Torture not Treatment - Disability Rights International

TORTURE NOT TREATMENT
both were in transport restraints (legs and waist) while they were in their beds; and one of the
boys did not have the required Level III court approval for restraints in his record. Neither boy
was evaluated by any medical staff until the following day after the incident, despite asking for a
nurse and complaining of pain.
Staff reported that it is not atypical for a resident to say that they have injuries
following a GED application. It was reported that typically staff would not call a nurse
when a resident voices that he is in pain from a GED application and described it as a
pinch.
The EEC report stated that staff observed that the ―skin was off‖ and there were ―fresh marks‖
on the calf of one of the boys, who complained of leg pain. It was later diagnosed as a stage two
ulcer. These wounds were located at the same site that the resident had received the shock.
The EEC investigation further concluded that:
staff was physically abusive toward the residents;
the staff was unable to provide for the safety and well being of a child;
staff lacked necessary training and experience;
staff used poor judgment;
staff failed to provide a safe environment;
staff failed to follow policies regarding medical treatment;
staff were neglectful in the care of residents.
The incidents of unlawful restraint of the boys at the JRC residence would never have been
discovered had EEC not been investigating the unauthorized shock ―prank.‖
Massachusetts recertification in 2009
In addition to court approval for Level III punishments, the Massachusetts DMR requires that
JRC undergo Level III certification by the state‘s Level III Certification Team which includes
two psychologists, a psychiatrist and the Massachusetts Department of Mental Retardation‘s
Director for Human Rights and assistant general counsel.
In its report dated April 27, 2009, JRC was given recertification, despite the team’s
findings, which included numerous violations, abuses and concerns. It is difficult to imagine
under what circumstances the state would not recertify JRC to use Level III punishments given
the amount of violations they reported. Previous successful legal action by JRC against the state
may also be a factor in the state‘s decision.
Findings by the team included:
39