What is a School-based Health Center (SBHC) ?

[Lliam]

Excerpts from the following short article:

Thanks to recent federal action, including the June 2022 passage of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act in Congress and quickly followed by millions of dollars in grants awarded to states by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for expansion of SBHCs.

School-based Health Centers are not your typical school-nurse model of care where minor illnesses and injuries are treated. SBHCs are intended by the Biden-Harris administration to be the “medical home” for your child, including primary health care services, reproductive counseling, dental care, and mental health counseling, replacing what the child would typically receive from providers outside of the school. Even worse, the Department of Education (DOE) has proposed changing the process for students with Individualized Education Plans (IEPs), removing the requirement for schools to receive parental consent before submitting Medicaid claims for reimbursement on behalf of their children.

When you combine the push for health care expansion within schools (a place where children are away from their parents) with the push for minor consent laws (nullifying the need for parents), the anti-parent agenda becomes clear.

https://standforhealthfreedom.com/blog/anti-parent/

[Daniela1982]

My sister's kids go to a school that has that. Both for dental and doctor. The kids get checked out once every few months. I can't believe they can afford to do that. You don't see that in Calif.

[Lliam]

Can they receive treatment without their parent's consent?

[Daniela1982]

That I don't know. But they are all in grade school so. . .

[TrueConfection]

One more method of bullying children into complying with group think. There are so many things wrong here that I don't even know where to start!

[TrueConfection]

Thank you for the MHO💕

[msc545]

I love how conservatives are actually against medical care for children because it might cost MONEY, but don't give a shit about literally a trillion $ a year for defense contractors.

[RealMarek]

Only the boomer conservatives care about the money. The rest of us object to violation of parental rights.

[msc545]

What violation of parental rights?

[RealMarek]

“…removing the requirement for schools to receive parental consent before submitting Medicaid claims for reimbursement on behalf of their children.” This opens the door to procedures/treatments without parental knowledge or consent.

[msc545]

There are certain procedures that children 14 and up can consent to without parents being aware or having to know. These include psychotherapy.

[msc545]

I think that's okay since the significant number of parents don't seem to believe in psychotherapy and don't find a necessity for it until after something really bad happens, like suicide.

[msc545]

Why is it you people don't have any problem with military spending? A lot of that spending represents peer corruption and theft on the part of defense contractors. Why isn't that a problem for you?

[RealMarek]

If the provision is limited very narrowly for cases where a child’s life is endangered or they are at risk of harming themselves or others, that’s one thing. The parents should be consulted even in these circumstances unless there is evidence that they could pose a danger to the child. If the new law gives schools the means to provide general medical or psychological care for students without parental consent, that is another matter entirely and it is one to which I would strongly object.

[RealMarek]

@msc545 I have a huge problem with military spending and adventurism. A lot of anti-establishment conservatives are extremely opposed to current foreign policy (basically, the Wolfowitz Doctrine) and military-industrial complex largesse, and not opposed to using government power/funds to address domestic problems. As for conservatives in the mainstream, the reason for their unquestioning support of military largesse has much to do with the fact that “cancel culture” was created within the conservative movement (way before the left adopted it) by William F. Buckley and the neoconservatives. For decades, the National Review ruthlessly purged and slandered any paleoconservatives or other anti-establishment figures from the right. I’ve often said when debating mainstream conservatives that their jingoistic faux patriotism and slavish support of the current elite’s wars is a glaring hypocrisy that makes them spiritually incompetent to lead. Furthermore, because the military adventurism has the single goal of enforcing the petrodollar, which is the source of strength for the current elite, it empowers the very elites who, regardless of party, despise common conservative people. As a result, even when they have electoral success, they are unable to change direction away from globalist neoliberalism or produce any cultural shift.

[RealMarek]

As you might imagine, coming to terms with having been played like a chump and contributed to massive corruption and millions of deaths from war and associated starvation for several decades creates extreme cognitive dissonance, especially for people who have been trained that supposed battlefield dominance is a reason for national pride. It’s easier, especially for the older conservatives, to pretend that Iraq really did have a dangerous WMD program, Ghadaffi was an incarnation of Hitler, etc., and that we definitely need to spend $1 trillion plus each year to “make the world safe for democracy.”

[msc545]

Thanks that is very informative.

[Lliam]

@RealMarek. 🎯🎯🎯

[RealMarek]

@msc545 You’re welcome.

[RealMarek]

Let me go out on a limb and predict these centers will be pushing “gender affirming care.”

[Lliam]

Oh, that's just a far right wing conspiracy theory. LOL

[RealMarek]

Yes of course, what was I thinking? Haha

[RealMarek]

Thanks for the MHO

[exitseven]

looks to me like another boondoggle that will cost millions and return little value for the taxpayer.

[Sevenpointfive]

i like that one taylor swift song "anti-hero"