[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 151 (Tuesday, November 15, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H10185-H10187]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CHILD MEDICATION SAFETY ACT OF 2005
Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 1790) to protect children and their parents from being coerced
into administering a controlled substance or a psychotropic drug in
order to attend school, and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 1790
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Child Medication Safety Act
of 2005''.
SEC. 2. REQUIRED POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.
(a) In General.--As a condition of receiving funds under
any program or activity administered by the Secretary of
Education, not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, each State shall develop and implement
policies and procedures prohibiting school personnel from
requiring a child to obtain a prescription for substances
covered by section 202(c) of the Controlled Substances Act
(21 U.S.C. 812(c)) as a condition of attending school or
receiving services.
(b) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in subsection (a) shall
be construed to create a Federal prohibition against teachers
and other school personnel consulting or sharing classroom-
based observations with parents or guardians regarding a
student's academic performance or behavior in the classroom
or school, or regarding the need for evaluation for special
education or related services under section 612(a)(3) of the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C.
1412(a)(3)).
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Child.--The term ``child'' means any person within the
age limits for which the State provides free public
education.
(2) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the 50 States,
the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico.
SEC. 4. GAO STUDY AND REVIEW.
(a) Review.--The Comptroller General of the United States
shall conduct a review of--
(1) the variation among States in definitions of
psychotropic medication as used in regard to State
jurisdiction over public education;
(2) the prescription rates of medications used in public
schools to treat children diagnosed with attention deficit
disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and other
disorders or illnesses;
(3) which medications used to treat such children in public
schools are listed under the Controlled Substances Act; and
(4) which medications used to treat such children in public
schools are not listed under the Controlled Substances Act,
including the properties and effects of any such
[[Page H10186]]
medications and whether such medications have been considered
for listing under the Controlled Substances Act.
(b) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United
States shall prepare and submit a report that contains the
results of the review under subsection (a).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Minnesota (Mr. Kline) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kline).
General Leave
Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on H.R. 1790.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Minnesota?
There was no objection.
Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1790, the Child
Medication Safety Act. This common sense legislation will prevent
school personnel from forcing parents to medicate their children in
order to remain in the classroom.
I would first like to thank Chairman Boehner and Speaker Hastert for
their support of this legislation and staff members from my office and
the Education Committee for their hard work on this bipartisan bill.
In recent decades, a growing number of children have been diagnosed
with attention deficit disorder, ADD, or attention deficit
hyperactivity disorder, ADHD, and treated with medication such as
Ritalin or Adderall. When a licensed medical practitioner properly
diagnoses a child as needing these drugs, the administration of the
drugs may be beneficial. However, these medications also have the
potential for serious harm and abuse, especially for children who do
not need the medications.
Unfortunately, in some instances, school personnel freely offer
diagnoses for ADD and ADHD disorders and urge parents to obtain drug
treatment for their child. Sometimes, officials even attempt to force
parents into choosing between medicating their child and allowing that
child to remain in the classroom.
This is unconscionable. Parents should never be forced to medicate
their child against their will and better judgment in order to ensure
their child will receive educational services.
That is why I introduced the Child Medication Safety Act, a
straightforward, sensible approach to remedy this growing problem. The
Child Medication Safety Act calls on States to establish policies and
procedures prohibiting school personnel from forcing parents to place
their child on any drug intended to have an altering effect on
perception, emotion, or behavior in order to attend school.
The bill before the House today also includes a provision to ensure
that parents and teachers are not prohibited from having an open
dialogue about any academic or behavior-related needs of their child.
Teachers spend a great deal of time with students and observe a wide
variety of situations. These men and women have a valuable perspective
to offer to parents, and a candid dialogue between teachers and parents
should be encouraged, not stifled. The Child Medication Safety Act
makes clear that these constructive conversations can still take place.
This bill is not anti-school, anti-teacher, or anti-medication. This
bill is pro-children and pro-parent. The Child Medication Safety Act is
essential in protecting children and reinforcing parental control.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill that restores power to
parents and puts children first.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1790, entitled the Child
Medication Safety Act.
Later today, we will be considering a resolution. In fact, we just
finished that resolution where we are celebrating the 30th anniversary
of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. So it is fitting
that we consider this bill to reaffirm parents' rights on this day, and
I thank the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kline) for bringing this
legislation forward.
One of the most difficult decisions for parents is choosing the best
course of care for a child with mental health needs. Teachers and other
school personnel often play a very important role in bringing problems
to the attention of parents because children spend the majority of the
day in the classroom. They help to identity children's mental health
needs and behavioral problems and assist children and their families in
overcoming these barriers toward academic achievement.
Mental health professionals often work with teachers and other school
personnel to help create classroom environments that best support
children's mental health needs. The information that school personnel
provide to the health care professionals about a child's behavior in
the classroom is critical to an accurate diagnosis of a child's
emotional disorder, learning disability, or other disability. However,
the decision to medicate a child to treat mental health problems such
as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, better known as ADHD,
belongs solely to the parents. It is a matter between the child, his or
her parents, and qualified health and mental health care professionals.
That is what this suspension bill today is aimed at achieving.
I support this bill because it achieves this goal while especially
recognizing the critical role of teachers and other school personnel in
promoting positive child adjustment together with parents.
Mr. Speaker, our intent here today is not to cause school
administrators to become overly cautious or to discourage teachers in
aiding parents in the identification of children with serious emotional
disorders but to ensure that the decision to use medication to treat
serious problem behavior remains with the family.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield such time as he
may consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), chairman of the
Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the chance to be here to
support the bill offered by the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kline).
An identical bill to this passed the last Congress 425-1.
Now, one would wonder, why do we need to be here doing this? There
are children that do, in fact, have behavioral disorders, have mental
health issues, other issues, and certainly teachers and school
administrators have a role to play in terms of helping bring this to
the attention of parents and, in many cases, urging them to seek
qualified medical attention.
But what has come to our attention in a number of hearings that we
have had on this issue over the last 4 or 5 years are the number of
complaints from parents, grandparents and others where their children
were going to be denied admission to school or denied services unless
their child was put on medication.
As was noted by both of my colleagues earlier, that is a decision
that should be left to the parents, and only to the parents. Certainly,
school personnel and teachers can play a role in terms of helping the
parents understand what is happening in the school, helping the medical
professional in terms of what type of behavior is being exhibited, but,
at the end of the day, parents of children ought to have the right to
make that decision about whether their child should be on some
prescription drug.
{time} 1545
The bill is very simple, and I think it lays it out very clearly.
Last year when we reauthorized IDEA, the special ed law, we put
identical language in that law to protect the parents of special needs
children. What this does is covers the rest of the children. I think it
is a great step in the right direction, and I urge my colleagues to
support it.
Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I was delighted to participate in the
discussion and debate on this legislation. I want to urge my colleagues
to support and vote for H.R. 1790, the Child Medication Safety Act.
Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
[[Page H10187]]
Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume
only to thank my colleague from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) and, of course,
the chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Boehner), for their support on this very important bill and again to
encourage all of my colleagues to pass this pro-parent, pro-child bill.
Mr. MURPHY. Mr. Speaker, I want to convey my appreciation to my
distinguished colleague from Minnesota, Congressman John Kline, for his
deep concern about our Nation's youth. I thank him for offering this
legislation, and I also thank the distinguished Chairman of the
Education Committee for his work. Let me be clear that I support H.R.
1790.
Mr. Speaker, during my career in elected office, I have worked to
raise awareness that mental illnesses are real and they must be dealt
with. Patients diagnosed with psychological disorders, like depression,
have higher rates of chronic medical illness and use health care
services more often. Untreated depression costs employers more than $51
billion per year in absenteeism and lost productivity, plus even higher
medical and pharmaceutical costs. I have seen first-hand that
medication can, indeed, be very successful to depression patients,
especially when it is accompanied by proper psychotherapy by a trained
and licensed professional.
That notwithstanding, I am concerned about some schools coercing
parents to medicate their children without medical justification--
exactly what this legislation aims to prevent. When I saw child
patients as a psychologist, I was once strongly pressured by a school
administrator to recommend medication for students. That sort of
pressure is unethical, not to mention potentially leading to harm for
children.
While I support H.R. 1790, please allow me to raise one concern that
we should keep in mind as the bill moves forward. This bill would make
Federal education funding to States contingent on their establishing a
policy to prohibit school personnel from requiring a child to be
medicated in order to attend school. I am concerned that an unintended
consequence of this requirement would be that teachers will be less
likely to report legitimate mental health illnesses and needs out of a
fear of losing Federal funds.
The current language that would call for a GAO study does not address
this problem. I believe, instead that the study should focus on schools
that actively influence parents to have their children receive
controlled substances. I have shared language that provides this focus
with the author of the bill, and I know we can work together with our
colleagues to adjust the direction of the GAO study.
Ultimately, we should be doing all we can to encourage parents,
teachers and health personnel to communicate with each other whenever
there are concerns about children. Our job is to support that
communication in every way possible. Nothing in this bill should be
construed to limit that important relationship.
Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Cole of Oklahoma). The question is on
the motion offered by the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Kline) that the
House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 1790, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of
those present have voted in the affirmative.
Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this question will
be postponed.
____________________