Torture not Treatment - Disability Rights International

TORTURE NOT TREATMENT
Critique of aversive treatment from research and policy
What‟s wrong with punishments is that they work immediately, but give no long-term
results. The responses to punishment are either the urge to escape, to counterattack or
a stubborn apathy. – B.F. Skinner interview, The New York Times, 1987 36
This urgent appeal challenges the use of aversives at JRC on the ground that it violates
international human rights law. Whether or not such treatment is narrowly defined as
―effective,‖ international human rights law places limits on the amount of pain that can be
inflicted on a person. To put this in context, however, it is important to recognize that the use of
electric shock and restraints as treatment, as practiced at JRC, lacks evidenced-based proof of
long-term efficacy or safety. 37 Indeed, there is reason to be concerned that these practices create
risk of ―psychological trauma, marginalization, or alienation.‖ 38 There are non-dangerous
approaches to the management of dangerous or disruptive behaviors that do not entail the
infliction of pain. 39
The New York Psychological Association Task Force on Aversives Controls with Children
reviewed the field in 2006 and found that ―prohibitions on the use of techniques that essentially
punish disabled students for symptoms of their disability have been promulgated by a variety of
federal agencies and professional organizations.‖ 40 The NY Psychological Association Task
Force concluded that ―aversive behavior interventions be prohibited, without exception, as part
of a behavioral intervention plan.‖ 41 Professional disability organizations like TASH, which
includes many of the leading psychologists and behavior experts in the United States, have come
out against any use of aversives. 42
The NYSED evaluation team that visited JRC in 2006 expressed concern about the lack of
―adequately controlled and replicated research supporting the use of many of the identified
aversive behavioral interventions,‖ particularly in this ―school setting.‖ 43 Given the ―lack of peer
reviewed research on the effectiveness and safety of the GED used at JRC, the NYSED has
concerns regarding the long-term health and safety of the students, particularly those students
who may receive multiple electric shocks as part of their behavior plans.‖ 44
The NY Psychological Association Task Force, which reviewed NYSED‘s report, raised
particular concerns about the use of aversives at JRC without careful attention to the patients‘
diagnosis. They point out that for certain children – in particular abuse or trauma survivors –
aversives can be particularly dangerous. 45 Other researchers have warned that ―restraints and
seclusion should never be used with children who present with certain psychological or medical
characteristics….Contraindications for the use of seclusion and restraints with children include a
history of sexual abuse, physical abuse, or neglect and abandonment.‖ 46
10