[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 5]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 6036]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




        INTRODUCTION OF THE CHILD MEDICATION SAFETY ACT OF 2003

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. MAX BURNS

                               of georgia

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, March 11, 2003

  Mr. BURNS. Mr. Speaker, today I am pleased to introduce the Child 
Medication Safety Act of 2003. This legislation will address a 
significant problem facing children and their parents throughout the 
nation and provide parents with protections from being forced into 
making decisions about their child's health under duress.
  Last year, the House Government Reform Committee held a hearing 
exploring an issue that should shock all of us. Witnesses at this 
hearing testified that some school officials have taken it upon 
themselves to decide that a child needs to be placed on psychotropic 
drugs. These school officials are not licensed medical practitioners, 
and yet they have felt comfortable telling parents that their child 
must be on a psychotropic drug or their child would not be allowed to 
attend school any longer.
  This is unconscionable.
  No parent should ever be coerced by a teacher or principal or other 
school official to place their child on a psychotropic drug. No child 
should ever face the denial of educational services only because they 
are not taking a psychotropic drug.
  What are these psychotropic drugs? Ritalin, Adderall, and others are 
drugs that, when carefully prescribed by a licensed medical 
practitioner and carefully monitored in the administration, can help an 
individual with attention deficit disorder (ADD) or attention deficit-
hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) control the symptoms of their disease so 
that they can function. These can be miracle drugs for many people, and 
when properly diagnosed and properly administered, many people benefit 
greatly from these drugs.
  But psychotropic drugs also have a dark side. These drugs are listed 
on Schedule II of the Controlled Substances Act. Drugs are placed on 
Schedule II when: ``(A) The drug or other substance has a high 
potential for abuse, (B) The drug or other substance has a currently 
accepted medical use in treatment in the United States or a currently 
accepted medical use with severe restrictions; or (C) Abuse of the drug 
or other substances may lead to severe psychological or physical 
dependence.''
  Why are parents being forced by some schools to place their child on 
a drug that ``may lead to severe psychological or physical 
dependence?'' These are drugs that have a high potential for abuse. 
These are drugs that the DEA says have a high diversion rate. This is 
unreal.
  Teachers, principals, or other school personnel may mean well, and 
may think that they are doing the right thing, but most are not trained 
medical personnel and have absolutely no business forcing a parent to 
choose between their child's education and the potential harm of these 
drugs.
  Now I do not want to demonize these drugs. When a licensed medical 
practitioner properly diagnoses a child as needing these drugs, the 
administration of these drugs may be entirely appropriate and very 
beneficial. But these decisions must be made without coercion or threat 
of the denial of education.
  This Act has a simple message: states that take federal education 
funds must prevent school district personnel, teachers, principals, and 
other non-licensed medical professionals, from forcing a child to be on 
psychotropic drugs in order to attend school or receive services.
  This is a common sense piece of legislation, and I strongly encourage 
my colleagues to support this bill.

                          ____________________