NAMI and Censorship

A couple weeks later I got what would be only the first of many reports. Cholesterol 300. Triglycerides 700. Terrible! Outrageous! Much worse than my readings when I'd had my heart attack. "What does the doctor say about that?" I asked. "They'll test him again in three months," answered his personal service coordinator. "What kind of doctoring is that? That's not good enough," I replied and asked for an immediate retest, "And have someone be sure David's done the necessary overnight fast. That alone could skew the results." "Yes, sir," said the voice at the other end.

The retest gave even worse results followed by the same lame "...retest in three months" reply. I had done a little research of my own between the two tests. It seems that the marvelous new atypical medications significantly elevate both cholesterol and triglycerides in most patients who take them. David was on high levels of both Clozaril and Zyprexa. With our family history he could be destined for coronary disaster--especially as a two-pack a day inhaling smoker whose rumbling cough is frightening to witness. Why hadn't his psychiatrist of eight years warned us?

I brought David home, and took him to his mother's internist, Gilbert Ross, an old family friend, who agreed to be David's principal physician, if David agreed to do what he prescribed. David said, yes. Ross would offer his services pro bono because he didn't want to do the MediCal (Medicaid) paper work, and he knew that if I paid (as a third party) it might be used by the bureaucracy to jeopardize David's SSI and MediCal eligibility.

David's blood work came back from Ross' lab worse than ever, and this time I had been the fasting enforcer. Because of David's profile, Dr. Ross prescribed large daily doses of Lipitor, checked with MediCal and of course they refused to pay for it, so he gave David all the samples he had, and we began a six-week test. At the end of six weeks David's readings were normal! Cholesterol down from 320 to 184. Triglycerides down from 700-plus to 130! Ross wrote the paperwork, and now MediCal had to pay for the costly Lipitor. But what about all the others who are lucky enough to get the new breakthrough atypical antipsychotics? Who would advocate for them?

I called some top people at Los Angeles County Mental Health. No one wanted to reply for the record. Off the record I learned they knew of the problem, and that few if any clients got physicals. Who will pay was the question. And if they got physicals, given their below poverty level lifestyles, medical problems were bound to surface. Who will pay for the needed medical care? It was a question of reimbursement--plain and simple. "Has this non-productive population been written off as expendable? Are they, in reality, putting aside politically correct rhetoric, discard people?" I didn't expect an answer. And I got none.

As we read this issue about wellness we would do well to remember that treatment works and that recovery is possible, but never for a moment must we forget that enlightened social policy and dollars to do the job is what will make what is needed available. And, how do we get that? # # # We gratefully acknowledge the efforts of our co-editors Dede Ranahan, Diane Vines, Suzane Wilbur, and Ed Diksa who brought in a majority of our authors.

Publisher's Note by Dan E. Weisburd

"Mental Illness and The Law"

I remember we were taught in a Political Science class that we had a government of laws not men, and that it was a good thing. Men, with too much power, could act on a whim and do stuff that was detrimental to others-- actions that could be biased, unfair, demeaning, even deadly. Laws were enacted to protect us-- all of us. We the people were committed to justice and equality-- for everyone. No one was overlooked. Not here.

I liked the sound of that. It made sense, and it caused my boyish pride to swell with a deep inner feeling that I guess you could call patriotism, and that felt good. For me it brought the welcomed embrace of security, especially after cringing through a course in World History and being exposed to the indiscriminate violence and treachery that apparently, with the exception of brief pauses in time, has always stalked humankind.

Thank heaven our Founding Fathers, through an act of genius and enlightened self-interest, sought to preserve the blessings of liberty by carefully crafting a framework where law ruled and justice prevailed. The founders of the United States bestowed upon us a chance-- to alter the course of history -- a constitution, by which all laws would be tested.

Our actions regarding this inheritance will keep that chance alive, or let it slip away. Our inaction, our indifference, or our getting caught up in the din of the music of the moment in this age of an emerging technocracy that transports us through a delirium of disconnected facts posing as knowledge, could relegateconstitutional concerns to the "something quaint trash heap" of irrelevant past litter, like a discarded PC that hasn't enough RAM to run anything anymore.

How vigilant must we be to protect the priceless gift of freedom we have inherited? And how does that gift apply to persons who, through no fault of their own, have disorders of brain chemistry? What attention do they merit? Where on our newly acquired liquid crystal desktop do their rights reside?

Look deeply into the dark shadows that lie between the lines of so many of the articles in this compelling issue of The JOURNAL, and see for yourself if those questions cry out for enlightened involvement.