Maryanne GodboldoI am saddened and outraged that this woman has had her Parental Rights violated by CPS for seeking a second opinion, then following the advice of a doctor to take her thirteen year old daughter off of Risperdal. Risperdal is a dangerous neuroleptic drug with serious "side-effects," and risks including disability and death.
I know the harm that can be done to a child who is given Risperdal...I also know there was a great deal of fraud and corruption involved with the marketing of this drug---Johnson & Johnson has paid massive fines for "off-label" marketing of the drug; and still managed to make obscene profits.
Make no mistake: what was done to Maryanne Godboldo, can happen to ANYONE. This mother was effectively deprived her Constitutional Rights as a parent. Parents have a Constitutional Right to make medical decisions, including mental health treatment, on behalf of their children. Why are Child Protective Service employees and mental health "professionals" being allowed to commit these crimes with seeming impunity? Neuroleptic drugs, like Risperdal, are teratogenic. These are drugs that literally cause the brain to shrink; simultaneously, the drugs alter the function of the endocrine, the cardio-vascular and the central nervous systems; causing dysfunction which may be permanent---even if the drugs are discontinued. Why are Government employees being allowed to violate Federal Law with seeming impunity? Forcing people to take drugs which may cause disability and death is a Human Rights violation, violates the Nuremberg Code, and it violates Individual Rights under the U.S. Constitution.
see: 4. Parham v. J.R58., 42 U4S 584, 602-606 (1979).
"This case involves parent’s rights to make medical decisions regarding their children’s mental health. The lower Court had ruled that Georgia’s statutory scheme of allowing children to be subject to treatment in the state’s mental health facilities violated the Constitution because it did not adequately protect children’s due process rights. The Supreme Court reversed this decision upholding the legal presumption that parents act in their children’s best interest. The Court ruled: Our jurisprudence historically has reflected Western civilization concepts of the family as a unit with broad parental authority over minor children. Our cases have consistently followed that course; our constitutional system long ago rejected any notion that a child is “the mere creature of the State” and, on the contrary, asserted that parents generally “have the right, coupled with the high duty"Parham v. J.R.
Maryanne Godboldo had her rights violated Under Color of Law---What was done in Detroit is happening across the Country; we are aware of this case simply because the woman chose to defend her child and her home when the Police, including a Swat Team and a TANK(?!?) arrived to take her child from her illegally. I say illegally because her Constitutional Rights as a parent were stripped from her without Procedural Due Process of Law.
Posts
