SAMHSA is nothing more than an unconstitutional Federal agency setup and designed to redistribute taxpayer money in the form of grants.

It has little to no positive impact on the actual people of this country. Publishing booklets, brochures, and "research" that can hardly be called informative is a waste. Pregnant women shoudn't drink alcohol you say? Wow, thanks for tip!

SAMHSA is a product of big government and nothing more than bureaucratic mess that is about as efficient as a car powered by a hamster wheel.

Do the American people a favor and stop wasting taxpayer money and expanding the National debt.

Nowhere is there mention of disparities in racial & ethnic minority groups in any of the former 10 or most recent 8 strategic SAMHSA initiatives. Is this not important to SAMHSA? USDHHS has an office (OMH) that attempts to address this area in a strategic & meaningful way...with little resources to do so. SAMHSA should have a similar dedicated office with ample resources to support this work at the state & community level. It is only through a USDHHS/SAMHSA commitment, working in partnerships with key stakeholders at the state & community level, in a cohesive & strategic manner will we be able to effectively address this issue to reduce & eliminate all health disparities, including in behavioral health.

What? Is "parity" off-limits? And if it is, who is keeping it that way? What are the vested interests against parity? How might they have succeeded, so far, in keeping the AOD field in a one-down position? What would it take to get adequate recognition (of value) for the AOD field, so that parity might actually be acheived? Are the (average) trained and licensed practitioners in the MH field really that much more effective than the (average) experienced (and often personally experienced) paraprofessionals in the AOD field? Where's the evidence that clinical outcomes for MH clients is appreciably better than for AOD clients. Isn't it true that a higher proportion of MH patients are also AOD-involved, than AOD clients are MH-involved? When the patient / client is receiving assistance from helpers in both fields, how is it determined which one had the greater effect, facilitated the work of the other, etc. There has long been an assumption that because AOD personnel tend to have less formal education, that they are less able to have a positive effect on the lives of their clients / patients (than MH professionals have on theirs). Where's the evidence of that being the case? The biases based on "professional preparation"--formal versus informal (for the most part)--is the basis for services performed in the AOD field being less well compensated than are services in the MH field. It may be true that formally trained lawyers and engineers would do in their respective fields than people receiving on-the-job training might do. And maybe the average RN would tend to be more proficient at nursing than the average LVN. But are Mental Health and AOD counseling related in that way? And if they are, is the structure of that hierarchical relationship sufficient to warrant the disparities in the ways that the two fields are financed, what they can and can't bill for, whether one is and one isn't eligible for certain kinds of reimbursement, or differences in the amount of compensation for similar kinds of work ... with similar results? Is anyone else wondering where a SAMHSA discussion forum might be an appropriate place to discuss the biases that are barriers to parity.