with a young infant and two teenage sons and poses no threat to anyone. To suggest that the community is at risk in any way is a gross exaggeration and extremely unfair to Shondi and the courageous steps she has taken to overcome the physical and spiritual obstacles in her life. Please direct all questions and comments to Rev. Rodney Hart, President and CEO of Teen Challenge New England.”

This is additional information that was already posted by others:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/2/17850/21034 7/

http://evangelicalsunderamicroscope.wordpress.com/2010/05/02/teen-challenge-hires-convicted-sex-offender-and-scam-artist/

http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/health/abuse/news.php?q=1213027887

Mounting Evidence of Criminal Activity Associated with Assemblies of God & Teen Challenge

Mike and Sharla Hintz from Clive Iowa campaigned for George W. Bush. But Reverend Mike Hintz, youth pastor at the First Assembly of God Church was later charged with the sexual exploitation of a child. Rev. Hintz was the youth pastor at the First Assembly of God Church for three years. Police said he started an affair with a 17-year-old in the church youth group. The Des Moines Iowa youth pastor was charged with sexual exploitation by another counselor and then turned himself in to police in 2004. Rev. Mike Hintz was fired from the First Assembly of God Church in 2004.

http://www.kcci.com/news/3976822/detail.html

http://www.kcci.com/r/4262185/detail.html

In Dallas Texas an 18-year-old man and his parents sued the Assemblies of God and the church's ranch for troubled youths, claiming the youth was molested by a counselor at the center. The alleged victim was 16 when he went to Dallas Teen Challenge Boys Ranch in January 1996. It was alleged tat the church Executive Director Paul Ecker employed men with known criminal histories. The alleged victim was according to his lawsuit sexually assaulted and molested on six different occasions by a counselor at the ranch who was a convicted drug trafficker. State regulations made it clear that this hiring of convicted offenders was illegal and yet Executive Director Paul Ecker continued to disregard regulations. Many clients of the Teen Challenge - Assemblies of God facility were court ordered into the Assemblies of God care as a condition of probation, and already had psychological or substance abuse problems. During the day, they performed chores, including caring for livestock, and took part in religious education. At night, they were "locked down" and monitored by alarm systems to prevent unauthorized departures. Employees and volunteers who were participating in an adult substance abuse treatment program called "Life Change" were admitted to the Teen Challenge facility as part of their probation. This was improper according to state regulations. (5/13/98, AP)

http://web.archive.org/web/20061208095423/http:/www.reformation.com/CSA/http:/www.texnews.com/1998/texas/molest0513.html

In New Mexico, Marty A. Hynes, 33, was charged with eight counts of criminal sexual contact of a minor, three counts of criminal sexual penetration of a minor and one count of attempted criminal sexual contact of a minor. Hynes was a youth pastor at the First Assembly of God church when the alleged incidents occurred, between July and December 2001. (Las Cruces Sun-News, March 24, 2003) The allegations came to light after the girl attempted to take her life with over-the-counter medication.The girl testified that after she turned 17 years old, Hynes began to kiss and fondle her, and it eventually lead to sexual intercourse. The church dismissed Hynes from his position shortly after the allegations were made.

See article: Trial of former youth pastor begins
http://web.archive.org/web/20061208095423/http:/www.reformation.com/CSA/hynes1.htm

In 1998 in Gainesville, Georgia, Rev. L.G. Gilstrap, a 54 year old Assemblies of God minister, was convicted by a jury on 3 counts of child molestation and sentenced to 33 years in prison for a string of fondling incidents in 1988 involving brothers aged 10 and 13. Eight men testified during the trial that they too were molested by the minister when they were boys. Gilstrap, defrocked, started a new church, New Hope Ministries. Married, he was a former clerk for the Georgia House of Representatives. Three of the eight men who testified against Gilstrap said the minister occasionally took them to Atlanta to serve as House pages. After spending the day working at the Capitol, they said, the minister would take them to an Atlanta hotel and molest them. (Atlanta Constitution, 9/22/89)

Ex-Minister Gets 33-Year Sentence In Child Sex Case: Gilstrap Guilty of 3 Molestation Counts
http://web.archive.org/web/20061022075535/reformation.com/CSA/gilstrap2.htm

International Outreach of Teen Challenge and Money Laundering

The hiring of prisoners directly into Teen Challenge is not just in the USA but also is being done in Teen Challenge facilities throughout the world. Teen Challenge has facilities in 80 nations. The Northern New England District Assemblies of God located in Portland Maine with which Shondi Fabiano,(registered criminally convicted sex offender), was associated, also does outreach ministry to Taiwan, Peru, Paraguay, Argentina, the Caribbean, Russia, Chad and Honduras. The Assemblies of God runs their own independent Credit Union in Missouri to facilitate money exchange and sets up personal banking accounts for prisoners in the re-entry program who are employed by Teen Challenge.

In addition Teen Challenge was hiring ex-cons with criminal backgrounds in fraud and money laundering and putting them in charge of fund raising efforts for their operations. In Teen Challenge in Minnesota, Frank Vennes, a man with criminal convictions as a money launderer, was put on the Teen Challenge board and placed in charge of handling financial accounts. Vennes then defrauded numerous Christian donors in an elaborate affinity fraud and was a co-conspirator of the Thomas J. Petters Ponzi scheme. Vennes’ past federal crimes include money laundering, cocaine- and gun-running. Frank Vennes gave tens of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions and Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, Governor Tim Pawlenty and former Senator Norm Coleman and former state GOP Chair Ron Ebensteiner all l supported a Presidential pardon from President George W. Bush for Vennes past crimes.

http://rippleinstillh2o.blogspot.com/2010/11/michele-bachmanns-pardon-pal-frank.html

http://www.keepandshare.com/doc/2356354/coleman-vennes-2002-letter-jpg-november-7-2010-7-38-pm-386k?da=y

http://minnesotaindependent.com/17098/norm-coleman-like-michele-bachmann-wrote-pardon-letters-on-behalf-of-petters-associate-frank-vennes-jr

Labor Fraud Schemes, Lack of Workmen’s Compensation Coverage

In 2008 Sanford Florida, Wayne Gray, Director of Sanford Teen Challenge, did a telemarketing fraud scam. This criminal scheme utilized Teen Challenge teens in an abusive environment using them for dirt cheap labor to man the phone bank and paying the teens only 33 cents a day for a 40 hour work week. This time share vacation scam funneled customer’s credit card information over to men convicted of financial crimes. Sanford Teen Challenge director Wayne Gray has resigned in disgrace after a telemarketing scam he oversaw was exposed on WFTV. Gray fled when Action 9 news reporter Todd Ullrich showed up with a camera crew to do a follow-up.

http://www.wftv.com/news/16262550/detail.html

Rather than being fired for violations of child labor laws and telemarketing fraud, Wayne Gray was moved from Sanford Teen Challenge and re-employed by Teen Challenge in Oklahoma City as Executive Director. Sanford Teen Challenge supervisor Danny McCrimon was arrested March 8, 2009 for DUI. McCrimon, who was Operations Director at the Sanford location, was arrested by the Florida Highway Patrol and booked into John Polk Correctional facility on a $2000 bond.

http://www.teenchallengeexposed.com/

http://webbond.seminolesheriff.org/iinfo.aspx...

Alan Pauler, a resident of Wichita, Kansas, was accepted into the Teen Challenge of the Midlands program on September 23, 2003. Teen Challenge of the Midlands (Teen Challenge) is a faith-based organization located on an 80-acre complex in Colfax, Iowa, with a smaller “reentry” facility in Omaha, Nebraska, and a non-residential facility in Des Moines. Teen Challenge is a 501(c)(3) corporation. At the time of admission, Pauler did not have health insurance. Teen Challenge does not provide health insurance to its participants—called students. Several staff members are members of Reverend Hunsberger’s family. There are no certified substance abuse counselors at the Colfax site. Reverend Hunsberger distinguishes the “discipleship” program from drug treatment, saying that discipleship is “based on scriptural model,” “eating meals together, hanging out together, and living together in a community.” Pauler was assigned to perform construction work on campus duplexes for use by Teen Challenge staff members. He was also selected to work on several construction projects at off-campus locations for which he was not paid, but from which Teen Challenge benefited financially. Pauler sustained a fractured patella, which required surgery and a laceration to his head which required sutures. He has suffered ongoing pain and restricted movement. Teen Challenge carried workers’ compensation insurance coverage for its staff, but not for participants. Coverage was denied. The court decided that there is no workers’ compensation liability in analogous situations involving individuals seeking spiritual development from organizations that provide room, board, and a work requirement.

http://www.iowacourtsonline.org/court_of_appeals/Recent_Opinions/20090806/9-458.pdf

Lack of Protection for Mandated Reporter Disclosure by Federal Employees and Whistleblowers

FBI agents report up the chain of command ultimately to the Director of the FBI and the White House. The President of the United States was George W. Bush who had already acted in his official capacity, as Governor of Texas, to protect Teen Challenge from state inspection and regulation and to overlook all complaints of child abuse. This lack of protection from the government happened in spite of mounting evidence of a continuing pattern of coercive psychological, emotional, physical abuse and even sexual abuse at Teen Challenge centers in Texas and other states. When there are disagreements on when to close a case or pursue the matter further, the decision is made based on the U.S. Department of Justice chain of command. When unsatisfied the final decider of FBI whistleblower complaints is the Merit Systems Protection Board and Special Counsel for the Office of Special Counsel. All whistleblower cases from federal employees would end up eventually for review by Special Counsel for the OSC, Scott Bloch. His decision to investigate or close the case and not appeal it at the Merit Systems Protection Board would be final and not subject to further appeal. His was the final decision of the Bush administration Department of Justice.

But there was little chance of any FBI agent being heard when presenting a politically unpalatable whistleblower complaint to the OSC or the Merit Systems Protection Board. So FBI agents and other federal employees who did their ethical and moral duty as federal officers of the US Department of Justice and other investigating federal agencies such as: Health and Human Services, SAMSHA, National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Department of Agriculture and Department of Labor would report their whistleblower complaint to the OSC with little hope of a positive outcome. Those dedicated federal employees who were acting as mandated reporters of human rights violations and child abuse, were instead often demoted, stripped of their security clearances, threatened with pension removal and dismissed from their positions as law enforcement officers.

For decades, the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) the very agency which was created to protect whistleblowers - was historically involved in tutoring agency managers on how to get rid of inconvenient, outspoken employees. Many of these brave whistleblowers have lost their jobs and life savings, defending themselves from retaliatory investigations, malicious prosecutions, baseless transfers, unwarranted demotions, suspensions, unjustified terminations and other reprisals by their respective government agencies.

Investigation and Allegations Against Attorney Scott Bloch

Scott J. Bloch was removed from his position in October 2008. During his tenure as head of the Task Force on Faith-based and Community Initiatives Scott Bloch turned a blind eye when Teen Challenge staff were accused of abuse of minors and young adults in their programs based on discrimination against them because of their religious beliefs and their sexual orientations. Scott Bloch while at the OSC had ordered his office to erase all references to workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation, claiming his office lacked the authority to protect gay and lesbian workers and he also failed to protect LGBT teens from abuse by the staff and “peer mentors” in Teen Challenge. Teen Challenge was also accused of coercive abusive practices against young women who wished to have reproductive choice regarding their own bodies. Teen Challenge was found to do coercive practices against those of Jewish faith as well as other faiths in an effort to force them to accept Jesus Christ. Persons of other faiths were court ordered into Teen Challenge facilities under the false belief that they were treatment programs for substance abuse when in fact there was no medical or psychological treatment component to their programs and there was no licensed professional involved in supervising care in their facilities. Teens in Teen Challenge were "locked down" and monitored by alarm systems, to prevent unauthorized departures. Teen Challenge essentially kept youth in a locked up facility for a year to 18 months in order to force their religious conversion to evangelical Christian faith. While held in these facilities, there was no permitted communication or contact with the outside world not even to family members unless coercive control and oppressive monitoring by Teen Challenge staff. Teen Challenge facilities in both Texas and Florida had been exempted by the state governors - Texas Governor George W. Bush and Florida Governor "Jeb" Bush from licensing requirements and state inspection. Thus staff in Teen Challenge – many, who were recruited directly from the Teen Challenge outreach to jailed prisoners, were at liberty to use the captives for any purpose they wished.

John Ellis "Jeb" Bush served as the 43rd Governor of Florida from 1999 to 2007. George W. Bush served as the 46th Governor of Texas from 1995 until 2000, when he resigned as governor following his election as the 43rd President of the United States. During the years of 1995 through the election of George W. Bush as President of the US - there were no meaningful protections for persons committed to lock up facilities owned and operated by Teen Challenge. Numerous allegations about child abuse surfaced but investigations were shut down without proper explanation and then the governors of Florida and Texas altered state law to exempt Teen Challenge from any state investigations and permitted them to be licensed by an accrediting agency that did no investigations at all and did not report to any governmental agency.

Lack of Human Rights Protections in the USA

The US Attorney Scott Bloch at the Office of Special Counsel did not protect whistleblowers from any federal agency. Teen Challenge abused the children and young adults in their care. If you were a convicted criminal and worked at Teen Challenge no one was going to stop you from doing human rights abuses or criminal activity. Teen Challenge staff and Board members did criminal activity and international money laundering.

Scott Bloch did not enforce the Hatch Act or Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (Veterans’ Rights). Under his tenure at the OSC, veterans were denied their human rights and veteran whistleblowers were denied their appeals. Rather than protecting federal employees from prohibited personnel practices, Scott Bloch actually violated the rights of his own staff.

There was also a complete lack of any Department of Justice protocols to protect human rights defenders, whistleblowers and mandated reporters. This break down in the Department of Justice system meant that we did not have any functioning protections for human rights in the United States of America.

A political strategy furthered by Karl Rove was behind this miscarriage of justice. Scott Bloch furthered that political agenda with his actions both at the OSC and also at the Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives. We need to bring Scott Bloch to justice for what he really did – obstruction of justice, Hatch Act violations, USERRA violations and Prohibited Personnel Practices and put into place appropriate safeguards for human rights and protection for human rights defenders.

Additional Information about the Office of Special Counsel:

http://www.osc.gov/Intro.htm

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) is an independent federal investigative and prosecutorial agency. Their basic authorities come from four federal statutes: the Civil Service Reform Act, the Whistleblower Protection Act, the Hatch Act, and the Uniformed Services Employment & Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA).

PPPs & Whistleblower Protection
OSC receives, investigates, and prosecutes allegations of Prohibited Personnel Practices or PPPs, with an emphasis on protecting federal government whistleblowers. OSC seeks corrective action remedies (such as back pay and reinstatement), by negotiation or from the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), for injuries suffered by whistleblowers and other complainants. OSC is also authorized to file complaints at the MSPB to seek disciplinary action against individuals who commit PPPs.

Disclosure Unit
OSC provides a secure channel through its Disclosure Unit for federal workers to disclose information about various workplace improprieties, including a violation of law, rule or regulation, gross mismanagement and waste of funds, abuse of authority, or a substantial danger to public health or safety.

Hatch Act Unit (Political Activity)
OSC promotes compliance by government employees with legal restrictions on political activity by providing advisory opinions on, and enforcing, the Hatch Act. Every year, OSC’s Hatch Act Unit provides over a thousand advisory opinions, enabling individuals to determine whether their contemplated political activities are permitted under the Act.

Hatch Act Unit also enforces compliance with the Act. Depending on the severity of the violation, OSC will either issue a warning letter to the employee, or prosecute a violation before MSPB.

Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (Veterans’ Rights)

OSC protects the civilian employment and reemployment rights of military veterans and members of the Guard and Reserve by enforcing the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA).

Employee Information Programs

Section 2302(c) of title 5 of the U.S. Code makes agency heads and officials with personnel authority responsible (in consultation with OSC) for informing federal employees of their rights and remedies under chapters 12 and 23 of title 5. These chapters deal with prohibited personnel practices, whistleblower disclosures, political activity, and access to OSC and MSPB.

Scott Bloch and Hatch Act Violations & Teen Challenge

2011-04-11T12:33:00.000-07:00

"Reality is the murder of a beautiful theory by a gang of ugly facts".

Scott Bloch's Role as Special Counsel for the Office of Special Counsel

In theory, as the independent U.S. Special Counsel, for the Office of Special Counsel, Scott J. Bloch was responsible for investigating waste, fraud and abuse, and for protecting whistleblowers. Governmental employees who come forward with reports of waste, fraud, abuse, and illegal and dangerous activities are known as whistleblowers. Whistleblowers and Mandated Reporters constitute our national alert system for when there is something seriously wrong with the governmental bureaucracy. Unfortunately, the cruel hard facts are that the usual reaction to a whistleblower by his or her management is not a correction of the problem, but rather retaliation in the form of forced transfers, demotions, revocation of security clearances, and even being fired. Whistleblowers who are retaliated against are supposed to be able to go to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel to seek redress. The U.S. Office of Special Counsel is supposed to act independently. The OSC can force investigations into retaliation, and also into misconduct that is reported by whistleblowers. But under Scott Bloch as Special Counsel of the OSC, the potential safe harbor at the OSC to report problems became a very unfriendly place to whistleblowers. This so-called whistleblower-protector intentionally caused hundreds of whistleblower cases to be permanently destroyed without an investigation.

The agency empowered to investigate violations of the Hatch Act was the Office of Special Counsel, an office of which Scott Bloch was appointed to head in 2004. So in this sequence of political choices by President George W. Bush, Scott Bloch would have had to investigate himself for whistleblower allegations of using the Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives (OFBCI) program for partisan political purposes. http://www.osc.gov/hatchact.htm

Scott Bloch protects himself

The Office of Special Counsel is the government office in charge of protecting government whistleblowers and enforcing the Hatch Act—a law that forbids government employees from using federal resources for political ends. The Special Counsel reports directly to the White House. But when staff expressed concerns for how Scott Bloch was handling cases Scott Bloch retaliated. Scott Bloch became under investigation himself for a variety of violations – including prohibited personnel practices and discrimination against the employees in his office. Scott Bloch purged more than 20 % of his staff – many of whom were experienced career professionals with years of work with whistleblowers. Scott Bloch also did preferential hiring of Alan Hicks in conflict with federal personnel practices.

Scott Bloch, Special Counsel for the Office of Special Counsel, became under investigation into whether he himself had violated the Hatch Act. Scott Bloch's use of his position as the Deputy Director of the Faith-based and Community Initiative program for political purposes would be a violation of the Hatch Act. The Hatch Act is the federal statute designed to limit the ways in which federal employees may participate in partisan political activities. http://www.osc.gov/hatchact.htm

Scott Bloch's misconduct while at the OSC

Scott Bloch was appointed by President George W. Bush to the Office of Special Counsel in 2001. Prior to his appointment as Deputy Director of the DOJ's Department's Office of Faith-based initiatives, he was for a decade an attorney in Lawrence, KS. In 2004, Justice Clarence Thomas swore him in as Special Counsel for the Office of Special Counsel (OSC). Bloch was removed from his position at the Office of Special Counsel in October 2008, after it was discovered he had ordered his office to erase all references to workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation, claiming his office lacked the authority to protect gay and lesbian workers.

During his tenure as head of the Task Force on Faith-based and Community Initiatives Scott Bloch turned a blind eye when Teen Challenge staff were accused of abuse of minors and young adults in their programs based on discrimination against them because of their religious beliefs and their sexual orientations. Teen Challenge was also accused of coercive abusive practices against young women who wished to have reproductive choice regarding their own bodies. Teen Challenge was found to do coercive practices against those of Jewish faith as well as other faiths in an effort to force them to accept Jesus Christ. Persons of other faiths were court ordered into Teen Challenge facilities under the false belief that they were treatment programs for substance abuse when in fact there was no medical or psychological treatment component to their programs and there was no licensed professional involved in supervising care in their facilities. Teens in Teen Challenge were "locked down" and monitored by alarm systems, to prevent unauthorized departures. Teen Challenge essentially kept youth in a locked up facility for a year to 18 months in order to force their religious conversion to evangelical Christian faith. While held in these facilities, there was no permitted communication or contact with the outside world not even to family members unless coercive control and oppressive monitoring by Teen Challenge staff. Teen Challenge facilities in both Texas and Florida had been exempted by the state governors - Texas Governor George W. Bush and Florida Governor "Jeb" Bush from licensing requirements and state inspection. Thus staff in Teen Challenge - many who were recruited directly from the Teen Challenge outreach to jailed prisoners - were at liberty to use the captives for any purpose they wished.

John Ellis "Jeb" Bush served as the 43rd Governor of Florida from 1999 to 2007. George W. Bush served as the 46th Governor of Texas from 1995 until 2000, when he resigned as governor following his election as the 43rd President of the United States. During the years of 1995 through the election of George W. Bush as President of the US - there were no meaningful protections for persons committed to lock up facilities owned and operated by Teen Challenge. Numerous allegations about child abuse surfaced but investigations were shut down without proper explanation and then the governors of Florida and Texas altered state law to exempt Teen Challenge from any state investigations and permitted them to be licensed by an accrediting agency that did no investigations at all and did not report to any governmental agency.

George W. Bush was the 43rd President of the United States (2001-2009) and the 46th Governor of Texas (1995-2000). As President of the United States George W. Bush encouraged Scott Bloch to provide money through the Charitable Choice program to certain religious organizations that supported him in his political campaigns. The growing concerns regarding the mounting evidence of criminal activity in Teen Challenge (fraud and money laundering) and also allegations of child abuse made it critical for the continuing unfettered operation of Teen Challenge that all federal investigations and whistleblower complaints against Teen Challenge be closed without prosecution and without even investigation. Teen Challenge was central to George W. Bush's war against drugs and also to his political popularity with the religious right, thus important to President George W. Bush's re-election campaign. So exempted from state licensing and regulatory oversight by Governor George W. Bush and Governor Jeb Bush, these centers would not even have federal investigations by the FBI, Health and Human Services, US Department of Labor, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Food and Drug Administration, National Institute on Drug Abuse, SAMSHA or any other federal agency, given the ability of the OSC to stop any federal employee whistleblower complaint in front of the Merit Systems Protection Board.

Questions about the validity of Scott Bloch's own law license

But what was Scott Bloch’s own criminal record? Did Scott Bloch properly obtain a license to practice law in DC? Why did the staff of the DC court not notice criminal investigations against him and failed to flag that fact to the Committee on Admissions.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/despite_probe_ex_bush_official_got_licenes_blunder_dc_court_appeals.php

Scott Bloch's misconduct toward whistleblowers

Under Scott Bloch’s leadership, the historically inept Office of Special Counsel did knowingly and willfully ignore whistleblower disclosures. Legitimate whistleblowers were hardly recognized by Bloch who did not take their cases seriously until the whistleblower had already prevailed elsewhere. The OSC dismissed and closed hundreds of whistleblowing complaints without investigation. The OSC deleted hundreds of files pertaining to whistleblowing disclosures and complaints of retaliation and reprisal. When facing his critics within his own office, Scott Bloch reassigned those staffers within the OSC to field offices across the country – giving them 10 days to accept, or else they'd be fired. During Scott Bloch’s tenure there was also a rolling back of protections for federal employees against discrimination based on sexual orientation. As head of the Office of Special Counsel, Scott Bloch, imposed retaliatory transfers on OSC staffers he perceived as having a “homosexual” agenda. Scott Bloch made staffing choices that selected for those who shared his discriminatory views and he also retaliated against OSC staffers who opposed his wrongdoing. He assigned interns to issue closure letters in hundreds of whistleblower complaints. OSC employees were intimidated so as to prevent them from cooperating with the Office of Professional Management governmental investigators.

Bloch closed cases without investigation and destroyed files of 56% of those cases. During the 2008, the OSC filed absolutely no corrective action petitions and no stays with the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). In addition Scott Bloch continued to protect the Teen Challenge program from the mounting evidence that these unlicensed facilities were culpable in instances of child abuse, fraud against the public taxpayers, and even money laundering for illegal activities. Teen Challenge centers had received grant funding from the White House Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives while Scott Bloch was Chief Counsel of that office. Scott Bloch did not as Special Counsel for the Office of Special Counsel make any attempt to investigate the allegations of those whistleblowing against Teen Challenge.

Scott Bloch himself misused prosecutorial power for political purposes. For what may be viewed as political or personal reasons, while Special Counsel at the Office of Special Counsel, Scott Bloch decided to launch into a broad investigation into the politically sensitive case of Karl Rove and the firing of US Attorneys. The Office of Special Counsel announced that it was forming an internal task force to determine whether there were violations of Rove’s office staff or other of provisions of the Hatch Act. The Hatch Act is a law that bars federal employees from engaging in political activities using government resources or government time. Specifically the OSC was going to look into the firing of at least one U.S. Attorney, e-mails from the Republican National Committee email accounts and the suspected use of Cabinet agency managers on political development and Republican campaign goals. But Scott Bloch himself was a part of Karl Rove’s political strategy. Scott Bloch in his role as Deputy Director of the Task Force on Faith-based and Community Initiatives was implementing that political strategy to reward those who had supported President Bush’s campaign and could be counted on to provide votes in the future.

There is no better way to prevent an investigation into your own conduct than to be in charge of the investigation yourself. What better means to stop whistleblowers who are federal employees from bringing criminal activity to the attention of the DOJ than to be the man in charge of all the whistleblower appeals from all those agencies? Then to divert attention from Hatch Act violations that you wish to hide, initiate a "sweeping broad investigation" and thus try to shut down any competing efforts of the US Congress to actually find out the truth in the allegations.

That tactic served Robert Hanssen, former FBI agent and mole for the Russians, well. Robert Hanssen eluded the efforts of both the CIA and FBI to identify him as the person passing secrets to the Russians by being himself in charge of the FBI investigation. To prevent criminal activity from being prosecuted this tactic has again surfaced in the Karl Rove investigation headed by Former Special Counsel Scott Bloch.

Investigation and Allegations Against Attorney Scott Bloch

The Office of Personnel Management Inspector General launched an investigation into Bloch after whistleblowers in his own department came forward and exposed him inappropriately steering contracts toward cronies, discriminating against two OSC employees on the basis of their sexual orientation, and clearing the agency’s extensive backlog of cases by inappropriately closing cases without investigating them at all.

In 2006, Scott Bloch abruptly canceled an award ceremony for the federal whistleblower of the year, according to several employees, when he learned that the winner, a corrections official named Leroy Smith, planned to criticize the special counsel's office at a news conference afterward.

The Investigated Investigator, Leader of High-Profile Probes Is Under Scrutiny Himself By Elizabeth Williamson, Washington Post,April 30, 2007
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/29/AR2007042901256.html

Whistleblowers are united in requesting that a special investigator to look into these crimes because these are serious crimes committed at the highest levels of government and our justice system must a thorough investigation. It is important to let high governmental officials know that engaging in illegal activity cannot be done with impunity. Scott Bloch should not be safe in the knowledge that his crimes will go unquestioned.

Whistleblowers request special prosecutor in Scott Bloch case
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/documents/2011/02/an-open-letter-from-the-community-of-whistleblowers-to-attorney-general-eric-holder.php?page=1

Whistleblower groups and some former employees of the U.S. Office of Special Counsel want more than probation for Scott Bloch who is still scheduled to be sentenced. In a six-page letter to U.S. Magistrate Judge Deborah Robinson, lawyers for the whistleblower groups and former employees note allegations that Bloch discriminated against gay and lesbian employees, that he retaliated against employees who tried to draw attention to illegal actions, and that he deliberately interfered with federal investigators when he hired “Geeks on Call” to wipe out computer files. In April, Bloch pleaded guilty to one misdemeanor count of withholding information from Congress. The US prosecuting attorneys for the U.S. Justice Department said they would not oppose probation. One letter on behalf of whistleblowers says probation wouldn’t be strong enough. “On behalf of the victims of Mr. Bloch’s unlawful conduct, we urge the Court to award a sentence that appropriately reflects the severe, long-lasting, and broad impact of his actions,” http://legaltimes.typepad.com/files/100715-ltr-to-robinson.pdf

Now Scott J. Bloch, the disgraced former head of the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), is scheduled to go back into court on March 30, 2011. After a long criminal investigation, on April 27, 2010 Bloch pleaded guilty to criminal contempt of Congress. Based on his actions, Bloch could have been charged with obstruction of justice, evidence tampering, destruction of official files, impeding an official federal investigation, civil right violations, Hatch act violations and violations of the Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA). Instead, he was charged only with criminal contempt (a misdemeanor). Scott Bloch, the former Bush administration official who pleaded guilty to misdemeanor criminal contempt of Congress has been trying to withdraw that plea since a judge ruled he would have to spend at least one month in prison. A group of government whistleblowers wants a special prosecutor appointed to handle the case of former Bush administration official Scott Bloch.

The whistleblowers wrote in a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder that Bloch "gravely damaged the federal civil service" and say they are concerned about "about the appearance of impropriety" because the federal prosecutor currently handling the case supported a plea agreement before Bloch withdrew his guilty plea.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/documents/2011/02/an-open-letter-from-the-community-of-whistleblowers-to-attorney-general-eric-holder.php?page=1

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/02/whistleblowers_ask_holder_for_special_prosecutor_in_scott_bloch_case.php#more

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/02/scott_bloch_asks_for_mulligan_on_guilty_plea_since_he_didnt_know_about_jail_time.php

A more recent letter by a group of whistleblowers states requests a special prosecutor for the USA v Scott J. Bloch case.

http://whistleblowerlawyer.wordpress.com/2011/02/20/an-open-letter-from-the-community-of-whistleblowers-to-attorney-general-eric-holder/

The Judge has ruled Scott Bloch to spend time in prison

US prosecutors charging contempt of Congress charge is a rare. There are only two other reported cases in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in the past 20 years, according to court records. Bloch, who pleaded guilty to criminal contempt of the US Congress made a deal with prosecutors, claimed that he had the expectation that he'd get probation as part of that plea agreement. But U.S. Magistrate Judge Deborah Robinson ruled that Bloch's plea requires "a mandatory minimum sentence of one month," The Washington DC US District Court Magistrate Judge Robinson rejected arguments for a lesser sentence from Bloch's lawyers and prosecutors. Robinson set Bloch's sentencing hearing for March 30, 2011. The Judge found Scott Bloch guilty and gave him a month in jail. Bloch, represented by Winston & Strawn partner William Sullivan Jr. will be appealing the Judge’s decision. Questions still remain why the DC staff issued Scott Bloch a law license in DC even though at the time he applied for his law license he was actually under a FBI investigation. We will soon see whether Bloch’s law license will be revoked by the District of Columbia Bar Association as the result of the recent guilty plea and sentencing.

Scott Bloch’s Plea Agreement
http://legaltimes.typepad.com/files/dqu29000.pdf

Judge denies Scott Bloch’s right to appeal sentencing verdict 3-29-11
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/documents/2011/03/judge-denies-scott-blochs-request-to-appeal-sentencing-in-geeks-on-call-case.php?page=1

Judges order is stayed pending appeal in Scott Bloch case March 10, 2011
http://legaltimes.typepad.com/files/robinson_order.pdf

Bloch’s DOJ press release 4-27-10
http://legaltimes.typepad.com/files/bloch-press-release-4-27-10.pdf

Whistleblowers request special prosecutor in Scott Bloch case
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/documents/2011/02/an-open-letter-from-the-community-of-whistleblowers-to-attorney-general-eric-holder.php?page=1

Teen Challenge New England & Child Abusers

2011-04-08T00:59:00.001-07:00

Teen Challenge gained national attention in 1995 when the Texas Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse (TCADA) threatened to shut down Teen Challenge of South Texas because its counselors refused to trade in their faith-based approach for a "medical model" based on the concept that alcoholism is a disease rather than a manifestation of sin. At that time Teen Challenge in New England was already was an established program and was using persons from the prison reintegration program as labor. The prison reintegration officer Marcy Haaland, in Bristol County Sheriff’s office (in Massachusetts) was creating a Teen Challenge unit in the county jail. The 22 men in the minimum-security unit were working through Teen Challenge curriculum under the daily oversight of two Teen Challenge ministers. When men in the unit are released from prison, Ms. Haaland was encouraging them to enter one of the Teen Challenge centers in Massachusetts.

By all reports Peter Fabiano, came to the Brockton Teen Challenge in 2000 for drug addiction treatment. By 2005 Peter Fabiano had been placed on the leadership fast track and was the supervisor of a center 30 miles south, in Fall River. Mr. Fabiano married the supervisor of the Teen Challenge women's center in Rhode Island, and the couple were in 2005 hoping to open a new center in Maine.

Shondi Fabiano has a history of 2nd degree sexual assault conviction in Kent, RI.
http://offender.fdle.state.fl.us/offender/flyer.do?personId=28737

Shondi Fabiano then moved into the position of co-director in the Maine center.

In 2008 there had been articles about Shondi Fabiano and her convictions for second degree child molestation. So in light of the exposure of Shondi Fabiano’s registration as a sex offender, Rev. Rodney Hart provided the press the following press release and then her name was removed from their public website of the Northern New England District of the Assemblies of God. They have since put up a new website that does not give the names of any of the staff in direct contact with clients at their facilities. Now they have also removed the names of the staff on their old Northern New England District Assemblies of God website and left the message – Coming Soon instead of their Directors names.

Shondi Fabiano was convicted of Second Degree Child Molestation in Rhode Island. She is listed on the National Sex Offender Public Registry. Maine has some pretty strict laws regarding contact with minors by registered sex offenders.
http://www.nsopr.gov

http://offender.fdle.state.fl.us/offender/fly...

http://sor.informe.org/cgi-bin/sor/step3.pl...

Teen Challenge New England - Augusta
11 Hudson Lane
Winthrop, ME 04346
pfabiano@tcaugusta.org

There is a difference between the Directors on the Board of Directors of Teen Challenge and the working staff Director in direct contact with clients. Rev. Rodney Hart’s actual position in 2008 was stated as the President and Chief Executive officer of Teen Challenge Centers in New England. In 2008 the Teen Challenge New England had just received title to the 520-acre Winthrop property through the Hudson Trust, and town officials informed them that a permit was a requirement. In the Kennebec Journal article dated Feb 27, 2008 they reported that a Winthrop property was being turned into a Teen Challenge Center. Rev. Rodney Hart was aware that the center in Winthrop would be operating without a permit and would be paying a $2,000 fine for operating without the permit. Apparently having no permit did not prevent Teen Challenge for starting a residential treatment program at that location for up to 16 men at a time who face alcohol, drug and related problems. That was not the first Teen Challenge program in New England. Teen Challenge New England was not always in the same facility and they often begin their operations while using another facility (sometimes rented) and then when expanding when they obtain a different property.

http://findarticles.com/p/news-articles/kennebec-journal/mi_8137/is_20080227/winthrop-rehab-center-plan-drawing/ai_n50717768/

So in interest of full disclosure – this is the explanation that was the Official Press Release from Rev. Rodney Hart, President & CEO of Teen Challenge New England at the time that Shondi Fabiano was exposed in the press for her position at Teen Challenge New England:

“Shondi Fabiano began using drugs at age 12 and was a heroin addict by the time she was 19 years old. She was living with and using drugs with a 21 year old man who was also an addict. While under the influence of narcotics she had sex with a 14 and a 15 year old boy. The two boys were family members of the 21 year old male that was Shondi’s boyfriend. The family of the boys filed charges against Shondi. Shondi’s public defender told her that if she didn’t want to go to jail for a long time she had better plead guilty. So she did. This was 15 years ago! Shondi sought help for her drug addiction at Teen Challenge and graduated with honors a year later. For the last 10 years she has dedicated her life to helping other drug addicts overcome their addictions and lead normal productive lives. Her life is a stellar example of one that has overcome incredible odds. Her life is a shining example and inspiration to all those who know and love her personally. She has been terribly embarrassed by this story. This was a tragic mistake that she will carry with her the rest of her life. She has completed probation without any violations and is no longer under any supervision. She is married, with a young infant and two teenage sons and poses no threat to anyone. To suggest that the community is at risk in any way is a gross exaggeration and extremely unfair to Shondi and the courageous steps she has taken to overcome the physical and spiritual obstacles in her life. Please direct all questions and comments to Rev. Rodney Hart, President and CEO of Teen Challenge New England.”

This information was already posted by others.So I will re post it here so that you can confirm her true status as a sex offender.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/2/17850/21034 7/

http://evangelicalsunderamicroscope.wordpress.com/2010/05/02/teen-challenge-hires-convicted-sex-offender-and-scam-artist/

http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/health/abuse/news.php?q=1213027887

Shondi Fabiano, was previously listed officially as a co-head of Teen Challenge New England by the website of the Northern New England District of the Assemblies of God, and who is officially listed as a lifetime-registered sex offender for second-degree child molestation and sexual assault in the third degree. An online check of sex offender registries, including the Florida sex-offender registry run by Florida Department of Law Enforcement, also shows Shondi Fabiano also has a history of 2nd degree sexual assault conviction in Kent, RI.(To give you an idea just why this may be an issue: 3rd degree sexual assault in Rhode Island is essentially statutory rape of a 14- to 16-year old minor by a person over the age of 18, 2nd degree sexual assault is sexual assault of an incapacitated person or sexual assault using force or coercion, and second degree child molestation is what is generally termed as frank pedophile rape--sexual assault of a minor under the age of 14. And this was probably not a case of "I thought he was legal"; Fabiano would have been nearly 24 years old at the time of the offense)

Fabiano apparently (at least per a search of the records site for Rhode Island's criminal courts) committed the crimes 10 years ago under her maiden name Shondi Barbato; she was originally charged with 1st degree child abuse (which involves sexual penetration of a child under the age of 14). It also appears Fabiano (under her maiden name of Barbato) she has a conviction for fraud (specifically attempts to obtain money under false pretenses, insurance fraud, and conspiracy) and a dismissed charge of possession of a controlled substance.

See for yourself:

http://www.nsopr.gov/main_frameset.cfm?pageid=16&ouid=aHR0cDovL3Nvci5pbmZvcm1lLm9yZy9jZ2ktYmluL3Nvci9zdGVwMy5wbD9pZD00NjkwJmY9MQ==

http://offender.fdle.state.fl.us/offender/flyer.do?personId=28737

http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/Statutes/TITLE11/11-37/11-37-6.HTM

http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/Statutes/TITLE11/11-37/11-37-4.HTM

http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/Statutes/TITLE11/11-37/11-37-8.3.HTM

http://courtconnect.courts.ri.gov/pls/ri_adult/ck_public_qry_doct.cp_dktrpt_frames?backto=P&case_id=K1-1996-0384A&begin_date=&end_date=

Scott Bloch and the Hiring of Disgraced Catholic Schoolmaster Alan Hicks

2011-04-06T15:15:00.000-07:00

Scott Bloch, the former Special Counsel for the Office of Special Counsel will be spending 1 month in Federal prison. Washington DC District Federal Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson sentenced Scott Bloch to prison time in spite of pleas of his defense counsel that he should just walk away after deliberately wiping his computers and erasing evidence when under a US Congressional investigation. Scott Bloch has many things to explain regarding his tenure as the chief enforcement officer of the OSC for whistleblower protection and for prosecution of Hatch Act violations.

None of these is as perplexing as Scott Bloch’s special treatment of the disgraced school headmaster Alan Hicks. After Alan Hicks was dismissed in disgrace from St. Gregory's, Scott Bloch hired his son’s former Catholic Boarding school headmaster as an expert consultant on a no-bid contract. Scott Bloch did this in apparent violation of civil service rules, according to documents released by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). Alan Hicks had served previously a short stint as a teacher of philosophy at the University of Kansas, but that did not really quality him as an expert for the OSC.

But why would Scott Bloch preferentially protect the disgraced headmaster of St. Gregory’s Academy? Alan Hicks had left St. Gregory’s Academy in the wake of allegations concerning priests of the Society of St. John sexually preying on young students at St. Gregory's Academy. St. Gregory's, which is owned and operated by the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, is a private Catholic high school for boys located in Moscow, Pennsylvania. Scott Bloch’s son had attended this all boys’ Catholic boarding school. Bloch gave the ex-headmaster a one-year appointment at the Office of Special Counsel as an expert consultant. Alan Hicks, former headmaster at St. Gregory’s was supposed to “advise on curriculum of future Office of Special Counsel training program.” Alan Hicks under this appointment would be entitled to receive as much as $111,966.40, but the only work produced for this generous appointment was only a single four page memo dated September 16, 2004. A FOIA request by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) only obtained a redacted version with only a blank piece of paper for this 4 page memo.

Alan Hicks was recruited by Fr. Arnaud Devillers to be headmaster at St. Gregory's. Hicks had previously studied philosophy and logic at the University of Kansas. At University of Kansas Hicks was in the Great Books program under Dr. John Senior, for whom he worked as an assistant instructor.

The St. Gregory’s Catholic traditionalist educational program was strongly influenced by Hilaire Belloc, a militant Catholic journalist, historian, and poet. Belloc was deemed by some to be anti-Semitic and not concerned to conceal his views. Belloc also considered Islam to pose a dangerous threat. Belloc's Roman Catholicism was uncompromising and he was one of the most prolific writers in England during the early twentieth century. Tuition and board for each student at St. Gregory’s Catholic boarding school for boys totaled $6,800 per year.

Dr. Jeffrey M. Bond, President of the College of St. Justin Martyr, in a June 7, 2002 letter warned the parents of children attending St. Gregory’s and stated clearly “…the SSJ priests had the opportunity to harm boys at St. Gregory's because of a pre-existing environment suited to their perverse purposes. I say this because parents, graduates, and other concerned parties who have read the above-mentioned letter have contacted me to share their experiences with me, and their stories indicate that the environment at St. Gregory's is not a healthy one for boys. That environment was largely the creation of Mr. Alan Hicks, the Headmaster of St. Gregory's Academy. In short, the bright promise of St. Gregory's has been betrayed by the very one whose task it has been to fulfill that promise.”

It is clear from Dr. Jeffrey Bond’s letter of warning to parents that he believed that Mr. Hicks acted in a callous and uncaring manner toward the boys who had been sexually abused. He states further that “Mr. Hicks' attitude reveals a remarkable ignorance concerning the ways in which homosexual predators "groom" their victims by degrees.”

In one instance of inappropriate homosexual contact that parents recounted to Dr. Bond, Dr. Bond concluded that ….”neither Mr. Hicks nor Mr. Clark expressed a single word of concern for the welfare of this young man. They did express concern for their own jobs, however, by joking about how they would soon be "eating out of garbage cans." They also denied responsibility by stating that it was unrealistic for them to have to patrol the hallways of St. Gregory's at night.”

Dr. Jeffrey M. Bond after delineating numerous instances of sexual situations that occurred at St. Gregory’s with several different boys concludes that “the moral threshold was crossed long before by the creation and tolerance of a poorly supervised and unsafe environment for boys….. Clearly Mr. Hicks should not be in charge of a Catholic boarding school for boys. I therefore encourage all parents to insist that the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter take responsible action by removing Mr. Hicks in order to ensure that St. Gregory's Academy be the educational womb of Catholic gentlemen that it purports to and ought to be.”

You can read the entire letter in its entirety here.
http://www.saintjustinmartyr.org/news/LetterWarningToStGregorysParents.html

The US Federal Office of Personnel Management advises that experts may be hired on a non-competitive basis only if he is “a specialist with skills superior to those of others in the same profession, occupation or activity.” In addition federal agencies are not supposed to use consultant appointments just to be able to avoid the normal employment procedures.

Questions have also been raised about how Scott Bloch used his federal office at Faith Based and Community Initiatives in regards to his own personal financial dealings. Bloch was a shareholder in O'Meara, Ferguson and Kearns (OFK) which was founded by Patrick O'Meara, Franciscan University of Steubenville, Ohio, graduate, onetime seminarian and former director of young adult ministry for the Mobile, Alabama, diocese. O'Meara, Ferguson and Kearns had clients from 40 dioceses, eight religious orders, 15 Catholic universities, and more than a dozen other Catholic entities as among its actual or prospective clients. Bloch's May 2003 financial disclosure form estimates the value of his OFK stock at between $5,000-$15,000. Scott Bloch said that he is a "private investor in O'Meara Capitol Partners, which then later became O'Meara Ferguson Kearns. He claimed that he was a small shareholder, a passive investor." Bloch had a relationship through O'Meara, Ferguson and Kearns with Republican National Committee Catholic Outreach chair Deal Hudson and also with Bishop David Ricken of Cheyenne, WY. Deal Hudson resigned his Republican National Catholic outreach position, following revelations that while a member of the faculty at Fordham University he engaged in an inappropriate sexual relationship with a freshman woman. OFK shareholder Scott Bloch was the key firm contact on OFK documents on deals with the Cheyenne, WY, diocese as well as the Southwest Indian Foundation (a New Mexico-based Franciscan-affiliated charity). The Southwest Indian Foundation had received federal grants from the Veterans Administration "to assist community-based agencies [to] acquire, renovate, or build transitional housing facilities, provide supportive services for homeless veterans and purchase vans for outreach to or transportation of homeless veterans." But there were concerns in how that federal money was spent. Southwest Indian Foundation in April 2005 was given a rating of “F” as a non-profit charity by the American Institute of Philanthropy because Southwest Indian Foundation did not directly benefit charity recipients adequately, because too much money was used for fundraising overhead and too little for actual charity work.

Scott Bloch was involved with the Southwest Indian Foundation according to documents at the OFK. In May of 2009, The Arizona Republic reported on its yearlong investigation of activities between the Don Stewart Association (DSA), a Phoenix-based televangelism ministry , and its affiliated secular charities including Southwest Indian Foundation. Twenty two charities, including the Southwest Indian Foundation, had ties to the Don Stewart Association and were accused of performed controversial transactions with supplies that helped inflate their finances. With such lapses in financial accountability, it was difficult if not impossible to tell if the charity actually raised its own funds or even how much of the money actually was theirs. Charities in the network, such as Southwest Indian Foundation, had used up to 76 percent of their donated cash on salaries and other expenses and often gave cash to other charities in the same network. In non-profit organizations there are many connections between charitable organizations including shared board members and shared staff, personal ties and family connections. The Combined Federal Campaign (CFC) is the world's largest workplace charity campaign which allows federal employees and military personnel to donate a portion of their paychecks to charities of their choice. The 22 charities reported $154 million in total revenue over three years. About four-fifths of that was in the form of gifts in kind. The charities transferred ownership of goods to other groups including $80 million of goods that the charities never physically handled.

Scott Bloch’s relationship with Deal Hudson of the Republican National Committee (RNC) is also under scrutiny. Deal Hudson was once a top consultant to the White House on Catholic issues and the former chairman of the Republican National Committee’s Catholic outreach effort. But after being exposed for a sexual liaison with an 18 year old Fordham University student and even more recent sexual misconduct, Deal Hudson was forced to resign his RNC position as well as forced out of his job as Crisis publisher. Crisis magazine is affiliated with the think tank, Morley Institute for Church and Culture.

While at OSC, Scott Bloch made a deliberate habit of avoiding the competitive merit system and instead hiring his own political allies and recent graduates from the ultra-conservative Ave Maria law school. Scott Bloch had ordered the removal from the OSC Web site and training materials any statement that discrimination based on sexual orientation was a banned practice in the federal workplace. This was in spite of an existing federal policy that “prohibits discrimination against federal employees based on sexual orientation.” Scott Bloch professed the view that discrimination simply based on sexual orientation simply did not come under OSC purview. While at the OSC, Scott Bloch deliberately removed several qualified career civil servants from their positions by forced transfer and other retaliatory measures (including removing staff expressing concerns about consultant Alan Hicks). This is why Bloch was under investigation by the Government Accountability Office, the President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency and a Senate committee.

The OSC is an independent body charged with defending federal employees who disclose incidents of abuse, waste or mismanagement, or who have been discriminated against in the workplace because of political affiliation or personal status. But what was Scott Bloch’s record as head of the OSC. Scott Bloch, as Special Counsel for the Office of Special Counsel, dismissed or otherwise disposed of 600 whistleblower disclosures where civil servants reported waste, fraud, threats to public safety and violations of law. Scott Bloch has did not identify a single case where he has ordered an investigation into the employee’s charges. Bloch reported that he made 470 claims of retaliation disappear. Scott Bloch never – not once – affirmatively represented a whistleblower to obtain relief before the civil service court system, called the Merit Systems Protection Board. There are those who believed Scott Bloch needed to be terminated under the “neglect of duty statute.”

To protect the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) from outside pressure, the agency’s director is appointed for five years and cannot be removed except in cases of illegal misconduct. But Scott Bloch’s employment as Special Counsel for the Office of Special Counsel ended abruptly on October 23, 2008 during a meeting with White House officials. On April 27, 2010 Bloch pleaded guilty to criminal contempt of Congress for, according to the U.S. Attorney, "willfully and unlawfully withholding pertinent information from a House committee investigating his decision to have several government computers wiped ...." Bloch was originally slated to be sentenced on July 20, 2010. On February 2, Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson ruled that Bloch faced a mandatory sentence of at least one month in prison. Now after her final ruling Scott Bloch faces a month in jail for pleading guilty to criminal contempt of the US Congress.

“It is beyond ironic that Scott Bloch heads the very office that is supposed to enforce the rules against nepotism and favoritism,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch.

Documents obtained by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility
(PEER) www.peer.org/ under the Freedom of Information Act:

See the pay scale and terms of Alan Hicks consultant appointment
http://www.peer.org/docs/osc/05_12_04_consultant_pay.pdf
View the redacted work product of Alan Hicks
http://www.peer.org/docs/osc/05_12_04_consultant_results.pdf
Read the “Consultant Statement of Work”
http://www.peer.org/docs/osc/05_12_04_consultant_description.pdf
Look at unfolding developments in the troubled tenure of Scott Bloch as Special Counsel
http://www.peer.org/watch/federal_info.php?row_id=23

Concerns continue to be raised about the Charitable Choice program, under which Scott Bloch rolled out the Faith-based and Community Initiatives program. Charitable Choice clearly blurred the line between public funding and private religious organizations. These distinctions regarding separation of Church and State were further eroded with a new Texas law that allows for the financing of parish meeting rooms and schools as long as no “sanctuaries” or “chapels” are built with the tax-exempt bond financing. Usually State and local municipal bonds are issued to benefit nonprofit organizations that pledge to use the funds to fulfill a public purpose. The long-term borrowing created by the bonds are backed by the government's ability to tax its residents so in order to protect the tax payers these bonds are secured usually with real estate holdings. But in Austin Texas $79.8 million in bond financing went to the Capital Area Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corporation and is not backed with the value of diocesan real estate holdings. This new Texas law opens the door for faith based organizations with little collateral to qualify for large amounts of municipal bond money. Making money easily available to religious non-profits without real estate assets, puts the general taxpayer at risk should the non-profit not fulfill its debt obligations on the municipal bonds. This municipal bond money used to further the capital improvements of a particular religious group, would in the event of debt non-payment fall on all tax-payers regardless of religious affiliation. Charitable Choice opens this door and the new Texas law holds the door open widely for those who been coached to use this system.

References and additional information:

1. Alan Hicks was former Headmaster, St. Gregory's Academy, RR 8, Box 8214, Moscow, Pa., 18444 St. Gregory's Academy 100 Griffin Road Moscow PA 18444
2. Information taken from: The June 26, 1994 issue of The Wanderer 201 Ohio Street, St. Paul, MN 55107
3. Dr. Jeffrey M. Bond, President, College of St. Justin Martyr, 142 Market Road, Greeley, PA 18425, www.SaintJustinMartyr.org
4. Joe Feuerherd "Catholic connections help pitch plan". National Catholic Reporter. FindArticles.com. 06 Apr, 2011. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_32_41/ai_n15933152/
5. White House pulls plug on fundraiser’s ‘briefing’ Washington Times, 12:01 a.m., Friday, June 3, 2005 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2005/jun/3/20050603-120131-8586r/
6. Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) is a national non-profit alliance of local, state and federal scientists, and law enforcement officers. PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, Phone: (202) 265-7337 Fax: (202) 265-4192 Email: info[at]peer.org www.peer.org/ Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) is a national alliance of local state and federal resource professionals. Public employees are a unique force working for environmental enforcement. In the ever-changing tide of political leadership, these front-line employees stand as defenders of the public interest within their agencies and as the first line of defense against the exploitation and pollution of our environment. PEER works nation-wide with government scientists, land managers, environmental law enforcement agents, field specialists and other resource professionals committed to responsible management of America’s public resources. Resource employees in government agencies have unique responsibilities as stewards of the environment.
7. Southwest Indian Foundation 100 West Coal Avenue, Gallup, NM 87301
8.American Institute of Philanthropy Charity Rating Guide & Watchdog Report http://www.charitywatch.org/ratingguide.html American Institute of Philanthropy, P.O. Box 578460, Chicago, IL 60657 Phone: (773) 529-2300
Fax: (773) 529-0024 E-mail: www.charitywatch.org/
9. Joe Feuerherd "Catholic connections help pitch plan". National Catholic Reporter. FindArticles.com. 06 Apr, 2011. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_32_41/ai_n15933152/
10. Don Stewart: A life in pursuit of God's reward, The Arizona Republic / AZCentral.com by Robert Anglen, ‎May 4, 2009‎ http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/05/04/20090504charities-stewart0504.html
11. Anglen, Robert (May. 3, 2009). "Network of charities". The Arizona Republic. http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/05/03/20090503charities0503network.html.
12.Anglen, Robert (May. 3, 2009). "Follow the cash: Charities spent bulk of it on salaries, expenses". The Arizona Republic. http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2009/05/04/20090504charities-day2-container.html.
13."Attorney general reviewing charities' practices". KSWT-TV. May 10, 2009. http://www.kswt.com/Global/story.asp?S=10335560&nav=menu613_2_6.
14.Anglen, Robert (Sept. 27, 2009). "Feds look into group of charities". The Arizona Republic. http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/09/27/20090927charity0927.html
15.Finances, Fraud, and False Teaching in the Troubled History of Don Stewart by G. Richard Fisher http://www.trinityfi.org/press/donstewart.html
16. White House pulls plug on fundraiser’s ‘briefing’ Washington Times, 12:01 a.m., Friday, June 3, 2005 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2005/jun/3/20050603-120131-8586r/
17.Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) is a national non-profit alliance of local, state and federal scientists, and law enforcement officers. PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, Phone: (202) 265-7337 Fax: (202) 265-4192 Email: info[at]peer.org www.peer.org/ Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) is a national alliance of local state and federal resource professionals. Public employees are a unique force working for environmental enforcement. These front line employees have unmatched technical knowledge, long-term service and proven experiences which make these professionals a credible voice for meaningful reform. PEER works nation-wide with government scientists, land managers, environmental law enforcement agents, field specialists and other resource professionals committed to responsible management of America’s public resources.

18.,http://www.co.travis.tx.us/commissioners_court/agendas/2005/02/text/vs050215_a2.asp

Scott Bloch will spend 1 month in Jail

2011-03-31T18:03:00.000-07:00

On March 30, 2011 Judge Deborah A. Robinson denied Scott Bloch’s motion to reconsider his guilty plea on the criminal contempt of Congress case USA v Scott Bloch. Scott Bloch was the former Special Counsel for the Office of Special Counsel and was accused of dismissing hundreds of whistleblower cases without investigation. Scott Bloch in the face of a federal investigation asked Geeks on Call to wipe his computer clean of all digital files thus destroying evidence that the FBI was seeking in the Congressional investigation. On March 30, 2011 Scott Bloch was sentenced to one month in prison by a D.C. federal court. The former Bush administration head of the Office of Special Counsel, Bloch had pleaded guilty in connection with his use of 'Geeks On Call' to scrub his government computer but then when realizing he would be facing mandatory jail time, he tried to withdraw his guilty plea. DC District Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson instead decided that Scott Bloch would spend time in jail. In addition to the prison time, Bloch was sentenced to one year of unsupervised probation and 200 hours community service. Scott Bloch’s attorney indicated that he would be filing a motion for a stay of the decision pending appeal.

Teen Challenge Received Money from Peters Company Ponzi Scheme

2011-03-19T19:36:00.000-07:00

Frank Vennes Jr., born-again ex con who served on the board of Teen Challenge MN, was a fraudster and money launderer. According to a federal search warrant affidavit, Vennes helped convince five investors to put $1.2 billion into Petters's companies, which won Vennes more than $28 million in commissions. Previously Frank Vennes Jr. had spent five years in prison for charges of illegally selling a firearm, using a phone to distribute cocaine, and money laundering, but claimed to be rehabilitated after finding God. Frank Vennes found guidance from evangelical Christian ministry while in prison and then upon leaving prison found support from the Assemblies of God run residential treatment facility Teen Challenge in Minnesota. The Directors of Teen Challenge MN knew about his previous convictions for money laundering, drug dealing and gun running but they still placed him in charge of financial affairs for Teen Challenge MN and for fund raising activities. Congressman Michele Bachmann had received many thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Frank Vennes, his family and lawyer/lobbyist G. Craig Howse. In a letter to the Office of Pardon Attorney dated Dec. 10, 2007, a year after she was elected, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann wrote requesting a presidential pardon for Frank Vennes Jr., she stated in that letter to then President George W. Bush that Fidelis Foundation was "backed" by Frank Vennes Jr. and Bachmann stated that a Presidential pardon of Vennes would be "good for society".:

“As a U.S. Representative, I am confident of Mr. Vennes’ successful rehabilitation and that a pardon will be good for the neediest of society,” Bachmann wrote. “Mr. Vennes is seeking a pardon so that he may be further used to help others. As I know from personal experience, Mr. Vennes has used his business position and success to fund hundreds of nonprofit organizations dedicated to helping the neediest in our society. The Fidelis Foundation, backed by Mr. Vennes, has directed over $10.7 million in total gifts in the last three years, and the Fidelis Foundation has ranked #6, #9 and #7 as the largest grant-making foundation in Minnesota over the past three years.”

The appearance of Vennes’ success was a mask for a tangled financial web of lies. As a member of the Teen Challenge board as well as the financial committee, Frank Vennes reviewed the investment proposal with Petters’ business. Following a federal investigation, by Julio La Rosa, Acting Special Agent in Charge of the St. Paul IRS field office, Petters was convicted by a jury of masterminding a scheme that cost investors more than $3.5 billion. Frank Vennes was a broker for investors in Petters’ companies. Petters functioned as a venture capitalist and by attracting investment from hedge funds and individuals. Petters acquired Sun Country Airlines and Polaroid Corporation which are now in bankruptcy. Pretending they were selling real items such as electronic equipment, Petters and his colleagues took investors money for their own gain.. In 2009 Thomas Petters was found guilty, in front of U.S. District Judge Richard Kyle, on all 20 counts of wire fraud, mail fraud, conspiracy and money laundering.

Specifically, Thomas Petters was found guilty on the following charges:

10 counts of wire fraud
3 counts of mail fraud
1 count of conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud
1 count of conspiracy to commit money laundering
5 five counts of money laundering.

Teen Challenge MN asserted the money invested in Petters Co. was given through a single contributor,the Fidelis Foundation. Fidelis Foundation is a public charity that acts as an investment agent on behalf of other public charities and nonprofits, including Teen Challenge. The Fidelis Foundation claims it is facing losses in the bankruptcy case of up to $27.6 million in Petters Co. notes. Fidelis Foundation, a Minnesota religious charity, had $27.6 million invested in eight promissory notes from Petters Co. backed by fictitious purchase orders. The Fidelis Foundation investment debt originally came from loans from the Harvest Foundation. The Harvest Foundation was the entity that initially loaned Frank Vennes $10,500,000 in 2001 and 2002.

Frank Vennes Jr. was a major financial contributor to Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann. Congresswoman Michele Bachmann quickly distanced herself and withdrew the letter of support for a presidential pardon she had written for Vennes claiming that she may have too hastily accepted his claims of redemption. But she was not the only politican to receive money from Frank Vennes. Minnesota politicians, who were scrambling to jettison campaign cash donated by those involved in the fraud scheme, included Norm Coleman, Amy Klobuchar, Tim Pawlenty, Jim Oberstar, and Elwyn Tinkenberg.

Thomas Petters had major holdings in Sun Country Airlines, Polaroid and other companies. As the criminal case developed, several of Petters' companies were put into receivership and 10 filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection (see list below).

Additional Information:

http://www.startribune.com/projects/30350074.html, Petters case back in court, By DAVID PHELPS, Star Tribune, Last update: March 15, 2011

http://www.startribune.com/business/33420309.html, Part 3: Tom Petters: Giving that hurts, Charities that invested with Tom Petters dropped the ball when it came to making wise choices with donated funds, experts say. By DAVID SHAFFER, Star Tribune, Last update: October 27, 2008 - 11:54 PM

http://www.startribune.com/business/46674572.html
Audit firm sued over Metro Gem assurances, June 1, 2009 Star Tribune
The suit claims auditors failed to examine the business dealings of Frank Vennes Jr.'s company.

http://minnesotaindependent.com/tag/frank-vennes ‘Dirty money’: MN Teen Challenge returned Bachmann’s contribution, By Karl Bremer, Minneosota Independent, 4/20/09

Vennes got pardon letter from Bachmann same month he saw Petters fraud,
By Chris Steller , Minnesota Independent, 1/11/09

Bachmann’s office claims she donated at least one Petters-tainted campaign contribution to charity, By Karl Bremer, Minnesota Independent, 10/16/08

http://www.startribune.com/business/29817604.html
Federal officials: Petters tied to multi-billion dollar fraud scheme
By David Phelp and Liz Fedor, Star Tribune, September 26, 2008

http://jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/080907/bus_189886989.shtml
Developer Kuhn sues business partner, Published Thursday, August 9, 2007 The Florida Times Union

http://www.startribune.com/business/30398069.html
Reformed convict part of Petters probe, Millionaire Frank Vennes Jr. once gave inspirational talks to prisoners but is now under investigation.
By Jon Tevlin, Star Tribune October 4, 2008 - 8:27 PM

http://www.rippleinstillwater.com/2010/11/michele-bachmanns-pardon-pal-frank.html Sunday, November 7, 2010 by Karl Bremer, Michele Bachmann's pardon pal Frank Vennes Jr. wants out of Petters Ponzi mess, Was post-election filing of plan to settle with investors politically motivated?

http://www.startribune.com/business/37369929.html Affidavit: Vennes knew of Petters fraud, David Phelps, Star Tribune, Jan. 10, 2009, Frank Vennes Jr., a Shoreview businessman who recruited investors for Tom Petters, found out something was amiss nine months before authorities moved in. Now they want access to his e-mail.

http://www.startribune.com/business/67235592.html Witnesses saw signs of fraud in 2000, Oct. 30, 2009, Star Tribune, David Phelps, With a subsidiary struggling to repay debt, Tom Petters wrote checks that bounced, GE exec Jack Marrone testified.

'Petters: 'It's not just me who knew', Nov. 4, 2009, Star Tribune, David Phelps, In a tape played for the jury, Tom Petters says he and his associates committed a fraud.

http://www.startribune.com/business/56779612.html Petters' woes haven't stopped his charity group, Sept. 2, 2009, Star Tribune, David Phelps, Separate from the businessman's fallen empire, the John T. Petters Foundation still awards scholarships -- it just keeps a lower profile.

http://www.startribune.com/business/40692097.html
Sketchy profile emerges for key player in Petters probe, March 3, 2009, David Phelps, A Los Angeles businessman who laundered money for Tom Petters' alleged Ponzi scheme may be in the government's witness security program.

http://www.startribune.com/business/35107584.html Sun Country seeks loan from a Petters company
Sun Country Airlines, in a motion filed Tuesday in U.S. Bankruptcy Court, is seeking court approval to obtain short-term financing from a Petters Aviation company to help the carrier pay its bills until next spring.

http://www.startribune.com/business/35107584.html Star Tribune, Nov. 25, 2008 Mansion of Petters associate for sale; proceeds will be held
Frank Vennes Jr., a Shorewood businessman, got court approval to sell his Florida mansion for $5.8 million. A three-bedroom house in Bismarck, N.D., has already sold.

http://www.startribune.com/business/33287804.html # Part 1: The collapse of the Petters empire, Star Tribune,October 26, 2008 David Phelps,
Tom Petters, accused of massive investment fraud, has been a salesman since his youth. "He could talk your wallet right out of your pocket," a former boss says.

http://www.startribune.com/business/33336049.html # Part 2: Burned: The human toll of the Petters case, Star Tribune, David Phelps,
Flight attendants, hedge funds and retirees are caught in the wake of the federal probe. "I'm trying not to cry," said a woman who may have lost $100,000 in savings.

http://www.startribune.com/business/33420309.html Oct. 27, 2008 # Part 3: Tom Petters: Giving that hurts, Star Tribune, David Phelps,
Charities that invested with Tom Petters dropped the ball when it came to making wise choices with donated funds, experts say.

http://www.startribune.com/business/33480259.html # Part 4: Petters fraud case shakes foundations, Star Tribune,October 29, 2008, David Phelps
The future of the Thomas J. Petters Family Foundation is in doubt, and Another named for his son is bracing for fallout from the investment fraud investigation.

These are the particulars of the Fidelis Foundation.

Fidelis Foundation
3189 Fernbrook Ln. N.
Plymouth, MN 55447-5320
Type of Grantmaker: Public charity
IRS Exemption Status: 501(c)(3)
Additional Descriptor: Organization that normally receives a substantial part of its support from a governmental unit or from the general public
Financial Data (yr. ended 9/30/07): Assets: $31,383,893; Total giving: $3,003,894
EIN: 300006857
990: 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002
Last Updated: 7/27/2008
Purpose and Activities: The foundation helps Christian ministries fulfill their missions by providing financial support for their programs, as well as resources to maximize their effectiveness.
Fields of Interest/Subjects: Christian agencies & churches
Officers and Directors: Note: An asterisk (*) following an individual's name indicates an officer who is also a trustee or director.
G. Craig Howse,* Chairperson
Joseph L. Smith,* President
Garth Warren, Vice President
L. John Buyse
Sam Crabtree
Bruce Pearson
Financial Data:
Year ended 9/30/07:
Revenue: $17,612,388
Assets: $31,383,893 (market value)
Gifts received: $13,743,931
Expenditures: $3,471,763
Total giving: $3,003,894
Program services expenses: $3,301,265
Giving activities include:
$3,003,894 for grants
$297,371 for foundation-administered programs
Additional Location Information:
County: Hennepin
Metropolitan area: Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI

It also appears that the Fidelis Foundation was once called the Harvest Foundation?

Harvest Foundation – IRS Form 990 Part IV – Other Notes and Loans Receivable
Borrower: Peters Company
Original Amount: 3,700,000
Interest Rate: 26.000000
Date of Note: 12/21/2001
Maturity Date: 12/31/2002
Repayment Terms: Note Due on 12/21/2002
Security Provided: Specific Merchandise
Ending Balance Due: $ 3,700,000.

Borrower: Peters Company
Original Amount: $3,640,000.
Interest Rate: 26.000000
Maturity Date: 12/31/2002
Repayment Terms: Note due on 12/31/2002
Security Provided: Specific Merchandise
Ending Balance Due: $3,640,000.

Borrower Peters Company
Original Amount: $3,160,000.
Interest Rate: 26.000000
Repayment Terms : Due on receipt of proceeds from sale of MDSE
Ending Balance Due $3,160,000.

Total Ending Other Notes and Loans Receivables $10,500,000.

This is a list of grants given by Fidelis Foundation

Fidelis Foundation
3180 Fernbrook Lane North
Plymouth, MN 55447
County: Hennepin
Phone: 763-201-1268
Program Description: Program’s purpose: The foundation provides resources to help ministries to maximize their effectiveness by providing strategic planning assistance, administrative, legal and tax services.
Areas of interest: Religion/Spiritual
Sample grants:
City Sites Ministry/$25,000
Crystal Evangelical – MN/MN/$10,000
Lighthouse Ministry – MN/MN/$10,000
Mission Moving Mountains – MN/MN/ $10,000
MN Family Institute/MN/$17,500
New Life Services/$20,000
Teen Challenge – MN/MN $100,000

This is a list of all Creditors of the Thomas Petters/Frank Vennes Ponzi Scheme
(Creditors Matrix with MN Bankruptcy Court) Case Number: 08-45257

AI Plus, Inc.
P.O. Box 385346
Bloomington, MN 55438

ARK DISCOVERY II LP

ARK ROYAL CAPITAL LLC

ARROWHEAD CAPITAL PARTNERS II LP

Acorn Capital Group, LLC

Apriven Partners, LP
Stoel Rives LLP, c/o Marc Al
33 South Sixth Street
Suite 4200
Minneapolis, MN 55402

ArrowHead Capital

ArrowHead Capital Management LLC
C/O James N Fry
601 Carlson Pkwy
Ste 1250
Minnetonka, MN 55305

Bank of America, N.A.
Miller Canfield Paddock & Stone, PLC
150 West Jefferson
Suite 2500
Detroit, MI 48226

C&C Capital, LLC
Stoel Rives LLP, c/o Marc Al
33 South Sixth Street
Suite 4200
Minneapolis, MN 55402

Elite Landings, LLC
2005 Cargo Road
Minneapolis, MN 55450
UNITED STATES

FREESTONE LOW VOLATILITY PARNTERS LP
C/O MARK R JACOBS
410 PARK AVE
NEW YORK, NY 10022

Fidelis Foundation

Fredrikson & Byron, P.A.
200 S 6th St Ste 4000
Minneapolis, MN 55402

Huron Consulting Group, Inc.

IOC Distribution, Inc.
P.O. Box 386112
Bloomington, MN 55438

Interlachen Harriet Investments Limited

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

Opportunity Finance, LLC
c/o Foley & Mansfield PLLP
250 Marquette Avenue
Suite 1200
Minneapolis, MN 55401

PETTERS AVIATION LLC
4400 BAKER RD
MINNETONKA, MN 55343

Palm Beach Finance Partners, L.P. and Palm Beach Finance II, L.P.
3601 PGA Blvd.
Suite 301
Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410

Petra (T) Fixed Income Fund, LLC
c/o Richard D. Anderson
2200 IDS Center
80 South 8th Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402

Petters Company, Inc.
4400 Baker Road
Minnetonka, MN 55343

Petters Group Worldwide, LLC
4400 Baker Road
Minnetonka, MN 55343

RHONE HOLDINGS II, LTD.
C/O JAMES M. JORISSEN
LEONARD, O'BRIEN, ET AL.
100 SOUTH FIFTH STREET
SUITE 2500
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402

RITCHIE CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LLC
C/O JAMES M. JORISSEN
LEONARD, O'BRIEN, ET AL.
100 SOUTH FIFTH STREET
SUITE 2500
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402

RITCHIE CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LTD.
C/O JAMES M. JORISSEN
LEONARD, O'BRIEN, ET AL.
100 SOUTH FIFTH STREET
SUITE 2500
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402

RITCHIE CAPITAL STRUCTURE ARBITRAGE TRADINGS, LTD.
C/O JAMES M. JORISSEN
LEONARD, O'BRIEN, ET AL.
100 SOUTH FIFTH STREET
SUITE 2500
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402

RITCHIE SPECIAL CREDIT INVESTMENTS, LTD.
C/O JAMES M. JORISSEN
LEONARD, O'BRIEN, ET AL.
100 SOUTH FIFTH STREET
SUITE 2500
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402

Taunton Ventures LP
C/O Paul Taunton
990 Deerbrook Dr
Chanhassen, MN 55317

True North Funding, LLC
Stoel Rives LLP, c/o Marc Al
33 South Sixth Street
Suite 4200
Minneapolis, MN 55402

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
C/O ROYLENE A. CHAMPEAUX, AUSA
600 U S COURTHOUSE
300 SOUTH FOURTH STREET
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55415

UNSECURED CREDITORS COMMITEE

Welsh Baker Road, LLC
c/o Briggs and Morgan, P.A.
80 South 8th Street
2200 IDS Center
Minneapolis, MN 55402

YORKVILLE INVESTMENT I, LLC
C/O JAMES M. JORISSEN
LEONARD, O'BRIEN, ET AL.
100 SOUTH FIFTH STREET
SUITE 2500
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402

Minneapolis
301 U.S. Courthouse
300 South Fourth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55415

200 WATER LLCCOMBINED MATRIX
202 WATER STREET #202
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331

200 WATER LLCSUPPLEMENTAL MATRIX
202 WATER STREET #202
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331

ACORN CAPITAL GROUP, LLC
TWO GREENWICH OFFICE PARK
GREENWICH, CT 06831

AD CAPITAL, LLC
UNIT 1006, 10TH FLOOR, BLOCK B
PHILEO DAMANSARA 1, JALAN 16/11
46350 PETALING JAYA.

AL'S ELECTRIC OF ST. CLOUD INC.
2616 NORTH COOPER AVE
PO BOX 933
ST. CLOUD, MN 56302

ALLIANCE COURIER
PO BOX 202092
BLOOMINGTON, MN 55420

AMERICAN EXPRESS
PO BOX 981535
EL PASO, TX 79998-1535

AMERICAN EXPRESS CO.
TRAVEL RELATED SERVICES CO. INC.
PO BOX 360001
FT. LAUDERDALE, FL 33336-0001

AMERIPRIDE
700 INDUSTRIAL BLVD, NE
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55413-2989
ATTN: ZLATA POZAIC

APRIVEN
5001 SPRING VALLEY ROAD
SUITE 290
DALLAS, TX 75244

AQUASCAPES, INC.
5705 COLFAX AVE S
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55419
ATTN: MARK TERSTEEG

ARK DISCOVERY II LP
GOLAN & CHRISTINE LLP
70 WEST MADISON STREET
STE 1500
CHICAGO IL 60602

ARK DISCOVERY II, LP
C/O RITCHIE CAPITAL MGMNT, LTD.
807 WARRENVILLE RD
SUITE 650
LISLE, IL 60532

ARK DISCOVERY II, LP
C/O RITCHIE CAPITAL MGMT, LLC
801 WARRENVILLE ROAD
LISLE, IL 60532

ARK ROYAL CAPITAL LLC
MS ALLISON HANSLIK
1616 S VOSS STE 430
HOUSTON TX 77057

ARK ROYAL MGMNT GROUP
C/O RITCHIE CAPITAL
801 WARRENVILLE RD
SUITE 650
LISLE, IL 60532

ARK ROYAL MGMT GROUP
40 WALL ST, 29TH FLOOR
NEW YORK, NY 10005

ARROWHEAD CAPITAL MANAGEMENT
601 CARLSON PARKWAY, SUITE 1250
MINNETONKA, MN 55305

AT&T MOBILITY
PO BOX 6463
CAROL STREEM, IL 60197-6463

ATT MOBILITY
PO BOX 6438
CAROL STREAM, IL 60197-6438

AWARE WEB SOLUTIONS
PO BOX 390236
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55435

BERRY COFFEE COMPANY
14825 MARTIN DRIVE
EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344-2009

BLACKWELL BURKE PA
431 SOUTH SEVENTH STREET
SUITE 2500
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55415

C&C CAPITAL, LLC
827 S. BRIDGEWATER PLACE
SUITE 101
EAGLE, ID 83616

C.I.T. LEASING

CAFFREY, JOE
6101 CHOWEN AVE SOUTH
EDINA, MN 55410

CALIBRAX CAPITAL
800 THIRD AVENUE, NINTH FLOOR
NEW YORK, NY 10022

CANANWILL INC
1000 MILWAUKEE AVE
GLENVIEW IL 60025

CANANWILL INC.
PO BOX 4795
CAROL STREAM, IL 60197-4795

CAPITAL BUILDERS-KIP EARDLEY
10615 PRESTBURY PLACE
106 SOUTH 840 EAST
SANDY, UT 84094-4434

CARLSON WAGONLIT TRAVEL
PO BOX 98953
CHICAGO, IL 60693

CENTERPOINT ENERGY
CHERYL WILLENBRING
PO BOX 59038
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55459-0038

CHARTER FIRST
1650 WEST COLLEGE DRIVE
SUITE 100
MARSHALL, MN 56258

CISION US, INC.
PO BOX 98869
CHICAGO, IL 98869

CITY OF MINNETONKA
14600 MINNETONKA BLVD
MINNETONKA, MN 55345

CMGRP, INC.
PO BOX 7247-6593
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19170-6953

COFACE NORTH AMERICA INC
PO BOX 2102
CRANBURY NY 08512

COMCAST
PO BOX 105184
ATLANTA, GA 30348-5184

CORNELL, KAHLER, SHIDELL & MAIR, PL
3570 LEXINGTON AVE N, SUITE 300
ST. PAUL, MN 55126

COURTRIGHT, FRANK
4400 BAKER ROAD
MINNETONKA, MN 55343

DEAN VLAHOS
294 GROVE LANE E
SUITE 113
WAYZATA, MN 55391

DEIKEL, THEODORE
1001 CALIFORNIA STREET
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94108

DELL MARKETING LP
PO BOX 802816
CHICAGO, IL 60680

DELOITTE TAX, LLP
13943 COLLECTIONS CENTER DRIVE
CHICAGO, IL 60693

DHL EXPRESS INC
LEGAL DEPT
PO BOX 670227
HOUSTON TX 77267-0227

DIVERSIFIED AIR, INC.
2230 WEST 94TH STREET
BLOOMINGTON, MN 55431

DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP
50 S 6TH STREET, SUITE 1500
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-1498

DS&B, LTD
SUITE 3000
222 SOUTH NINTH STREET
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-3340

DVS RENEWAL
PO BOX 64587
ST. PAUL, MN 55164-0587

Dell, Inc.
One Dell Way, RR1, MS 52
Round Rock, TX 78682

EDGE BROOK, INC.
294 GROVE LANE E
SUITE 113
WAYZATA, MN 55391

EDGE ONE CAPITAL
F/K/A ARK DISCOVERY FUND II, LP
CO/O RITCHIE CAPITAL MGMNT, LTD
807 WARRENVILLE RD, SUITE 650
LISLE, IL 60532

ELISTONE FUND
WINDWARD I, 2ND FLOOR
REGATTA OFFICE PARK, W WAY RD
PO BOX 31106 SMB
GR CAYMEN KY1-1205,CAYMEN ISL

FEDEX
PO BOX 94515
PALANTINE, IL 60094-4515

FETSCHERIN, MARC
VISITING SCHOLAR, HARVARD KENNEDY
ASIA PROGRAM
79 JOHN F. KENNEDY ST, BOX 130
CAMBRIDGE, MA 02138

FIDELIS FOUNDATION
3189 FERNBROOK LANE N
PLYMOUTH, MN 55447

FLAGLER CENTER PROPERTIES, LLP
505 SOUTH FLAGLER DRIVE
SUITE 1325
WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401

FREDRIKSON & BYRON
PO BOX 1484
MINNEAPOLIS,MN 55480-1484

FREE AGENT CONSULTING, LLC
RANDY LUSH
6140 LAWNDALE LANE N
PLYMOUTH, MN 55446

GLENN PLATT
3718 OXFORD-MIDDLETOWN RD
SOMERVILLE, OH 45064

GRAINGER
DEPT 865789739
PALANTINE, IL 60038-0001

HANNON SECURITY SERVICES, INC.
9036 GRAND AVE S
BLOOMINGTON, MN 55420

HARRIS HOMEYER CO
6800 FRANCE AVE S.
SUITE 145
EDINA, MN 55435

INDIANAPOLIS LIFE INSURANCE
PO BOX 14590
DES MOINES, IA 50306

INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS, INC.
PO BOX 270107
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55427-0107

INSIGHT PARTNERS LP
47 WINTER ST 8TH FLR
BOSTON MA 02108

INTERLACHEN HARRIET INV. LTD
C/O INTERLACHEN CAPITAL GROUP, L.P.
800 NICOLLET MALL
SUITE 2500
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402

INTERLACHEN HARRIET INVESTMENTS LTD
C/O INTERLACHEN CAPITAL GROUP, L.P.
800 NICOLLET MALL
SUITE 2500
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402

Internal Revenue Service
30 E. 7th St., Suite 1222, Stop 5700
St. Paul, MN 55101

JONES DAY
555 SOUTH FLOWER STREET
FIFTIETH FLOOR
LOS ANGELES, CA 90071

JORDAN, JOHN
4400 BAKER ROAD
MINNETONKA, MN 55343

JP MORGAN PRIVATE BANK
21 SOUTH CLARK STREET
42ND FLOOR, IL 1-0550
CHICAGO, IL 60603

JUVENILE DIABETES RESEARCH FOUNDATI
2626 EAST 82ND ST, SUITE 225
BLOOMINGTON, MN 55425

KANDARE, GREG
505 SOUTH FLAGLER DRIVE, SUITE 700
WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401

KEY EQUIPMENT FINANCE
PAYMENT PROCESSING
PO BOX 203901
HOUSTON, TX 77216

LANCELOT INVESTOR FUND L.P.
1033 SKOKIE BLVD, SUITE 620
NORTHBROOK, IL 60002

LYNDALE PLANT SERVICES
PO BOX 128
SANBORN, MN 56083

MASSINE, CAROLYN
4400 BAKER ROAD
MINNETONKA, MN 55343

MAYO CLINIC
PO BOX 4003
ROCHESTER, MN 55903-4003

METRO GEM CAPITAL I
C/O METRO GEM INC.
PO BOX 987
EXCELSIOR, MN 55337

METRO GEM INC.
948 TAHOE BLVD
INCLINE VILLAGE, NV 89451

METRO GEM INC.
PO BOX 97
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331

METRO GEM INC.
PO BOX 987
EXCELSIOR, MN 55331

MINNWEST BANK METRO
12011 BUSINESS PARK BLVD. N.
CHAMPLIN, MN 55316

MINUTEMAN PRESS
8043 LEWIS ROAD
GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55427

MN TEEN CHALLENGE
FIDELIS FOUNDATION
3189 FERNBROOK LANE N
PLYMOUTH, MN 55447

MN TEEN CHALLENGE
FRANK VENNES
FIDELIS FOUNDATION
3189 FERNBROOK LANE N
PLYMOUTH, MN 55447

NASH, TIFFANY
2630 ALVARADO LANE N
PLYMOUTH, MN 55447

NEAL, GERBER & EISENBERG, LLP
TWO NORTH LASALLE STREET
CHICAGO, IL 60602

NIPPON POLAROID KABUSHIKI KAISHA
TORANOMON MARIN BUILDING, 3-18-19
TORANOMON, MINATO-KU, TOKYO
105-0001, JAPAN

NORTHLAND MOBILE OIL CHANGE
3250 COUNTY ROAD 10 N
WATERTOWN, MN 55388

OFFICE MAX-A BOISE COMPANY
CHAR BENDICKSON
75 REMITTANCE DRIVE #2698
CHICAGO, IL 60675-2698

OFFICEMAX
263 SHUMAN BLVD
NAPERVILLE IL 60563-1255

OPPORTUNITY FINANCE, LLC
60 SOUTH 6TH STREET, STE 2540
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402

PALM BEACH FINANCE PARTNERS, L.P.
PALM BEACH FINANCE II, L.P.
3601 PGA BLVD., SUITE 301
PALM BEACH GARDENS, FL 33410

PALM BEACH FINANCE PARTNERS, LP
3601 PGA BLVD, SUITE 301
PALM BEACH GARDENS, FL 33410

PAUL HANNA MANAGEMENT, INC.
505 S FLAGLER DRIVE #1325
WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401

PBC-MPA LLC DBA PREFERRED OFFICES
ACCOUNTING DEPT.
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NW, SUITE 300
WASHINGTON, DC 20006

PETTERS AVIATION
4400 BAKER ROAD
MINNETONKA, MN 55343

PETTERS CAPITAL, LLC
4400 BAKER ROAD
MINNETONKA, MN 55343

PETTERS COMPANY, INC.
4400 BAKER ROAD
MINNETONKA, MN 55343

PETTERS GROUP WORLDWIDE, LLC
4400 BAKER ROAD
MINNETONKA, MN 55343

PETTERS INTERNATIONAL JAPAN

PETTERS, THOMAS J.
655 BUSHAWAY ROAD
WAYZATA, MN 55391

PIONEER SECURESHRED
155 IRVING AVE N
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55405

PLANTIQUE, INC.
PO BOX 541657
LAKE WORTH, FL 33454

PLANTRONICS SOUND INNOVATION
BANK OF AMERICA ILLINOIS LOCKBOX
PO BOX 98024
CHICAGO, IL 60693

PLOUMIDIS, MATINA
4400 BAKER ROAD
MINNETONKA, MN 55343

PLUNKETT'S PEST CONTROL
40 NE 52ND WAY
FRIDLEY, MN 55421

POLAROID CORPORATION
300 BAKER AVE., SUITE 330
CONCORD, MA 01742

PR NEWSWIRE, INC.
GPO BOX 5897
NEW YORK, NY 10087-5897

PREMIER CORPORATE SERVICES, INC.
590 PARK STREET
SUITE 6
ST. PAUL, MN 55103

PRIESTER AVIATION LLC
1061 S WOLF ROAD
WHEELING, IL 60090

PRIORITY COURIER EXPERTS
PO BOX 10699
ST. PAUL, MN 55110

QWEST
PO BOX 17360
DENVER, CO 80217

QWEST BUSINESS SERVICES
PO BOX 856169
LOUISVILLE, KY 40285-6169

RHONE HOLDINGS II, LTD.
C/O RITCHIE CAPITAL MGMNT, LLC
801 WARRENVILLE ROAD
LISLE, IL 60532

RHONE HOLDINGS II, LTD.
C/O RITCHIE CAPITAL MGMNT, LTD.
801 WARRENVILLE RD
SUITE 650
LISLE, IL 60532

RICHARD HETTLER
PO BOX 386225
MINNEAPOLIS MN 55438

RITCHIE CAP STRUCT ARBITRAGE TRAD
C/O RITCHIE CAPITAL MGMNT, LLC
801 WARRENVILLE ROAD
LISLE, IL 60532

RITCHIE CAPITAL
C/O RITCHIE CAPITAL MGMNT, LTD.
801 WARRENVILLE RD
SUITE 650
LISLE, IL 60532

RITCHIE CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LTD.
801 WARRENVILLE ROAD
SUITE 650
LISLE, IL 60532

RITCHIE SPECIAL CREDIT INVEST, LTD
C/O RITCHIE CAPITAL MGMNT, LLC
801 WARRENVILLE ROAD
LISLE, IL 60532

RITCHIE SPECIAL CREDIT INVESTMENTS
C/O RITCHIE CAPITAL
801 WARRENVILLE RD
SUITE 650
LISLE, IL 60532

SAM'S CLUB
PO BOX 9001907
LOUISVILLE, KY 40290-1907

SERVICEMASTER OF ST. CLOUD
PO BOX 608
ST. CLOUD, MN 56302

STAFFING PARTNERS FINANCIAL GROUP
5909 BAKER ROAD, SUITE 570
MINNETONKA, MN 55343

STANTON GROUP
3500 AMERICAN BLVD
BLOOMINGTON, MN 55431

STEEL PIER CAPITAL ADVISORS
800 THIRD AVENUE, 9TH FLOOR
NEW YORK, NY 10022

STOPPEL, TROY
11730 RUNNEL CIRCLE
EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55347

STRATEGIC EQUIPMENT
NW 5587
PO BOX 1450
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55485-5587

STREET FLEET
PO BOX 14947
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55414

T-MOBILE
PO BOX 790047
ST. LOUIS, MO 63179-0047

TAUNTON VENTURES, LP
9900 DEERBROOK DR
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317

TAUNTON VENTURES, LP
9900 DEERBROOK DR.
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317

THE HDH GROUP
US STEEL TOWER
600 GRANT STREET, SUITE 1100
PITTSBURG, PA 15219

THOMAS J. PETTERS
C/O JON HOPEMAN
FELHABER LARSON FENLON & VOGT
220 S 6TH ST STE 2200
MPLS MN 55402-4504

THOMAS PETTERS, INC.
4400 BAKER ROAD
MINNETONKA, MN 55343

TOSHIBA AMERICA BUSINESS SOLUTIONS
PO BOX 31001-0271
PASADENA, CA 91110-0271

TOSHIBA BUSINESS SOLUTIONS
13272 COLLECTION CENTER DRIVE
CHICAGO, IL 60693

TOSHIBA FINANCIAL SERVICES
PO BOX 790448
ST. LOUIS, MO 63179

TRADE LINKER INTERNATIONAL INC
COFACE N AMERICA INC
PO BOX 2102
CRANBURY NJ 08512

TREAT AMERICA FOOD SERVICES
8500 SHAWNEE MISSION PKWY #100
MERRIAM, KS 66202

TRUE NORTH FUNDING
827 BRIDGEWATER
SUITE 101
EAGLE, ID 83616

UPS-UNITED PARCEL SERVICE
LOCKBOX 577
CAROL STREAM, IL 60132-0577

US Trustee
1015 US Courthouse
300 S 4th St
Minneapolis, MN 55415

VERIFIED CREDENTIALS, INC.
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
20890 KENBRIDGE COURT
LAKEVILLE, MN 55044

VERIZON WIRELESS
PO BOX 790422
ST. LOUIS, MO 63179-0422

VLAHOS, DEAN AND MICHELLE
294 GROVE LANE E
SUITE 113
WAYZATA, MN 55391

VLAHOS, MICHELLE
294 GROVE LANE E
SUITE 113
WAYZATA, MN 55391

WASTE MANAGEMENT RMC
2421 W PEORIA AVE STE 110
PHOENIX AZ 85029

WASTE MANAGEMENT-SAVAGE
PO BOX 9001054
LOUISVILLE, KY 40290

WELSH BAKER ROAD
CM 9660
PO BOX 70870
ST. PAUL, MN 55170

XCEL ENERGY
PO BOX 9477
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55484-9477

XO
14239 COLLECTIONS CENTER DRIVE
CHICAGO, IL 60693

YORKVILLE INVESTMENT I, L.L.C.
C/O RITCHIE CAPITAL MGMNT, LTD.
801 WARRENVILLE RD
SUITE 650
LISLE, IL 60532

ZEPHYRHILLS
6661 DIXIE HWY
SUITE 4
LOUISVILLE, KY 40258

Andrew S Nicoll
Jenner & Block, LLP
330 North Wabash Avenue
Chicago, IL 60611-7603

Douglas A Kelley
Kelley & Wolter PA
Centre Village Offices
431 S 7th St, Suite 2530
Minneapolis, MN 55415

James A. Lodoen
Lindquist & Vennum P.L.L.P
4200 IDS Center
80 South Eight Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402

Michael S Terrien
Jenner & Block, LLP
330 North Wabash Avenue
Chicago, IL 60611-7603

Ronald R Peterson
Jenner & Block, LLP
330 North Wabash Avenue
Chicago, IL 60611-7603

Ronald R Peterson
Jenner & Block, LLP
330 North Wabash Avenue
Chicago, IL 60611-7603

d/b/a CONSOR Domain Assets, LLC
Henson & Efron, P.A.
220 South Sixth Street, Suite 1800
Minneapolis, MN 55402