The New Yorker’s Andrew Solomon Fails to Disclose Family Connection to Drugs Prescribed to Adam Lanza.
It seems that the facts of the Sandy Hook shooting continue to be cloaked in secrecy, even by the journalists that cover the tragedy.
Earlier this week, The New Yorker magazine published “The Reckoning: The Father of the Sandy Hook killer searches for answers,” by Andrew Solomon.
The lengthy article was useful from the standpoint of revealing that Adam Lanza actually had been prescribed two – not one -psychiatric mind-altering drugs and had experienced serious adverse reactions to both drugs.
The fact that Adam Lanza had been prescribed the antidepressant CELEXA was made public in the State Police Report earlier this year, but it was Solomon who made pubic Adam’s use of a second antidepressant, LEXAPRO.
Despite revealing the use of Lexapro, nowhere in Solomon’s article does the writer disclose that his father, Howard Solomon, is the Chairman of pharmaceutical giant, Forest Laboratories, the makers of both antidepressants CELEXA and LEXAPRO. This is bizarre.
Given that, to date, these are the only drugs known to have been prescribed to Adam Lanza, wouldn’t Solomon think it appropriate to disclose his family relationship to the pharmaceutical maker of both drugs? From a journalistic standpoint it seems unconscionable that Solomon failed to disclose this information. Did Solomon fail to disclose his relationship with the family’s pharmaceutical company because of the serious adverse reactions Adam experienced while taking both drugs?
Recall that Ablechild sued the State of Connecticut to obtain Adam Lanza’s toxicology report and mental health records. The result of Ablechild’s exhaustive efforts was the State’s Assistant Attorney General, Patrick B. Kwanashie, explaining that the reason for withholding Lanza’s medical records was because it “would cause a lot of people to stop taking their medications.”
What medications would people stop taking? One can only wonder, now, how many psychiatric drugs Adam Lanza had been prescribed and is there some pharmaceutical arm-twisting taking place prohibiting the release of this important information?
Due to a lack of transparency and disclosure in this case, one can only speculate. (see Ablechild Press Release of March 11, 2014)