|
Remedy or abuse? Controversy
resurfaces over use of shock treatment at Canton school
September 13, 2007
By Erin Conroy, Globe Correspondent
A n investigative magazine article
dubbing a Canton-based institution the "school of shock" has
reignited efforts to pass legislation limiting the facility's use of
skin shock and aversive therapy.
State legislators say the report in
the September edition of Mother Jones has refocused the controversy
surrounding the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center, believed to be
the only school in the country that gives children electric shocks
as a form of treatment.
The 230-student facility treats
children with autism, mental retardation, and emotional problems.
Senator Brian A. Joyce of Milton
and Representative John W. Scibak of South Hadley are trying to move
up hearings, now slated for January, on legislation that would limit
aversive therapy to extreme cases of violent or self-injurious
behavior, such as head banging or eye gouging, and create a special
commission to regulate it.
Matt Israel, founder of the
Rotenberg Center, acknowledges the controversy surrounding the use
of shock therapy, but says the practice is crucial to treat severe
mental illnesses. Israel said it is unfair of legislators to
characterize the school's practices as unfettered because it is
regulated by the Department of Mental Retardation, Department of
Education, and Department of Early Education and Care, as well as
judges in individual cases.
The Judge Rotenberg Center, which
has students from at least seven states, is in Joyce's district. He
said his staff has spent hundreds of hours researching the facility
and its practices, including claims by critics that children are
often shocked for relatively minor infractions such as cursing or
speaking out of turn - behavior that, he said, is typical of most
adolescents.
"The bottom line is, we have to
protect some of the most vulnerable citizens in our society," Joyce
said. "We need to eliminate or severely limit any future application
of this barbaric treatment on innocent children."
Aversive therapy - which uses a
system of positive and negative reinforcements based on psychologist
B.F. Skinner's behavior modification theory - is banned in 10
states, including Connecticut and Rhode Island. Last year, Joyce
filed a budget amendment to ban it in Massachusetts. It passed in
the state Senate but not in the House.
Some state legislators, including
Representatives Tom Sannicandro of Ashland and Barbara L'Italien of
Andover, have denounced the institution's methods as cruel and
outdated. Others say there are behaviors and illnesses that warrant
shock therapy.
The release of the Mother Jones
article is not the first time the Rotenberg Center has come under
scrutiny. Massachusetts officials have investigated reports over the
years that electric shocks delivered to misbehaving students caused
burns on their arms, legs, or torsos. Regulators from New York,
where more than half the students come from, have pressed the school
to end electric shock.
The facility was also fined last
year by the Massachusetts Division of Professional Licensure for
falsely representing employees as licensed psychologists.
Israel told the Globe he thought
the Mother Jones article, written by freelancer Jennifer Gonnerman,
did a poor job of explaining the school's mission. He said that
negative reinforcement for seemingly harmless behaviors is sometimes
necessary for treatment, and that the article depicted certain
incidents out of context.
"Sometimes in treating a behavior,
you'll notice that it changes its form as it decreases in
frequency," Israel said. "If you are treating someone who pulls hair
out to the point of baldness, you'll pay attention when they are
even pulling, tugging, or touching their hair. It may look
innocuous, but if you don't treat it at that point in time, it will
grow back to its original form."
"There are many well-intentioned
people who oppose this form of therapy because they are unwilling to
weigh the intrusiveness of it against the benefits," he said. "Just
like any medical or dental procedure, you have to weigh the benefits
and the risks."
Parents of children at the center
also defend the treatment.
Marguerite Famolare's 19-year-old
son, Michael Costello, has lived at the Rotenberg Center for six
years. As a child, Michael was diagnosed with autism, mental
retardation, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and bipolar
disorder.
Famolare, who lives in Boston, said
her son spent years bouncing back and forth from private
institutions and psychiatric hospitals, and was lethargic from
prescription drugs.
"He was given no opportunities and
just slept all of the time. He was sedated and treated like an
animal, and that wasn't the life I wanted for him," said Famolare.
"Now he goes to Red Sox games, and he has friends that he relates
to. He's learned to communicate with people and how to express
himself, because of what they've done for him."
Famolare said she has tested the
electronic shock administered on her son, and likens it to a bee
sting. She said her son shows some discomfort when shocked, but no
signs of trauma.
"This is better than he die from
kidney or liver problems developed from prescription drugs, because
that's what would've happened," she said. "The pain from the shock
is no more than the pain he would have suffered from needles put
into him with high dosages of those psychotropic drugs."
Scibak, who has a doctorate in
developmental disabilities and is the former director of a
psychiatric institute, sponsors Joyce's bills, but opposes a full
ban on shock therapy. There are, he says, times when it is
appropriate.
"People say it's cruel and unusual
punishment, but I've seen people biting their fingers or tongue off,
or banging their head against a wall until it splits open," he said.
"How can a parent sit back and just watch their child bite their
extremities off? In those situations, it would be cruel and unusual
not to use these procedures."
Just how much pain the shocks cause
is a matter of some disagreement.
Sannicandro, who sits on the
Legislature's Joint Committee for Children, Families and Persons
with Disabilities, said he tested the shock treatment himself and
compared it to being electrocuted.
"It was unbelievable pain that felt
like it was going on forever," said Sannicandro, who has a
23-year-old son with Down syndrome. "I can't imagine subjecting my
child to this. It would be like living in a hell."
The Mother Jones article described
an environment where teachers were fearful of being attacked and of
losing their jobs for not shocking students enough.
Gregory Miller, who worked as a
Rotenberg Center teacher's assistant from 2003 to 2006, told the
Globe that most teachers found the work unbearable. As a result,
there was a high turnover rate, he said.
"You could just hear echoes of
screams coming down the halls, all day long," said Miller, who will
testify in favor of Joyce's bills. "The stress levels were
incredible because every time someone jumped up from being shocked,
everyone would scream as a reaction and in turn they would be
shocked. It's dangerous to think of the level of stress caused by
that constant fear."
Joyce said he has already gotten
reaction from people who have read the Mother Jones article, and he
is confident the bills to restrict the practice will pass before the
end of this year.
"This Skinner pseudo-science from
50 years ago is not appropriate today," said Joyce. "It is curious
that we don't inflict such punishment on serial killers or child
molesters."
Erin Conroy can be reached at
econroy@globe.com.
|
