Petition against the JRC

Post Reply New Topic

The fact of the matter is that is just wrong though I've taken psychology 101, 102 and Abnormal Psychology and everything from your reputable sources is completely backwards and contrary to everything I learned. From the assignments, reading, watching documentaries on psychology and two different psychology professors with PHDs in Psychology. So from my understanding and hopefully most peoples the Medical Profession certainly does NOT recommend the use of electric shocks as punishment for self harm behaviors of mentally disabled children.........ECT is currently only approved for cases of severe depression that don't respond to any other treatments with consent of the patient. ECT and shocking a mental disabled kid when they do something self harming are two completely different things.

The SIBIS method, used at a point in time at the JRC, before they developed a different system, is still used across the country in school systems to prevent the self-injurious behavior of head banging, by students on a voluntary basis.

I provided evidence for that earlier in the thread. It is used in Michigan as well as other states.

The JRC went to a stronger method of skin-shock, because the pain stimulus provided by the SIBIS skin-shock method was not strong enough to avert the self-injurious behavior.

My point in the discussion, is, that if skin-shock therapy is outlawed across the country it will also outlaw the use of SIBIS in the school system where the students voluntarily use the procedure to control their head banging.

The question is, whether some people agree with the treatment as defensible, on a personal basis, should those students right to the use of a treatment of last resort, that works for them, be taken away, when they have not abused it, on a personal basis?

I don't like ECT either, but it has saved people's lives as a measure of last resort, also.

It was also a therapy that was abused in the past, that is now tightly controlled through the medical and legal systems.

Should those rights be taken away, also, because the therapy has been abused in the past, and some people don't like it?

The same organizations that are pushing to close the JRC down, want to see all skin-shock therapy outlawed across the country, to ensure that the JRC organization, or those like it cannot establish themselves in another state, if the Massachussetts bans skin-shock therapy, in an election.

So, is it fair that those students in Michigan would have their voluntary rights taken away to use SIBIS in the school system, if the organizations are successful in their efforts to completely outlaw skin-shocks nationwide?

ECT should not even be in this discussion as ECT involves small amount electricity being passed through the brain to stimulate certain areas of the brain to help patients with extreme depression feel better when every other method has failed and the patient consents. Sedation of course is included now days so you don't have to have three mental hospital nurses holding the patient down so they don't break their bones due to convulsions. That is hardly the same thing as giving a shock every time a behavior that they are trying to stop happens. So like I said two totally different things. I never said I had a problem with ECT, I would not want it done to me but that's me not everyone else.

My concern is children being hurt against their will in the name of improvement, which is what based on all the information in this thread is what it seemed like was occuring at JRC.

The SIBIS system is used on a voluntary basis in states where it is legal. As detailed here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-Injurious_Behavior_Inhibiting_System




The students can stop the therapy whenever they want to. But if they are attempting to harm themselves other methods will be used to stop the behavior whether it is restraint or drugs. The SIBIS method gives the students a choice, that they would not have, if the SIBIS method were not available.

I am sorry if I was not expressing my point clearly, but I can see from your response that you understand this specific issue, and would not want to take the rights from the student to use the procedure, as long as it was within their control to stop it, which it is.

I was using ECT as an analogy of a similiar therapy, that is controversial, that some people believe is inhumane and should be outlawed.

While it is not the same exact therapy the issue is the same in regard to the usage of skin-shock therapy, as applied legally and appropriately in other areas of the country through the SIBIS method.

We can all agree that the abuses of the therapy at the JRC requires restrictive action, however the actions against the JRC supported by organizations, includes outlawing the appropriate and recommended use of SIBIS everywhere else.

I wanted to see if people here believed that those other individuals should lose rights to their treatments because of the abuses at the JRC.

And, while the videos at the JRC were destroyed to hide abuses there, under the law, parents have the right to access the videos, and choose to terminate the skin-shock therapy on their children, if they no longer feel that it is helping their children.

I had no idea of the other contigencies involved for individuals across the country, until I researched the issue.

Most opinions have made it sound like the JRC was the only place that the skin-shock therapy is used, and don't explore the other side of the story. In every controversial issue there is another side of the story that should be objectively explored.

Otherwise, some people can lose their rights and potentially their life as a result of legal actions, while others are protected from harm.

If I was in charge I would torture the little nazis who were in charge of JRC and responsible in the most grisly manners I could conceive of. I would the same to all those police nowadays who intimidate and kill/injure autistic kids.