|
Groups ally in fight, filing
against shocks
By: RORY SCHULER
10/25/2006
TAUNTON - At least 20 New England
activist groups have been lobbying for a Bay State ban on
aversive therapies such as those used at the Judge Rotenberg
Educational Center.
Pending state legislation,
co-sponsored by Democrats Sen. Jarret Barrios, D-Cambridge, and
Rep. Barbara L'Italien, D-Andover - Senate bill 376 and House
bill 1120 - has been proposed to "ensure the humane treatment of
disabled persons," by prohibiting painful therapies such as
electric skin shock.
"While the Massachusetts Constitution promises equality,
irrespective of ability or disability, there are no statutes
that prohibit procedures which involve the purposeful infliction
of pain on people with disabilities with the intention of
changing behavior," states a letter provided by John Thomas, of
The Arc of Massachusetts, representing a group of undersigned
organizations, urging constituents to support the bills. "There
are no statutes protecting them from physical contact or
punishments, or protecting them from the denial of adequate
sleep, food, shelter, bedding or bathroom facilities."
With no formal Beacon Hill sessions scheduled for the rest of
year, the bills have stalled, and won't resurface until next
year, at the earliest.
State Sen. Brian A. Joyce, D-Milton, has also sponsored an
amendment to ban aversive therapy in Massachusetts and intends
to file it again in the next session.
The letter's undersigners - in addition to the Arc, 17
organizations and additional affiliates led by civil liberties
boosters and advocates for the autistic - have combined
resources to draw statewide and national attention to the
methods of therapy in use at the center.
"These extreme, punishing physical interventions are illegal
when inflicted upon nondisabled people, but when used on people
with disabilities, are considered treatment or 'aversive
therapy,'" the letter says. "These procedures have never shown
to be effective methods of permanently altering behavior,
including that which may be self-abusive."
School Committee member and Department of Social Services
caseworker Alfred W. Baptista Jr., has made comparisons between
the rights of prisoners and the rights of severely disabled
children. While prisoners cannot be forced to undergo painful
behavior-changing procedures, covered under cruel and unusual
punishment prohibitions in the U.S. Constitution, it is legal to
expose children to those therapies, as long as they are included
in their court-approved and special educator-designed
individualized education plans.
The state legislation, if ratified, would prohibit what the
groups have labeled "the most extreme forms of punishing
physical procedures."
They include any technique designed to cause physical pain, such
as hitting, pinching and electric shock; physical contact or
punishment otherwise prohibited by law or that would be
prohibited if used on a nondisabled person; and any program that
denies adequate sleep, food, shelter, bedding or bathroom
facilities.
Even state agencies have started shying away from recommending
the institute and its heavily debated methods. Denise Monteiro,
a public affairs spokeswoman for DSS, said the state's
caseworkers almost never place disabled children in the center's
care.
"It's so controversial," she said. "There are other methods. We
don't put our kids there and haven't for years."
In some situations, however, the center may serve a needed
purpose.
"Each case is different," Monteiro said. "If a parent of an
autistic child feels it's the only [solution], we tell them
about the other options."
A letter urging constituents to support bills for "the humane
treatment of disabled persons" and against therapies such as
electric skin shock has been signed by:
The Arc of Massachusetts, the American Civil Liberties Union of
Massachusetts, Center for Public Presentation, Federation for
Children with Special Needs, Doug Flutie Jr. Foundation,
Coalition for the Legal Rights of People with Disabilities,
Massachusetts Developmental Disabilities Council, Autism
National Committee, Central Massachusetts Families Organizing
for Change, Autism Alliance of MetroWest, Disability Policy
Consortium, Disability Law Center, Community Resources for
People with Autism, Massachusetts Office on Disability, TASH New
England, Massachusetts Advocates Standing Strong, Advocates for
Autism in Massachusetts and Massachusetts Mental Health Legal
Advisors Committee.
|
