Re: Shocking Stupidity: Boston Globe Ignores Research to Support

[Anne Bonney]

Damn but I love Maia.  She nails it every time.  That's exactly what happens here and it's exactly what allows the entire TTI to still exist.


You're right Eliscu....the little guy says it all.       ::deadhorse::

[Anne Bonney]

It sounds like The Who/Whooter's fav. analogy from the beginning.

Yep, sure does.  Sounds EXACTLY like him all the way through.

[Whooter]

On the surface I think that shock treatment is archaic and there have been very little studies done on it in the past quarter century (that I am aware of).  A part of me thinks it to be cruel, but when you read a little further and see how these kids are suffering and medicated to the point of being in a stuper just to keep them from harming themselves and others it gives me pause.  We also need to consider that this is the end of the line for them.  They have been rejected from every special ed school available before going to this Center.

His proof? A five hour visit he made to the school in which he saw "nothing inhumane."

Quotes from Boston Globe article  (link is in the OP) :

But the behaviors of many of the students, who range in age from 7 to 50, can be so unpredictable that it would be almost impossible to create a Potemkin village to dupe outsiders.

Students who needed stupefying doses of psychotropic drugs or mechanical restraints in their former schools routinely dine drug-free in the Rotenberg cafeteria, perform piece work for a local company, and work at classroom computers.

Why do no practitioners other than Israel adopt this approach? Do they view skin shocks as cruel or do they fear the outcry of disability advocates and inevitable probes? Is skin shock, in some cases, a more humane treatment than heavy drugs and mechanical restraints?
“I don’t know,’’ said Dr. Michael Grodin, a psychiatrist and director of medical ethics at Boston University School of Public Health. But Grodin said he would be wary of anyone who sees this complex issue purely in terms of black or white. The best one can do, he said, is wrestle with the complexities by asking “who benefits, under what circumstances, toward what end, and at what cost.’’

I think there is more to this issue, then Maia speaks about in her article.  This center is receiving a ton of media attention and scrutiny of professionals and the jury seems to be still out on whether this is the best option for these kids or if there is something else that is more humane.
Personally I haven’t made up my mind yet.  I find it difficult to take a position on this one right now.



...

[Troll Control]

I say they should hook ol' Whooter up to the electrodes and see if it cures pathological lying.  Now THAT would be something.

[Whooter]

Here is the Reply from Mattew (I shock kids) Israel.It sounds like The Who/Whooter's fav. analogy from the beginning.

http://http://www.judgerc.org/ResponsetoGonnermanArticle.pdf

Good link,
Wow, It does sound like one of my analogies.  It makes a little sense to me.  Why is shock treatment being viewed and judged so harshly when it is described as feeling like a “bee sting”?  Could this be compared to being given a needle?  Receiving Chemo?  Having Braces put on?  Having a cavity filled?
If it is true that there has been more focus and articles given to the negative side of the issue then I can see why the public may be biased in their perspective and acceptance of shock therapy.

Every surgical, dental or medical treatment involves discomfort, risks or costs on the one
hand, and expected benefits on the other. For most persons a reasonable approach is to
weigh the discomfort/risks/costs against the potential benefits in deciding whether to
undergo or approve the treatment.
In the case of certain treatments, however, there are some persons who, for religious or
philosophical reasons, are unwilling to weigh the negative aspects of those treatments
against the potential benefits. These persons view the treatment in question as Wrong
with a capital “W”, regardless of the potential benefits the treatment might produce. For
example, Christian Scientists oppose the use of medical interventions, and Scientologists
oppose the use of psychiatric drugs, regardless of what potential benefits may ensue.
Opponents of behavior modification treatment that involves aversives (sometimes
referred to as “aversive therapy”) are similarly unwilling to weigh the discomfort, risks or
costs associated with aversives against the potential benefits—even when those benefits
could be lifesaving, life-improving or life-extending. Such persons prefer to brand
aversives as “Wrong,” refusing to recognize them as part of a relatively new behavior
modification treatment procedure2, and many of them sometimes do whatever they can to
prevent anyone else from using them. It is clear from Ms. Gonnerman’s article that she is
one of those persons.
Ms. Gonnerman is so intent on indicting the Judge Rotenberg Center (“JRC”), the only
special needs school in the country that offers this form of therapy, that she violates the
normal journalistic ethics of presenting both sides of a controversial issue. Out of a total
of 265 column inches that her article occupies, only 15 inches (6% percent of the article)
present any of the benefits of JRC’s treatment. Even those few accounts of parents
(characterized as “desperate parents”) or students who speak positively about JRC are
presented with snide comments, disparaged by unfavorable observations or reported in
the least favorable light possible.






...

[Troll Control]

Damn but I love Maia.  She nails it every time.  That's exactly what happens here and it's exactly what allows the entire TTI to still exist.


You're right Eliscu....the little guy says it all.       ::deadhorse::

I agree that she wrote an excellent article here.  I'm glad to see more and more writings like this as well.  At least the public is starting to see how some of these facilities operate.  I especially enjoyed all of the mainstream media (local papers and internet) coverage of the forcible closing of several Aspen facilities last fall for "systematic child abuse."  At least there is some exposure to the public of this crooked TTI business and the leeches that run the phony programs with the phony clinicians and phony treatment plans.