The TeenScreen Program is an extremely controversial mental health screening program developed by Columbia University’s Child Psychiatry Research Department. Their goal is to screen every school-aged child before graduation for suicide and "mental disorders" using a computer survey and then recommending those that are considered at risk for "treatment."

With daily reports of violence and even murder on the rise — on the surface this program sounds like a good thing. Could it be a program that could potentially reduce violence and deaths in our schools? Is TeenScreen really effective and able to achieve its stated goals? What kind of diagnosis and treatment methods are being recommended, and what are the long-term effects? What does screening mean to the future of our children?

Tested, Labeled and Drugged
A simple test is given to students and the results are scored using a screening checklist based on "symptoms", to determine what "disorders" the student is manifesting. These symptoms are the sole basis for any diagnosis of mental disease. The screening questions are specifically geared to match criteria from the APA's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fourth edition (DSM- IV), a manual that comprises all the "symptoms of mental diseases" that were voted into existence by the American Psychiatric Association.

An 84 - 94% Chance Your Child Will Incorrectly Be Determined to Have a Mental Illness
One of the things TeenScreen fails to openly disclose is that the percent of false-positives for their pencil and paper screening "tool" - called the Columbia Suicide Screen (CSS) - is 84%, which means that the chances of your child walking away falsely labeled as "suicidal" or "mentally ill" is 84%! Click to view PDF document — see page 7. The Diagnostic Predictive Scales (DPS) - the computer screening version - has false-positives up to 94% (Lucas et al., 2001). Any screening program with that high a rate of false positives is for all intents and purposes useless. In a study involving ten high schools, the staff reported losing confidence in the screen due to the large number of false positives (Hallfors et al., 2006). In fact, the author of the TeenScreen test, Dr. David Shaffer, acknowledges that his screening tool "would deliver many who were not at risk for suicide, and that could reduce the acceptability of a school-based prevention program."

Strong evidence suggests that the intended treatment for those so labeled is psychiatric drugging, using antidepressants and mood-altering drugs such as Ritalin, Xanax, Celexa, Paxil, Zoloft, Prozac, Thorazine, Luvox and other similar drugs which are known by the FDA (and the pharmaceutical companies) to cause depression, violence, suicide and homicide. In a recent survey of child psychiatrists it was discovered that 9 out of 10 children in their care were on at least one of these or similar drugs. Despite the recent FDA "black box" warnings, it is not unusual for a child to be put on two or more psychotropic antidepressant drugs — drugs that the FDA says can trigger suicidal thoughts. Do you want your child to be on these drugs with their potentially deadly side-effects?

Does Screening Work?
The Center for the Study and Prevention of Suicide, Rochester, NY released a study done earlier this year (2006) after their investigation into the TeenSceen surveys. They state: "Given the lack of an adequate evidence base regarding either the use or the utility of screening programs for preventing suicides, suicide attempts, or factors associated with suicide risk, efforts to use such programs should be regarded as investigational in nature." (Emphasis is theirs)

As far as the reliability of screening, in 2004, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) stated that they "found no evidence that screening for suicide risk reduces suicide attempts or mortality." Furthermore, they found "insufficient evidence that treatment of those at high risk reduces suicide attempts or mortality."

What the FDA has to say about the necessity of requiring its new "black box" warning on all antidepressant drugs: "Today's actions represent FDA's conclusions about the increased risk of suicidal thoughts and the necessary actions for physicians prescribing these antidepressant drugs and for the children and adolescents taking them. Our conclusions are based on the latest and best science. They reflect what we heard from our advisory committee last month, as well as what many members of the public have told us." — Dr. Lester M. Crawford, Acting FDA Commissioner.

Is Drugging Effective?
Here's a statistic that is rarely mentioned in news reports: In nearly every school shooting incident, the children and teens involved were already taking one or more psychiatric drugs or had just recently come off them, and had been under the care of a psychiatrist or mental health practitioner. The same is true for the majority of child and teen suicides — they were already on some type of psychiatric drug program that was supposed to be treating their "mental illness" yet they killed themselves anyway. Further exact statistics relating to the correlation between psychiatric drugs and suicide will be available on this site soon. Right now, however, the question must be asked: Are these drugs helping our children or are they actually creating the cases of extreme violence and suicide that are becoming more and more common? What are TeenScreen's actual statistics in the places the program has been adopted — are there fewer instances of violence and suicide?

TeenScreen's National Goal
TeenScreen’s primary goal is to set up their operations in every school district in the nation in order to reach each 13-16 year old before they have a chance to drop out of school. Their secondary target groups are the juvenile justice systems and runaway homes. They have admitted they are having problems in getting into primary care physicians offices and have that target saved for last.

Screening Costs
On their FAQ page TeenScreen says: "Columbia TeenScreen does not charge for its services. It offers consulatation, screening instruments, materials and technical assistance free of charge to qualifying communities." But there is a cost. TeenScreen states: "The cost of your program will vary depending on the staffing model you choose and the number of youth you screen. [...] Local programs must cover other costs involved with the screening, such as staffing and administration."

A study done by Shaffer and McGuire in 1999 gave the costs of screening at $37 per child for the initial screen and $250 per child that is referred for further assessment, which according to TeenSceen is 33% of all the children screened. Neither the exact formula or any details on calculating costs was included in their study.

The National Alliance on Mental Illness
Columbia University is not alone in its desire for TeenScreen’s universal acceptance and advance into the schools. The National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), billed as "the voice of the mentally ill," is collaborating on achieving that goal. NAMI is itself controversial because of extensive funding provided by multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical companies such as Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Eli Lilly and others. While NAMI claims to be a grassroots organization created to benefit those diagnosed as mentally ill, its critics claim that NAMI’s main activity is spreading fraudulent information about mental illness and lobbying on behalf of those same pharmaceutical companies — the companies which give NAMI millions in funding every year.

The Purpose of This Site
Our purpose in putting together this web site is to provide the truth on mental health screening programs by presenting information gathered from various sources on the Internet and helping you to connect-the-dots.

The widespread practice of labeling children as "mentally ill" and drugging them with potent, mind-altering psychiatric drugs is affecting our future and our children's future. With the data provided here, loving parents and concerned citizens will be able to prevail inspite of the enormous pressure to think that psychiatrists and "mental health experts" know better on how to care for our children than we do. Armed with the truth we can spare our children a drug-numbing childhood and a label that will follow them into a drug-consuming adulthood.

We will attempt to provide answers to the following questions:
• What is the link between psychiatry, drugs and suicide?
• What is the truth on the development of the screening tools used for "diagnosis"?
• What is the link between big PR firms and the sudden credibility of these programs?
• Who are the people behind these programs and where do their interests really lie?

Covering their tracks by deleting or altering pages
You may occasionally notice on your travels through our site that we have provided screen captures of certain TeenScreen or related web pages. We have saved these images of the pages because we have come to find out that once we or others start making a fuss over certain unsavory details about TeenScreen or their supporters, the people in charge of these sites will actually change the data or delete the page to avoid bad publicity. We want you to have the facts. We will attempt to let you know when any changes have occurred to help make clear the actual PR campaigns involved.

Your input is valuable
If you are aware of any disturbing incidents regarding TeenScreen in your area, please drop us a line and let us know what's happening. We will treat your information confidentially and will only publish it with your consent.