Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > News Items
Youth lock-ups blasted
wdtony:
http://www.thestar.com/news/investigati ... asted?bn=1
Youth lock-ups blasted
Star investigation Hearings order release of children found not to have mental disorders
Published On Wed Jul 7 2010
Diana Zlomislic
Staff Reporter
Just around the corner from the Eaton Centre, a psychiatric facility is locking up youngsters who don't belong in secure custody, provincial documents reveal.
In one case, a 15-year-old girl's “moderately eccentric interests” in origami and the study of bugs were cited by a psychiatrist at Youthdale Treatment Centre as examples of a possible mental disorder. Another teen's admission of having unprotected sex was taken as evidence of a suicide wish because such behaviour could lead to AIDS.
“Secure treatment is not a placement substitute for child welfare,” a provincial appeal board ruled in ordering the release of a 14-year-old boy with a learning disability and limited school supports.
A Toronto Star review of 32 cases over the past two years where a youth formally appealed the lock-up decision found that nearly half (14) were overturned after an emergency hearing by the Ontario Child and Family Services Review Board. Most of these children were ordered released on the grounds they didn't even have a mental disorder.
Youthdale is a non-profit community agency. Last year, it received $11 million in funding from the Ministry of Children and Youth Services. In addition to the secure treatment unit and a less restrictive inpatient program downtown that has no maximum length of stay, Youthdale operates four group homes in the Annex, one home in Aurora and three cabins at a remote wilderness setting near Parry Sound for children with mental health issues. The centre also runs a 24-hour telephone crisis line, which is often the first step toward getting a child admitted.
With consent from a legal guardian — often children's aid — youth 16 years and younger can be held in Youthdale's secure unit for up to 30 days where they may receive mood-altering medications. Disruptive behaviour may be managed with chemical injections as well as mechanical and physical restraints.
Paul Allen, Youthdale's clinical director, said a review of his agency's policies and practices, led by two psychiatrists in response to complaints from former patients and parents, is underway. A report is expected later this summer.
“The challenge of balancing a child's rights and needs for treatment is a complicated matter,” Allen said.
To lock up a child, provincial law states that a facility must satisfy five criteria. It must demonstrate the child has a mental disorder; poses a substantial threat to himself or others; that secure custody would prevent the child from causing serious bodily harm to himself or others; that the facility offers appropriate treatment for the child's mental disorder and that there are no less restrictive method available.
A “mental disorder” is defined by the Child and Family Services Act as “a substantial disorder of emotional process, thought or cognition, which grossly impairs a person's capacity to make reasoned judgments.”
Once committed, the child meets with a provincial youth advocate who informs him he is allowed to appeal his secure placement. In 2009, 117 youth were admitted to the secure floor for 30 days. Appeals were filed by 30 youth, but 19 withdrew their applications before the hearing. Of the remaining 11, seven were ordered released.
The girl with the “moderately eccentric interest” in the study of bugs appealed in December 2008. The board ruled the 15-year-old, gifted student's behaviour — pouring flour on the floor and getting into physical confrontations with her mother — was the result of teen-parent conflict and was not caused by a mental disorder.
In the case of the girl who admitted to having unprotected sex, Youthdale claimed the teen refused to take birth control pills, which indicated a “gross impairment to make reasoned decisions.”
The board's decision cited evidence that the child had discussed birth control with a doctor and that the teen's mother threw out sample pills and refused to fill the prescription. The board also took issue with a psychiatrist's suggestion that the teen's ability to make reasoned judgments was impaired because she took Prozac only when she needed to feel better.
“This is typical of even adult patients taking medication,” the board wrote in its decision. “To suggest that a child should be admitted to a treatment centre because of this is unrealistic.”
Review board chair Suzanne Gilbert, a lawyer who specializes in criminal law and youth protection, told the Star she would not comment on individual cases. The board, which must rule within five days of receiving an application, has members with backgrounds in education, law, social services and mental health.
“To lock a child in a secure area is a very serious decision,” she said. Gilbert noted that of the three Ontario facilities with secure treatment units, all but one of the recent appeals have come from Youthdale.
Youthdale's headquarters is a four-storey, tan brick building on Victoria St. A sleep research clinic and gymnasium occupy the basement. There are as many as 20 children occupying beds in rooms on the upper two floors at any given time. Ten beds are reserved for children who present emotional and behavioral issues but no imminent risk of harm to themselves or others. The locked fourth floor is set aside for up to 10 children considered at immediate risk of seriously hurting themselves or others.
“Our approach to managing kids when they are distressed and agitated is well in advance of the 1950s,” said Allen, responding to comments from critics who suggested Youthdale's methods were outdated. Allen said the agency's treatment plans are “good as any care you will find in any hospital or any other mental health centre.”
Allen invited the Star to tour the facility last month.
Two of the children in the secure unit were in common areas at the time. One cherub-cheeked boy is seated alone inside a room with glass windows playing a hand-held electronic game. A girl sat by herself at a table, staring blankly ahead while holding a picture of trees torn from a magazine.
Their bedrooms, though impeccably clean, are cell-like — big enough only to accommodate the length of a twin-size bed, which is fitted with a flat sheet and a pancake-thin pillow. A window is covered in external blinds that open and close with a magnetic device held by staff. On this day, in the early afternoon, they are shut. The only personal artifact that shows a child sleeps here is a small, plush toy dinosaur perched on a shelf high out of arm's reach.
Dr. Nathan Scharf, Youthdale's director of psychological services, explained that the facility has been admitting more children under the age of 12. Many, he said, have neuro-developmental disorders. Scharf estimated that one-third of youngsters admitted to the secure unit now fall into this demographic.
“They're damaged in the sense that there is something wrong with them from the time they were born,” he added.
In one of the cases the Star reviewed, Youthdale argued a 14-year-old girl was a danger to herself because she once said, “I wish I was dead” after learning she could never return home to live with her mother. The girl was in the care of the Catholic Children's Aid Society and suffered from seizure-like episodes during which she drooled and walked into walls.
These episodes were considered further proof she posed a danger to herself. She was considered a danger to others on grounds that she can become “loud and argumentative.”
The review board ruled there was “no evidence that an emergency measure was at all warranted.
“It appears (the Catholic Children's Aid Society) was looking for a way to have her problems diagnosed and receive appropriate treatment after hitting an impasse in the child's care,” the board's decision states.
Youthdale's Scharf suggested the review board's decisions are subjective.
“How they interpret the information is subject to their own attitudes and philosophies,” he said.
In another case, the review board ordered released a 14-year-old boy who had a learning disability and was suspended for skipping school. The board noted “a clear link between the child's lack of appropriate school supports and behavioural difficulties.”
The board recommended less-intrusive options to help the child, such as working with the local hospital to access assessment and counseling services.
In one case involving a 14-year-old girl whose mother contacted children's aid for help after her daughter was sexually assaulted, Scharf told the review board an assessment at the centre's secure treatment unit will sometimes lead to prioritizing youth with community resources. The board called this an “irrelevant consideration.”
“To deprive a child of her liberty in order to more readily access community resources,” the decision stated, “flies in the face of the use of secure treatment as an extraordinary measure of last resort.”
The Ministry of Children and Youth Services told the Star it is committed to providing support for “our must vulnerable,” which is why it empowered the review board to scrutinize admissions into secure treatment.
Said ministry spokesperson Paris Meilleur: “The statistics demonstrate the process works and that the review board is serving its purpose.”
Ursus:
Pic from the article:
Youthdale Treatment Centre, which is around the corner from the Eaton Centre at 227 Victoria St., is a psychiatric facility that is locking up kids who don't belong in secure custody, provincial documents reveal. RICHARD LAUTENS/TORONTO STAR
© Copyright Toronto Star 1996-2010
Ursus:
There was a lawsuit about 5 years ago. Apparently, Youthdale was doing some pretty iffy things as far as restraining procedures and meds dosing were concerned... Some particulars are mentioned in this petition:
-------------- • -------------- • --------------
Send Gabie to Youthdale? I don't think so.
To: Gabie's parents
Would you want to be pushed into a padded cell & drugged for almost everything you do?
No? Didn't think so. If that thought isn't enough; read this.
"Youthdale's Illegal Actions...EXPOSED!
About this Information/Disclaimer
All information contained on this page is FACTUAL, and proof of the examples given is contained in Youthdale's Patient Files.
Here are a few things that will shock you!
You may know Youthdale as a highly regarded and well known treatment facility, which is supposed to help children. What you might not know is what actually happens inside Youthdale's main treatment facility, and that what they do may be causing more harm than good.
One example of Youthdale's bad antics is their excessive (and sometimes unnecessary) use of restraints, weather it be chemical, mechanical, or otherwise.
One thing Youthdale doesn't want their former patients to know is that some of these actions were in fact illegal. Yes, you read it right...illegal. What did Youthdale do that is illegal? Read on to find out!
A former patient, who was admitted to Youthdale in 1998 at the age of 11, and suffered a horrific experience, has come forward with medical records that show things you'd never expect to see with such a well known institution.
This patient's parents were led to believe that Youthdale was a place that was simply going to 'switch the patient's medications and monitor the blood pressure 24/7'. Instead, their homesick child was heavily drugged with anti-psychotic drugs, and placed in an isolation room for over 25 hours shortly after admission. This patient was also given certain psychotropic medications without obtaining written authorization of any kind for their use, or drugs that aren't approved for use in anyone under the age of 18.
This former patient's parents would never have placed their child in Youthdale had they known what would really happen.
This former patient, who wishes to remain anonymous, and is now over the age of majority, filed suit against Youthdale in August 2005. The matter was settled in March 2006, and after a careful review of this patient's settlement agreement, it was determined that there is no confidentiality agreement in effect. We have placed some of these medical records on our website, and they are available for the public to view.
This patient found that Youthdale had been in violation of several sections of the Child and Family Services Act, with respect to various things including the administeration of psychotropic medications and use of the isolation room.
This patient's findings included:
1. A 'Psychotropic Medication Consent Form' that was almost 9 (YES, NINE) years out of date at the time it was signed by the patient's mother
We believe that this form was likely written before the Child and Family Services Act came into effect in 1990.
This form is NOT a valid consent because it does not meet the criteria as stated in clause 132 (2) of the Child and Family Services Act, and therefore all druggings on this and any other patient for which this form was used are unlawful, even in an emergency situation,
Clause 132 (2) of the Child and Family Services Act states:
A consent referred to in subsection (1) shall identify the psychotropic drug clearly and shall specify,
(a) what condition the psychotropic drug is intended to alleviate;
(b) the range of intended dosages;
(c) the risks and possible side effects associated with the psychotropic drug, and how they vary with different dosages; and
(d) the frequency with which and the period of time during which the psychotropic drug is to be administered.
The 'Psychotropic Medication consent form' that was found in the file (see it here: http://www.youthdale.com/files.html):
A) DOES NOT contain a range of intended dosages. Instead, the form only gives a maximum dosage of each drug in a 24-hour period.
B) The form DOES state the risks and possible side effects associated with the drug, but NOT how they vary with different dosages.
C) DOES NOT state the frequency with which the psychotropic drug is to be administered
2. This former patient was given the medication Clonidine without obtaining any kind of written consent from the patient's mother. THIS IS A HIGHLY ILLEGAL ACTION, THAT, IF CONVICTED, CAN RESULT IN A LENGTHY PRISON SENTENCE, under section 245 of the Criminal Code for 'Administering Noxious Substances'.
3. Youthdale staff, on a regular basis, forcefully drug patients with medications such as Nozinan (Methotrimeprazine) or Loxapac (Loxapine) for very minor issues or for almost any sort of misbehavior, without considering their views and preferences.
If a patient refuses to take their medication, they are told that if they don't take their medication, that they will have to get it in a needle. If the patient still refuses to take the medication, they are often either pinned down to the floor by youth workers or put in mechanical restraints and then usually drugged by injection against their will.
Clause 132 (3) states:
A service provider shall not administer or permit the administration of a psychotropic drug to a child in the service provider’s care who is less than sixteen years of age or lacks capacity within the meaning of section 4 without first considering the child’s views and preferences, where they can be reasonably ascertained.
Therefore, Youthdale cannot administer drugs by threatening the patients with needles, as they are not considering the patient's views and preferences.
4. Shortly after admission, this former patient, already heavily drugged on the psychotropic drug Nozinan, was dragged into the isolation room and was told that they were not to leave, and they were kept in the room for over 25 hours-a period exceeding even the weekly maximum for the use of isolation
This isolation room is called the Intensive Care Unit or 'ICU', and contains a restraint bed, barred lights controlled from the office, a heavy locking door, and a viewing window looking out to the office.
This patient was kept in the isolation room for a total of 25 hours, 5 minutes, only being allowed out to use the washroom. The patient was placed in the room without obtaining permission from a director of the facility (which is in fact REQUIRED due to the patient's age at the time), and the reason given for this action was because of 'homesickness'. This is definitely NOT a remedy for homesickness, and there are less restrictive methods available for keeping the situation under control, and is therefore an action in violation of the Act.
Clause 127 (3) of the Child and Family Services Act states:
A child may be placed in a secure isolation room where,
(a) in the service provider’s opinion,
(i) the child’s conduct indicates that the child is likely, in the immediate future, to cause serious property damage or to cause another person serious bodily harm, and
(ii) no less restrictive method of restraining the child is practicable; and
(b) where the child is less than twelve years of age, a Director gives permission for the child to be placed in a secure isolation room because of exceptional circumstances.
Clause 127 (8) states:
'In no event shall a child be kept in a secure isolation room for a period or periods that exceed an aggregate of eight hours in a given twenty-four hour period or an aggregate of twenty-four hours in a given week.'
This fomer patient had filed several complaints under section 109 with Youthdale, and all complaints were ignored. As well, even the 'Further review' requested under section 110 of the act was ignored by Marilyn Renwick of the Ministry of Children and Youth Services. In our opinion, if these complaints are being ignored, those responsible for handling these complaints should be demoted to scrubbing toilets.
The Anti Child-Drugging Movement decided to investigate the Ministry's decision to ignore this former patient's complaints. We ran credit checks on Youthdale through both Equifax and Dun & Bradstreet and found that there were no lawsuits relating to medical malpractice, but rather only a few employment issues. To this date, still no lawsuits relating to medical malpractice have shown up on Youthdale's credit bureau reports, and we figure that this may indeed be the reason behind these complaints not being taken seriously. This, however, can be changed, but only with your help!
On June 3, we pulled Youthdale's credit report from Equifax, and noticed Youthdale had been seeking credit for a rather strange thing...Wholesale Construction and Mining Equipment....who knows what Youthdale would ever do with construction and mining equipment?!?!?!?!
Now that you know what goes on in there, why not help us by writing to your local MPP, or the Minister of Children and Youth Services. Please feel free to submit your comments to us. In the future, we may post them on our site. Please send any comments to http://www.youthdale.com ;;
go ahead & check out that site if you please. I'm not going to sit here & let my friend be put into a place like that though. I would hope you would do the same. Lets come together; maybe if we can get enough signatures, we can show Gabie's parents that this isn't right & hopefully they won't send him there.
Sincerely,
The Undersigned
Ursus:
Fwiw, the websites associated with the Youthdale Treatment Centre are as follows (there may be more):
* http://youthdale.ca/
* http://youthdalefoundation.com/
* http://youthdalesleep.com/
An activist website, which is linked to the petition to save Gabie from Youthdale (above), and is actually owned by the Movement Against Child Drugging is as follows; note subtle difference:
* http://youthdale.com/
wdtony:
--- Quote from: "Ursus" ---Fwiw, the websites associated with the Youthdale Treatment Centre are as follows (there may be more):
* http://youthdale.ca/
* http://youthdalefoundation.com/
* http://youthdalesleep.com/
An activist website, which is linked to the petition to save Gabie from Youthdale (above), and is actually owned by the Movement Against Child Drugging is as follows; note subtle difference:
* http://youthdale.com/
--- End quote ---
Thanks Ursus, very useful connections.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version