Current Inks

Tennessee School Vouchers Will Ruin Private Schools

December 5, 2023 Eric Potter Current Inks School Vouchers, Tennessee Legislation

Very often, pausing to listen to others with differing views than ours provides much needed insight into the plans of our government and influencers. By listening to Dr. Lauren Fox from the Public School Forum of North Carolina in episode #227 of their Education Matters podcast, we get a good picture of where vouchers will likely lead our Tennessee system if passed in 2024. This highlighted podcast episode reflects the perspective of public-school advocates in North Carolina. North Carolina’s history of vouchers beginning in 2013 offers us a crystal ball glimpse into where educational bureaucrats and policy makers will take the “no strings” vouchers of 2024’s legislative session and run with them in 2025 and beyond.

Background: North Carolina started vouchers in 2013 and have adapted the regulations over the ensuing years as noted in this podcast, particularly in terms of who is eligible for the program. Like other state voucher programs, parents can elect to remove their children from their local public school and receive a specified amount of money to use for private school enrollment.

Dr. Fox brings up the concerns of public-school advocates in regards to how vouchers are being implemented in North Carolina. Such advocates are working to address their concerns and offer insights into the directions that public policy surrounding school vouches can go after initial legislation is passed. Whether or not we agree with her concerns as legitimate is less important than the fact that the education establishment wants accountability for these programs to fix what they perceive as problems. If they get their way, these vouchers become snares for the schools that accept the funds and the students who use them once such “accountability” is added.

You can listen to the podcast link below on their website or various podcasting services, but here is a summary of their concerns which we need to be aware of. (My immediate focus is on the first half of podcast #227, interviewing Dr. Lauren Fox, Senior Director of Policy and Research from Public School Forum of North Carolina.)

Private schools accepting voucher money are only required to administer and report standardized test scores if they accept over a specified number of voucher students. She advocates for greater transparency than the current 3% of private schools in North Carolina that currently have to comply with this requirement. She would prefer that all schools accepting voucher money would have to administer state standardized tests and report.

Implications: If these views prevail, private schools accepting voucher funds would be required to administer the same state standardized tests as public schools. These are the same tests that many parents wish to forgo due to their being poor predictors of performance as well as being used for data mining of our children’s preferences. Public schools collect and sell data gathered from these standardized tests to company’s without parental consent. Many concerned parents would prefer to keep their children’s information private.

While it is only mentioned once in a brief comment, she seems bothered that parochial, i.e. religious schools, are receiving state voucher funding. Later, she expresses concerns that private schools can deny a student application for a variety of reasons that might be considered discriminatory. She prefers that schools not be allowed to discriminate in any way based on worldviews or sexuality.

Implications: If others who share such views with Dr. Fox had their way, private schools accepting voucher money would not be allow to refused acceptance of students whose religious views contrasted with the school’s principles. Accepting public funds means accepting government rules regarding discrimination.

Dr. Fox provides some numbers in regards to North Carolina’s proposed changes to its voucher program. The estimate is for a cost of 4 billion dollars over 10 years, meaning about 400 million dollars per year. She explains that currently voucher funds are only available if the student was previously enrolled in public school, but the proposed new proposal would be open to all regardless of prior enrollment. She describes a hypothetical situation in which ½ of the students receiving vouchers came from public schools, thus shifting 200 million per year out of the public school system. She sees this as very detrimental to public schools, especially in rural areas.

Implications: While the debate over whether more money poured into education does or does not actually improve educational outcomes will rage on, the reality of the large sums of money at stake is unavoidable. With that much money on the table, teacher’s union, local school districts, and many other interests will be clamoring for a piece of the pie. Not all of these will be looking out for the best interests of the children. This will make a great excuse for more governmental oversight. Government bureaucracy will be needed to ensure it is spent wisely. Costs will go up and more regulations will make it more expensive for private schools to participate. Private school costs will go up just like higher education costs increased with the federal government getting involved in college loans.

Bullets:

Public-school advocates like Dr. Lauren Fox from the Public School Forum of North Carolina do not hide their concerns or their intentions for shaping school voucher policies in their states. If such public-school advocates get their way in shaping the implementation of school voucher programs, we could see the following adverse effects on our children in the wider educational system.

Whereas only public schools are currently required to administer and to report standardized testing, all schools accepting vouchers could be compelled to do so. This standardized testing system then erodes the privacy of our children through its data reporting systems.
Whereas religiously oriented schools now have freedom to deny acceptance based on religious viewpoints, all such schools accepting vouchers could be restricted from continuing this practice. No longer could religious views or views regarding sexuality be a legitimate basis for denying admittance to a school
Whereas private schools currently operate without publicly reported oversight but instead as private businesses, all such schools accepting vouchers could be compelled to report not only test scores but other financial transactions. Besides the privacy issues involved, the costs of such reporting and the oversight it entails would increase the costs of private school operations higher.

While those promoting school vouchers in Tennessee will attempt to deny these realities, the same forces are at work in Tennessee as in North Carolina. With the dollar amounts involved in these programs, we always find strings. At first, the strings may be almost imperceptible to the undiscerning eye. Over time, the faint fishing lines become thicker and thicker, first becoming ropes, then becoming chains. The educational establishment will keep working until the private schools and all their students are chained to the same broken systems and regulations under which the failing public-schools now operate.

Now is the time to reject the school voucher system. We must not take the bait if we hope to avoid the eventual assimilation of the private school system into the public system. Take a few minutes to contact your legislators or those on the education committees now to let them know your opposition to this proposed legislation.

Senate Education Committee:

https://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/CommitteeInfo/SenateComm.aspx?ga=113&committeekey=630000

House Education Committee:

https://www.capitol.tn.gov/house/archives/107GA/committees/education.html

Education Mattes Podcast. Public School Forum of North Carolina. Accessed 12/3/23. Go to this site and choose episode #227.

Education Matters

Present School Shootings and Gun Rights

September 20, 2023 Eric Potter Current Inks Gun Rights, School

(Written before 2023 Tennessee Special Session, but will apply to January 2024 Legislative Session)

Middle Tennessee drank from a bitter cup in 2023, experiencing what other communities have previously endured with the tragedy of a school shooting. While we may never know the full story of the shooter’s angst and anger, we know that lives were taken and we know that families continue to mourn. We mourn with them, and extend our sympathy to their pain. As a community and state, we collectively look for solutions to prevent such a tragedy from occurring again. Some call for gun control as the solution. Some call for more gun freedoms as the solution. The spectrum of proposed solutions extends in multiple directions from this overly simplistic dichotomy as everyone wants the same thing, no more school shootings.

In response, our governor, Bill Lee, called a Special Session of the legislature to address such an extraordinary situation. As with the majority of politicians, he and others in his camp believe that government intervention offers the best opportunity for prevention. No one wants to be accused of doing nothing as the potential for another loss of life could be in the making. Neither does anyone want to react rashly and somehow lead to either similar or different harms to our children in the school system. In the midst of these competing priorities and inclinations the state legislators find themselves as we, the people of Tennessee, watch and attempt to avoid further harm from resulting.

With hopes to come out of this tragedy in a better position to protect lives than when we entered it, I offer the application of principles in guiding you and our legislators towards real solutions. I am not privy to any special knowledge of the events nor in any position to implement significant changes at schools. However, I am a citizen of this state who directly or indirectly could be impacted by unwise legislation and who wants my children and your children to grow safely into old age rather than meeting their demise at the hands of an vengeful shooter.

Without special insight or knowledge and without influence, I might choose to focus energy elsewhere, but I want each of you to grow in your wisdom so that we as a people can influence those who have the knowledge and/or the power.???? In order to do so, I offer principles from one of our core values and another principle of general wisdom as they can be applied to the question of “what do we do now?” Those principles are first noted in the core values promoted on this site before suggesting they be applied to the school shooter and its aftermath. They include 1) Truth Seeking and 2) Considering the ramifications of our response.

First, in facing the choices of how we or our leaders should respond we must seek truth. Partial truth risks inadequate or even harmful responses. We should ask ourselves and others for a full picture of not only what happened that tragic day but also for a full picture of the wider situation of school safety. Countless questions need answering regarding what led a young woman to plan the murder of those she gunned down. We don’t have those answers and are thus hindered in our response. We know a good deal about the actual events themselves from security cameras and can greatly appreciate the rapid response of the police force in limiting further loss of life. On other hand we don’t know whether others with guns would or would not have bought this tragedy to an end even sooner, but that has been the case with active shooters in other situations.

With the tragedy in mind, we now hear calls for various responses to the question of school safety. The various responses from both sides of the political spectrum which get the most attention repeat simplistic responses of either more guns or less guns. We must again seek the whole truth by methodically evaluating what we do know about the safety of schools. We must better understand the full problem which encompasses multiple issues like bullying, mental health, school facility locks and alarms, staff training, the juvenile justice system, and more. The breadth and depth of the issues leading to this shooting seem difficult to exhaustively comprehend but we must do our best before taking a reflexive action.

We must submit to this first principle of truth seeking or risk a worse response being implemented.

Second, we must consider all ramifications of the response or responses we choose whether individually or collectively. Every choice we make first focuses on a primary outcome. In this case, we all agree that we want children to be safe from armed attackers. If it were that simple, there would be no debate and no need for this essay. While the primary outcome may be first in view, rarely do our choices impact solely on the primary outcome without impacting secondary and tertiary outcomes. This is especially true when legislation is enacted which applies across hundreds of schools across our state and thousands of children in those schools. While situations do arise which necessitate such broad and sweeping actions, still we must consider those secondary impacts.

Some specific questions include the following:

Will more guns on school campus truly decrease the occurrence of school violence?

Will the mental health of children be adversely affected by the presence of guns?

Will more locks and security features interfere with any other aspects of school safety?

Will more money for counselors and mental health professionals bring more federal control of state schools?

Will the worldviews of mental health professionals conflict with the views of parents?

Will stricter gun laws interfere with constitutional freedoms?

Will limits on freedoms lead to other societal adverse effects down the road?

I could go on, but the point is made that legislative short-sighted reflexes which echo the reflexive voices of the media arising from the extremes of political opinion may cause us to miss the bigger picture, creating either a larger problem than we began with or new problems which did not exist prior to our response. We must seek as much truth regarding the problem before proposing a solution. We must then consider the full ramifications of that solution. While many like Governor Bill Lee apparently believe that me must act quickly with a Special Session (and many in the legislature seem to agree despite their claims to the contrary), the legislature is moving forward in the dark and our children and our freedoms are at risk when they needlessly stumble.

Ask yourself these and other questions. Ask our legislators to answer these questions. Demand an answer from yourself and from them.

Sexual Education According to the Elite

September 13, 2023 Eric Potter Current Inks

“We are not in Kansas anymore”

We want to think the best of others, to trust what they say and give them the benefit of the doubt. That works well when we share similar values and in personal relationships in which trust has been built over time. This approach preserves family relationships and friendships. However, large institutions or large swaths of a population like the “ruling elites” do not deserve such a benefit from us. We do not know them personally nor do we have the same foundational worldview as can be seen in the ideals they set forth for people to follow. In fact, it is dangerous to the health of our families and society to be anything but skeptical about their intentions. This is very clearly seen in the movement promoting the “sexual rights of children,” yes children. We must not foolishly believe their attempts to sound noble instead recognizing their vain ideology and employing covenantal thinking in combating their attempts to further corrupt God’s image bearers.

I urge you to read the attached article Sexual Education According to the Elite with eyes wide open. In their own words and written plans, these entities both institutional and personal are pushing for further corruption of your children. Because of their false ideologies, those pushing for these supposed rights are proud of their efforts, shameless before the face of God.

However, reading is not enough as you will be tempted to dismiss the Epoch Times article as blowing things out of proportion or as taking the statements out of context. You will want to brush aside the concerns of pedophilia and sexualizing children as conspiracy theories which no normal person in the world would ever want to actually do. A quick review of THIS LINK from The Children’s Center for Psychiatry, Psychology, & Related Services should dispel any notion that our society has a big problem. With 3.5 million children between 8^th and 11^th grade reporting sexual contact from an adult during a survey, how can anyone deny that the problem is more than conspiracy theory. While the majority of adults in our school system do not hold such views, a considerable number do (Schlitz 2017). While the left-leaning Wikipedia is not my favorite source, they give one more reason to read with eyes wide open as even they have to acknowledge that a significant number of organizations across the world do advocate for children sexual rights with adults (LINK).

To fully encourage you to read the Epoch Times article and to do so with open eyes, I will offer a few glimpses of the challenges they present. Starting at the 30-thousand-foot view, they boil the international effort down into two foci, one promoting comprehensive sex education and the other that promotes the view that children are sexual beings with rights to sexual pleasure. While either effort by various organizations is clearly detrimental to children and to parental rights, the combination synergizes to create an even more dangerous situation in which children are exposed to sexual topics before they are emotionally able to handle them and granted freedom to make their own choices out from under the oversight of their parents.

The advocates for children’s sexual rights have canned responses to those who object to their plans. As anyone expresses concern that these efforts will begin to engage in earlier sexual activity and experience adverse consequences, those pushing sex education will claim that such work delays sexual activity and increases the practice of safe sex. (Statistics noted later in the Epoch Times article refute this assertion.) Further, they present themselves as caring advocates of children in general although they have little to no respect for the parental role of protection for the individual child in the family context. While I cannot speak to the intentions of every person in every organization that promotes sex education, the overall patterns of the movement do not encourage me to trust them. Their ideological worldview includes the belief that sex before marriage is optimal and sex with and for children can be freeing. In order to do so, they ignore any categories of sin and redefine what it means to protect the weak- among other ideological choices.

While they may give lip service to preventing detrimental affects to children who have sex, these are usually such things as prevention of STD’s. How they plan to make children willing to consent to such inappropriate age-related behavior includes destroying family relationships and changing the definition of mental health in children- i.e. normalizing trans-sexual behavior and desire. Their ideology holds to a new truth of their own making, rejecting Biblical morays of any kind.

The United Nations acts as primary driver for much of this effort and guides the direction with a document from its U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) called “International Technical Guidance on Sexual Education.” Working with the World Health Organization and the U.N. Women and the U.N. Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the want to “’equip children and young people’ with knowledge and to empower them to ‘develop respectful social and sexual relationships.’” The United Nations wants these policies to be enforced upon all children in all nations as one of their reports cited by the Epoch Times explains.

While proclaiming that they want to promote the well-being of children across the world, the toolkit they offer “teaches that some children aren’t “comfortable being identified as male or female based on their sex organs.” They teach the children that they have to right to consent or not consent to sexual activity and this activity may occur in the settings of dating, marriage, or even “commercial sex work”. Again, these values are far from being consistent with nearly all the readers of this article.

While the United Nations promotes this work of sex education, the International Planned Parenthood Foundation (IPPF) works with other organizations to “frame ‘child sexual rights’ as ‘human rights.’” They base their declaration partly from the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN CRC). They view children as having an “evolving capacity” to make decisions for themselves. A review and deeper understanding of the UN CRC reveals that the Elites in charge of that effort do not believe parents have children’s best interest in mind and the government should enforce the children’s rights to autonomous decisions. The IPPF document states that “Young people are sexual beings,” and “They have sexual needs, desires, fantasies, and dreams” on its opening page. “It asserts children can make decisions about sex based on their maturity, free from parental ‘interference.’”

At what point in the history of the IPPF, should it be given any benefit of the doubt based on its ongoing practice of encouraging sex outside marriage and abortion. Its founder advocated the use of abortion against other races. It continues to promote abortion up to and after the birth of a child. The Epoch Times article also shared the experience of April Gallart while lobbying the UN. She found resistance to parental rights their including the intense effort to remove the words “mother and father” from a document. The UN’s proclamations promoting children’s rights to have sex at any age is exactly what it says without the taint of any conspiracy theories.

At this point, you cannot click away and hide your eyes from the dramatic effort by Elites in the United Nations, the World Health Organization, and other groups to remake our children into sexual beings unhindered by Biblical morals. If there are no limits, then all, including pedophilia is permissible. Trauma rebranded as Rights will make for a docile society willing to go along to survive the next day while at the same time fulfilling the deviant desires of wicked adults.

We are not in Kansas anymore and should not keep pretending that this is really happening. Pray for wisdom and opportunity. Speak truth to your neighbors and our leaders. Reject the claims that they are just wanting the best for our children. Protect your children and grandchildren. God REQUIRES it.

Primary Article:

Global Network Promotes “Sexual Rights” for Children. (n.d.). The Epoch Times. Retrieved September 3, 2023, from https://www.theepochtimes.com/article/global-network-promotes-sexual-rights-for-children-5455257 Accessed September 3, 2023.

Other citations:

Schiltz, R. (2017, July 11). Sexual Abuse by Teachers is on the Rise – The Children’s Center for Psychiatry, Delray Beach, FL. The Children’s Center for Psychiatry, Psychology, & Related Services. https://childrenstreatmentcenter.com/sexual-abuse-teachers/ Accessed September 3, 2023.

List of pedophile advocacy organizations. (2022, April 10). Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pedophile_advocacy_organizations

Politician’s Views of Mental Health Crisis

September 6, 2023 Eric Potter Current Inks Government, Mental Health

Today, people from a variety of backgrounds recognize that we have a deteriorating mental health problem in our society which began before 2020, but has been exacerbated by it. While many will debate the causes, severity, and details of this problem, most admit that we live in an age of heightened sadness and anxiety expressed in a variety of symptoms and diagnoses. We can look together at statistics further below with some general agreement, but as soon as solutions are offered, divergences begin. We may agree that something must change, but how we view the problem determines how we believe that we should respond. While we may be able to address our own or our family’s mental health issues, the collective societal response is best exemplified in the political proposals of those in leadership across various offices. These legislative proposals concerning mental health care demonstrate our leaders fundamentally flawed beliefs about the mental health problem.

Before considering the statistics, my simple definition of mental health according to worldly standards includes someone feeling good about life, having the absence of significant “dis”-ease which hinders functionality and productivity in daily life. This plays out not as a complete absence of emotional fluctuations as with a science fiction robot. Instead mental health is viewed as an spectrum of emotions which includes some degrees of sadness, anxiousness, joy, mourning, and other emotions. The intensities match the context of the situation, and their duration is appropriate for the circumstances without significantly interfering with life functions.

While the world’s general view of mental health tends towards a focus on individual’s absence of “dis”-ease, a Biblical view of health informed by Biblical support emphasizes a Hebrew term “shalom”. Shalom encompasses a more wholistic and positive view of health. It includes physical and mental/spiritual health as well as relational health with God and with other people. This shalom focuses on the presence of “well-being” rather than just the absence of negative symptoms. (for a further explanation of shalom and other Biblical words regarding health, see prior essay).

The world’s approach is to aim against “dis”-ease, rather than towards shalom. If we as Christians believe that God’s goal of mental health for us should be shalom for people as both individuals and in community, then we should evaluate whether the approach taken by the world and by our governmental leaders will lead to shalom or away from it.

Assuming for the moment that the methods of assessment by the authors of the following surveys and studies are valid and portray a relatively accurate picture of the state of mental health in our nation, we see that we truly have a problem. Elsewhere we can address the shortcomings of these methods and the factors they measured, but for now let’s take them at their face value. A December 2022 edition of the journal Pediatrics reported on their comparison of mental health diagnoses reported in primary care between the year prior to COVID beginning in February of 2020 and two periods after this watershed in 2020 and 2021. They found that eating disorder diagnoses in children almost doubled from 9.3 visits per 1000 patients per year to 18.3. They also found the overall annualized mood disorder visits increased from 65.3 per 1000 patients per year to 94.0. Basically, this second statistic indicates that almost 1 in 10 visits in pediatric primary care were for a mood related symptom.

In another study by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention reported by the Pew Center for Research (LINK) in 2021, high school students were evaluated on their self-reports of mental health symptoms. In public and private high schools, 37% reported that their mental health was not good during the pandemic and 44% reported that in the prior year, they had experienced sufficient sadness or hopelessness for 2 weeks or more which led to their stopping some activity.

From the website by the National Alliance on Mental Health (LINK), we find further disturbing statistics. Their “Mental Health by the Numbers” paint enough of a picture that we don’t need to go any deeper. They list the following in a longer list on their site:

About 1 in 5 adults in the U.S. experience some mental illness each year.
About 1 in 6 children between the ages of 6 and 17 years experience mental illness each year.
For children aged 10 to 14 years, suicide is the second leading cause of death.

Numbers like these can tell us that a problem exists and that the current response does not appear adequate. However, they do not necessarily explain how to change this situation. A much deeper look into the root causes of this situation would be needed and is not in the direct scope of this essay. Neither will I provide support for my belief that there will always be some prevalence of mental “dis”-ease in a fallen world where sin is still rampant. Until the New Heavens and New Earth, there will always be some degree of poor mental health. For now we turn our attention to the response of our political leaders and what their response tells us about their view of the problem and its roots.

We can gain a sense of how our Tennessee legislators view mental health by considering a few of the recent bills they proposed in the 2023 Special Session called by Governor Bill Lee for August of 2023. This session is now adjourned and the following bills were not passed, but these bills can be returned or refiled to committee and the Senate or House floor for consideration in the next session in January of 2024. We as a state still must contend with these bills for better or worse and with the worldview foundations of our legislators which underlie these bills’ proposals.

We look first at SB7079 and its companion bill in the state House, HB7035 which proposed loan repayment incentives to mental health professional students in exchange for a required number of years of their service in Tennessee. The beliefs or assumptions of legislators can be deduced from this proposal. They appear to believe that we have a shortage of mental health providers and by raising that number, we can improve mental health. They appear to believe that experts in mental health can alleviate the problem. They appear to believe that more money spent on these experts will alleviate the problem. By not mentioning any other potential resources like family, church, or community, they suggest a belief that these factors are not important especially when considering that no other legislation in the special session addressed those factors. They appear to believe that the views of mental health professionals, which in general conflict with the previously stated Biblical view of health, can solve the problem. I believe these are plausible inferences to make from their proposed bill.

We look next at SB 7032and HB 7066 which proposed the coverage of at least three mental health telemedicine visits to youth. Besides many of the same appearances gleaned from the previous bill, we can add a few more. The legislators appear to believe that children should be able to freely access these services without parental involvement as that is not mentioned in the bill. The bill has no mention of the ability of parents to oversee either the individual mental health care of their children, nor have any say in the collective work of that system. Beyond that, while the bill has possible provisions for further visits beyond three initial visits, the legislators appear to believe that short term interventions can be sufficient for such chronic issues. That is a debatable opinion and this bill, if ever passed, will undermine parental rights.

We next look at SB 7016 and HB 7076 which proposed adding 1 school counselor per every 250 students in the public school system. This would add over 3800 new counseling positions in 1800 schools across the state at a potential cost of about 280 million dollars. Again we see the appearance that legislators believe mental health experts know best for our children and should have access to children potentially without parental involvement or even parental awareness at times. They also appear to believe that schools are a good location for such services. This fits with the central role school frequently plays in the life of families, shaping their activities and relationships around schools’ calendars and connections. (This dovetails with the mindset of the federal government since the schools receiving federal funding are no longer required to get parental consent for mental health services source. LINK.)

We finally look at SB 7074 and HB 7069 which proposes that Tennessee seek federal waivers through Tenncare to receive more federal money to increase mental health services in Tennessee. The legislators proposing this bill clearly believe that federal government money flowing into Tennessee is a good option to meet the need for mental health care. They would appear to not be concerned about any regulations that such money would bring from the federal government that would dictate how Tennessee mental health provider treat Tennesseans with mental health problems.

In summary, our governmental leaders appear to believe in the following principles behind their solutions:

Experts can solve the problem
Government money from the state or federal government can fix the problem
Other resources like family, church, and community do not play a role in a solution
Understanding the root causes of the problem are not necessary for a solution
For children’s mental health, parental and family involvement are not necessary
Without a mention of the contribution of sinful behavior to the issue, they don’t consider it a factor

Are these principles ones which Tennesseans agree with? These foundational principles regarding what our legislators believe about mental health and the relationship between parents and children give me great concern as a Christian parent and a Christian physician. I should not be surprised as much of our society sees little problem with these foundational principles. Even our churches and their leaders don’t quite understand that a Biblical approach to mental health should aim at shalom rather try to resolve “dis”-ease of a worldly view of mental health. I would argue with Psalm 11 that the righteous must consider what to do next in the face of the foundations being destroyed and having been replaced by faulty worldview foundations. It is high time to return to Biblical principles including the striving for shalom rather than the reduction of “dis”-ease through more governmental mental health intervention.

In future blogs… What should the role of state or federal government be in mental health?

Bibliography

Potter MD, E. (2023, June 1). True Health: What does it include in Biblical terms? (Part1) – Whole Person Whole Life. Whole Person Whole Life. https://wholepersonwholelife.com/true-health-what-does-it-include-biblical/

Mental health and the pandemic: What U.S. surveys have found. By John Gramlich Pew Research Center. March 2, 2023. Accessed August 30, 2023. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/03/02/mental-health-and-the-pandemic-what-u-s-surveys-have-found/

National Alliance on Mental Health. Mental Health By the Numbers. Last updated: April 2023. Accessed September 4, 2023. https://www.nami.org/mhstats

Hoge, A. (2023, August 29). Biden Expands ObamaCare For Mental Health Services at Schools to Psychoanalyze Children 0 to 21. News with Views. Accessed September 4, 2023. https://newswithviews.com/biden-expands-obamacare-for-mental-health-services-at-schools-to-psychoanalyze-children-0-to-21/

Tennessee School Vouchers Will Ruin Private Schools

Present School Shootings and Gun Rights

Sexual Education According to the Elite

Politician’s Views of Mental Health Crisis

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories

Meta