Amazing Judge Rotenberg Center shock victim complaint

The Canton, MA Judge Rotenberg Center (JRC) "specializes" in aversive (pain) "treatment" for the disabled and juvenile delinquent community and many people have tried to closed to house of torture over the years.

Below is a letter addressed to Nancy R. Weiss, Director, National Leadership Consortium on Developmental Disabilities, from a former JRC "client" of seven years. detailing the abuse she and other JRC victims received over the years. The GED device referred to is called the Graduated Electronic Decelerator that gives powerful shocks that are roughly ten times the power of a police taser gun. The device in action can be viewed here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=aAj9W0ntUMI as filmed in court by Fox News Boston.

Please read the letter and help to stop this abuse.
Sincerely,

Kevin Hall

Dear Ms. Weiss

Hello my name is xxx. I was told you are someone I can talk to in confidence and be safe. I would like to share with you my letter that I wrote to the FDA about life inside JRC and on the GEDs. It was torture being there. And I suffered so much. I am still tormented. Here is my letter of testimony:

    My name is xxx and I attended the Judge Rotenberg Center.  I am writing to ask you to please reconsider your approval of the GED for use on ANY human being. I was placed on the GED about 2 months after arriving.  I started out on the GED-1, and during my last few years I was placed on the GED-4.  There are so many of us that were tortured with these devices, this “treatment”. I believe the reason why more ex-students haven’t spoken out is because they are either non-verbal, afraid, or believe that no one cares about us or it will not make a difference. Parents and families that speak and rally in favor of the GED, are not the ones who have to experience it, the pain and anxiety, day after day for years on end.

    The GED IS harmful. Even the GED-1. I was burned many times, and I still have scars on my stomach from being repeatedly shocked there, by the FDA approved GED-1. The electrodes had actually burned into my skin. I experienced long term loss of sensation and numbness in my lower left leg, after getting a shock there. I felt searing pain all the way down to the bottom of my foot, and was left with no feeling in my skin from the knee down for about a year. Again, this was with the GED-1.  After complaining to JRC nursing about my leg, they told me to tell the Neurologist about it during a follow up visit for a suspected seizure.  He asked the staff what that device was on my leg, and they explained to him it was an electrode. After their explanation, the Neurologist said, “Well, I don’t know what that thing is, but it needs to come off.” JRC left the device off my leg for about a year, then decided on their own, without sending me back to a Neurologist, it was ok to put it back. I have seen students with torso electrodes accidentally placed on their spine area, get a shock there and be violently bent backwards.

     Also, I would like you to know that the devices have a tendency to malfunction and go off all by themselves. JRC refers to this as a “misapplication”. It happened to me and other students so many times I cannot count. Sometimes the GED’s will just start to go off and shock you by themselves.  Other times the staff shock one student but the remote can also set off someone else’s device at the same time.  I have also gotten accidentally shocked from staff mixing up my device with another student’s device, shocking me instead. Then there are the times when staff intentionally misuse the GED. I have had a staff who became angry with me and started pushing more than one remote at a time, shocking me several places on my body at once. I have had staff intentionally give me shocks for things I didn’t do in places like the bus where there was no camera to prove it. I have had numerous staff over my years there threaten me with a GED, antagonize me to try and get me to have a behavior they can then shock me for, merely for the sport of it. Staff can and DO use the GED to scare non-verbal students into doing what they want them to by pretending they are about to shock them.  Some even laugh when they do this.

     Many of the things I and others get shocked for at JRC were very small things. They would often shock us for things simply because staff found them annoying and they would keep writing therapy notes until our psychologist added it to our program. I got shocked for tic like body movements, for which I have no control over, and which don't hurt me or anybody else. I would be shocked for waving my hand in front of my face for more than 5 seconds, for closing my ears with my fingers, which I do when things get too loud, because I cannot tolerate too much noise. I would be shocked for wrapping my foot around the leg of my chair, for tensing up my body or my fingers, and the list goes on and on. There was a period of time where I and many of the other students were getting shocked for having 5 verbal behaviors in an hour. A verbal behavior is a minor behavior like talking to yourself, noises (such as clearing your throat), or talking without permission. Every hour would start a new block. And if you were pinpointed more than 4 times in that hour, on the 5th you would get a shock, and then for EVERY minor verbal behavior after that you would be shocked. If you talked out a 6th time, shock. If you had to go to the bathroom, and you had to go really bad, but you asked more then once, that would be nagging, which is a verbal behavior. And these were the things we were getting shocked for. My program was this way for a while. Some of my verbal behaviors I got pinpointed for were crying, talking to myself (even quietly), noises, laughing, humming, repeating myself and inappropriate tone of voice (which was based on staff's opinion of how my voice should sound).  Almost every time I spoke or answered a question, I was pinpointed with these behaviors. My reaction was to stop speaking, but they also made part of my program that if I didn't answer staff in 5 seconds, I would automatically be shocked. I was paralyzed with fear every day. No matter what I did I was doomed. I ask those who read my letter to think to themselves about how often they do some of these things while they are working. Twirl their pens, talk to yourself or think out loud, ask a question to someone nearby, hum a song that's in your head, laugh at something funny in the room. These are things humans do. And they are not harmful. Yet we were being subjected to terrible pain and fear for doing these simple things. One day, out of the blue, the case managers went through the building and scratched off this punishment from all their students recording sheets. They didn't say anything to us about it, just made it like it never happened. Although I can't say for sure, I overheard talk that one of the male students had told his lawyer and family they were shocking him for talking, and that JRC was never supposed to be allowed to do that to us. Whatever the reason, they covered it up fast. And even though they stopped, they still need to be held accountable for all of it. Because it went on for a very long time, and I suffered greatly because of it. People NEED to know these things happened.

    There was a time when I was there that I was on the portion program. This is where JRC starves you as a punishment for having a behavior. For example, my first plan was that for every time I had a minor behavior, such as talking to myself, rocking, wiggling my fingers, I would lose a part of my next meal. My meals came to the classroom cut into tiny pieces and divided into portions inside of a little plastic cup. Every time I had one of these little behaviors, I was forced to stand up and throw one cup away. There were many days I would lose most of my meals. And the hungrier I got, the more frantic and restless my body became. This caused me to have more behaviors like tics and rocking, and in turn I would lose more food. My mind clouded and I could no longer concentrate. I would often become so frustrated from this I would end up hurting myself.  At the end of the day, at 7pm, I was offered "LOP" (loss of privilege) food. This was made intentionally to be completely unappetizing. It was ice cold, and it was made up of chicken chunks, mash potato, spinach, and then doused with liver powder, then set to sit in the refrigerator for days. The smell alone made me sick. And I never once was able to eat it, no matter how hungry I got.

     It was very difficult to sleep at JRC. There are several alarms in the room and over the bed. Every time someone moved in bed it would set a loud alarm off that could be heard throughout the house. Most of us on GED's had to sleep with the devices on. That means locks and straps that get all tangled around you and make it very hard to lay down in a comfortable way. I was very anxious to close my eyes, always fearing a shock for something I might not have even known I did. My fears came true one day, and I was given a GED-4 shock while I was asleep. It was not explained to me why I got this shock. I was terrified and angry. I was crying. I kept asking why? And they kept telling me "No talking out". After a few minutes Monitoring called, and told the staff to shock me again for "Loud, repetitive, disruptive talking out."  The next day I asked the supervisor why I had gotten that GED. And she explained that staff had found a small piece of plastic in my self-care box, which contained my shampoo bottles etc, and that they considered this a hidden weapon. I could not believe it. I did not hide anything in my self-care box. I had not done anything wrong. Yet I was shocked for it, and worse off in my sleep. That piece of plastic, of which I was never shown, had  probably broken off of one of the plastic containers inside the box. And I was severely punished for this. After this incident I really stopped sleeping. Every time I closed my eyes they would jump open, anticipating that jolt somewhere in my body.

      I truly believe that the judges that approve us for the GED have no idea what it really is like.  All they have to go on is what JRC claims.  The GED does not feel like a “hard pinch” or a “bee sting.” It is a horrible pain that causes your muscles to contract very hard, leaving you sore afterward. I would often have a limp for one or two days after receiving a GED.  The devices JRC puts on us are not the same ones they show to the outside world when they let outsiders try the GED. Students wear a different electrode, a long one with 2 metal electrodes that radiate the electricity across a large area.

     Besides the physical pain, life with GEDs is a life of constant anxiety. I experienced heart palpitations daily, had a very hard time sleeping and eating, and became rather paranoid, always wondering if I was about to get shocked and constantly alert in all directions. I eventually became very depressed there and contemplated suicide every night. Now, after having been gone almost 4 years, I am still having nightmares and flashbacks during the day, especially when I hear certain noises that remind me of GEDs and JRC.

     I want to mention, similar to many other students, I was also tied to the 4-point restraint board and given multiple shocks for a single behavior. And if I screamed out in fear while on the board, I would  be shocked for that as well.  I was shocked for behaviors I had no control over, such as tensing up and tic-like body movements.  We were always having to watch others getting shocked in the room. Hearing others scream, cry, beg to not be shocked.  Students would scream “I’m sorry, No, Please!!” all day. I, like other students, would cringe and feel sick and helpless while watching others getting shocked.  I was so anxious about getting shocked that I would many times bang my head just to get it over with. The GED often was the cause of my behavior problems. The students that get shocked the most at JRC are non-verbal. So they cannot speak up. I feel that just because we were born different, we are not given the same rights to be protected from tortures like the GED.

     We are at the mercy of guardians and judges. When I was brought to court to be approved for the GED, I was not told where we were going or why. I was brought into the courtroom wearing a helmet and restraints on my wrists and ankles.  I was not questioned by the judge.  All he had to go on was my appearance in those restraints, testimony from JRC officials, and charts of provoked behaviors. These behaviors came from being forced to sit in isolation with a straight upright posture, in the center of a hard restraint board, day after day, week after week, for two months. I received no real help and no socialization. For those two months I was not allowed to sit in a chair, at the classroom or residence. I was to sit on the board. Also, JRC provoked me by not allowing me to shower during those two months. Instead of showers, I was bathed tied to a restraint board, naked, while staff washed me, putting their hands all over me. All in front of cameras, where Monitoring watched, including men.  Being tied on a restraint board, naked, with my private areas exposed to the staff in the bathroom and the cameras was the most horrible, vulnerable, frightening experience for me. I would scream out “rape, rape!” And these were recorded as major behaviors for me. When I first arrived at JRC, I was immediately subjected to humiliation and provocation by them forcing me to wear a diaper. I in NO WAY needed or have ever needed a diaper as an adult. I am completely independent in all toilet and hygiene skills. And they knew that. I had NEVER worn a diaper up until that day, except of course when I was a little baby. And that is exactly how they made me feel, like a little baby. I was embarrassed and confused and angry. I took that diaper off constantly. When I would take the diaper off they would mark that down on my chart that they would later show the judge as destructive behavior. I would often get restrained on the 4 point board for taking off the diaper and fighting staff not to make me put it back on. In these ways and more, JRC provoked many behaviors in me that were shown on a chart to the judge. There is no way the judge could know what was provoking my behaviors. JRC told the judges that their program was the only thing that could help me. That theirs is the only last resort treatment.

     I was considered a difficult case. I would like you to know that I am doing very well in a new program that is nothing like JRC. I don’t get shocked or put in restraints, and I am given help by staff and doctors that I can talk to. I am not drugged up as JRC claims I would be if I left. JRC made no attempt to understand me.  Feelings do not matter to JRC and we were specifically not allowed to express them.  I felt like an animal test subject there.  My new program does not punish me for my problems, that are the result of having Aspergers Syndrome. I have gotten so much better from getting real help instead of constant punishment and pain.

     I ask you to please investigate carefully into the GED. The ones that are actually being used on the students, not the samples JRC provides, as I have experienced them to be extremely manipulative in all things. There are no doctors overseeing us with the GED. Every few years they would drive me to a doctors office near Framingham, Ma, and not tell me why. In his office he would literally walk in, say hi how are you, and before you can answer he has signed their papers and you are shown the door.

     I have attached with this email a document I wrote called “The Board” which is about one of JRC’s worst tortures that they used on me and others.  I wrote it so that outsiders can feel what we feel, and hopefully to help others understand the agony of GED treatment. I invite you to read it, and I hope it will share a new perspective for you, the perspective of the ones that should matter the most, the human beings on which these devices are being used.

Sincerely,

xxx

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Board

By: xxx

December 2012

     The most sickening, horrifying experience of my life was being shocked on the restraint board. What is the board? It is a large, door sized contraption made out of hard plastic, with locking restraint cuffs on each corner where your wrists and ankles get locked in. Your body becomes stretched spread eagle style, pinned tight, rendering you completely helpless, combined with an overwhelming feeling of vulnerability. It is a torture that you would expect to see in a horror movie. The kind that makes you cringe and scream while you watch. The kind you cant get out of your head even a after it’s over. Only this was happening for real, to me.

     They added the restraint board, which for me was 5 shocks over 10 minutes to my program after a few months, which means getting shocked 5 different times, over a period of 10 minutes for having just one single behavior. If you have just one of those behaviors on your sheet, which can be getting out of your seat without permission (even without doing anything violent), tensing your body, anything they decide to put in your program. A behavior is anything you do that JRC considers a problem. Anything from hitting your head, to talking to yourself, saying a swear word, rocking, even screaming from fear and pain of the shocks, is a "behavior". The staff grab you, put you in restraints, walk or drag you to where the board is kept (usually right in the middle of the classroom with all the other students watching and stepping around you), and than restrain you to the board. Arms and legs locked in. Then the terror starts. You have to wait for it. You never know when it's coming. The staff shocking you usually hides behind a door or desk so you can not see them. JRC lavishes in the element of surprise when shocking us. Then all of a sudden the searing pain and jolt in your arm or leg or stomach, or sometimes even the fingertips or thigh or even bottom of your feet.  Whichever part of the body gets shocked, it will travel throughout. If you get shocked in your arm, for example, it is not a "hard pinch" it is a radiating electricity that will travel from your bicep through to your fingertips. Your whole arm jerks against the restraints, causing added pain from your muscles being forced to contract against being tied up. The loud screech of the device goes off with it, and they say, "(name) there is no tensing up". One down, 4 to go. Your heart races immediately, and you sweat profusely. All you want to do is throw up. That ten minutes feels like hours. You try to prepare yourself for the next shock. I keep saying in my head, 4 more, 4 more. Please just finish please. Trying not to scream in fear because i will be shocked for that as well. It comes again without warning, next time maybe in your stomach, the stabbing pain runs from left to right, right to left, across your belly button area. Your stomach heaves in and you lose your breath. More sweat now. Your heart beats faster now than you can feel possible. I start to hope my heart stops. Anything to let me away from this. 3 more. But now it's even harder, I don't feel I can take any more of this torture. Besides the pain, it's the panic and fear in your mind. There were times when I peed on myself. One particular time I was put on the board for hitting my head the night before. They said because the staff did not "follow my program". They put me on the board. They shocked me repeatedly in the stomach. And when they finally got to 5, I thought "it's over". But then they didn't take me off the board. They gave me a 6th, than 7th, than 8th. They kept going. I was so filled with fear, not knowing what was happening or when they would ever stop. I went away in my head. I started floating. I had no more tears left. When they finally stopped after 10, they sent other staff in to "change my batteries". When they lifted the electrodes off of my stomach, it was stuck. They had to pull because it had burned into my skin. I still have those scars on my stomach. When they took the devices off of me to test them, I was still strapped to the board. Every time I heard the noise from the test, I cried and panicked. The staff attempted to comfort me, she whispered to me so they wouldn't hear her, because any kind of comforting is never allowed. I was shocked on the board on many separate occasions. One time for something I never even did.

    I lived this. These things happened. These things were done to me and I witnessed them done to many others.

JRC whistleblower Greg Miller describes their torture

The Canton Patch
Opinion
by Greg Miller
April 17, 2012

Letter to the Editor: Former Teacher's Aid at Judge Rotenberg Center Comments on FOX TV Video of JRC Shock Treatments

Former Judge Rotenberg Center employee responds to Fox News video released in court last week.

Editor's note: This is a Letter to the Editor by former JRC employee Gregory Miller. Miller is commenting on the graphic Fox TV video  of JRC student Andre McCollins being shocked that was shown in court last week.

My name is Greg Miller.  I worked at the Judge Rotenberg Center as a Teacher's Assistant (with Massachusetts Teacher's Certification) for three years, starting in January of 2003, and ending in March of 2006.  I resigned and left on my own accord, then I wrote Dr. Israel a letter to inform him why I resigned.  I was interviewed for Mother Jones Magazine, for Boston Globe, and for ABC Nightline, in 2007.

I wanted to add more information regarding the 4-point board shocks and the context in which they were used.  What you do not see in this student's case on this video that I did observe with other students is the added element of psychological torture through the means of positioning the staff with the remote control outside of the door of the room with a silent timer.

Normally when a student knows he or she is about to get shocked, they instinctively tense up their muscles in anticipation of the shock as soon as a staff reaches for the remote control.

You can see Andre [McCollins] in this video tensing up his body in anticipation of the 16th or 17th shock out of 31 shocks that he received for the day.

By having the staff with the remote control and timer stand outside of the classroom door, the student would not know when the next shock was coming.  For some students, the amount of time between each shock would be varied, say a five minute wait before one shock then a 15 minute wait until the next shock, so that the student on the four-point board would literally go crazy in anticipation by not knowing when the next shock was going to take place.  When the shocks are spaced out over time at uneven intervals, and without the ability to see a staff reach for the device, students would tense up their bodies and scream, over and over, thinking that the shock was about to take place, until their muscles would get so tired that they could no longer tense up.  The student then would sadly "give up" in apathy, much like a prey who has already lost.

This added element of varying the minutes between the electric shocks in my opinion was much worse than the horrific shocks themselves.  It added a whole other dimension of helplessness and hopelessness to a student who was already tied up to the board and getting shocked.

The ability for students to tense up their muscles in anticipation of a shock gives the student at least some hope of protecting themselves from severe pain, and with that gone, and with the muscles and student voice giving out from repeated tensing up of the muscles and the screaming and crying, some students appeared to resign their will to live.

For those who have not been there in person to witness those psychiatric "treatments," it may be difficult to visualize how significant those varied timed shocks were to students, or to imagine how bad those treatments really were.  I cannot imagine any sane parents watching a video of their child receiving that kind of treatment and approving of the treatment for their child.  I do NOT believe that parents have made an "informed consent" when they have their children placed on those treatments because they have not seen what those treatments actually look like until now.

I am also certain that other parents, including those whose children are NOT placed on 4-point boards for electric shocks, are not giving an informed consent to have their children shocked at JRC.  Parents, with one exception that I saw in my entire three years at JRC, were not permitted into the classrooms.  If parents could spend time inside the classrooms, they would see students getting shocked for many mild behaviors, with no distinction made between tearing a small thread or a paper cup as different from tearing posters off the walls.  The student plan says to shock them regardless.  There was no distinction between standing up and politely raising a hand to ask to go to the bathroom versus standing up in an act of aggression.

Worst of all was when one student had a behavior, and ALL of the students were punished in the room of up to 40 students by having to watch their classmate get shocked, which I view as being significantly penalized due to the severe trauma.  For this reason, I believe that all of the children were being punished even though they were not exhibiting any behaviors, merely for being there in the classroom minding to their own task.

I was having nightmares as a teacher, and some of the other staff who I spoke to were also having nightmares.  We were not even wearing backpacks with electric shock devices or electrodes strapped to our bodies!  The students often did not know if they had exhibited a behavior, or if it was a classmate who had exhibited a behavior.  It was not uncommon when one student had a behavior for the staff to merely reach for the remote control on his or her belt, triggering five or seven other students to all react in panic with behaviors that cause each of the children to get shocked.  One student would yell out in fear, another might jump out of his seat, another student might try to pull her electrodes off of her skin or scream, or another student might hold the arm of the staff who had the remote control.

Another student might throw down his task onto his table in a panic, and other students might just sit in their seats and scream and yell.  All of these behaviors were defined as "GED"-shock behaviors, and we were required to shock all of the students exhibiting these behaviors along with the one student who had the initial behavior.

On a number of occasions, a staff would reach for a pencil in an apron pocket triggering students in their state of high anxiety to think that the staff was reaching for the remote controls, and resulting in groups of students being shocked when they reacted.

I don't believe a parent has made an informed consent to such treatment until they have been in the classroom and have seen their child and other children react together under such great stress.  If I had nightmares as a staff from working at JRC, and I did not have electrodes tied to me, just imagine what it is like for non-verbal children who are tied to the electrodes and devices in their backpacks 24-hours per day!

One parent approved a plan for her son with autism to get shocked every time he closed his eyes for 15 seconds while at his desk, but I believe that was just one bad parent who didn't like the fact that her son had autism.  For most of the parents, I believe they were largely misinformed and desperate.

Personally, I never intentionally shocked a student tied to a 4-point restraint board, nor had I shocked a so-called "high functioning" student (which meant mostly normal cognitive and verbal abilities) in my three years at the Judge Rotenberg Center.  I worked mostly with students with autism who had severe behaviors and who I did not see tied to 4-point restraint board to be shocked multiple times.

But I was working in the room a number of times when higher functioning students were tied to the 4-point restraint boards getting shocked, which left me feeling nauseous and in nightmares for days until my doctor advised me to leave for the sake of my own health.

If I could emphasize two messages in response to watching the video clip on Fox News of Andre McCollins, it would be to say, "Yes!  It really is that bad, and much worse!", and that Andre's mother absolutely must be genuine in saying that she did not give an informed consent for her son to be treated in that way.  Parents may sign permission for their children to be shocked, but that is very different from actually seeing the treatments and how the treatments are executed.  There is no "informed" consent until parents have seen what they are actually approving.


Teen tied and shocked for hours, mom calls it torture, Judge Rotenberg Center

FOX TV 25 Boston
Sunday, 19 Feb 2012
by Mike Beaudet
Kevin Rothstein Producer kevin.rothstein@foxtv.com

(FOX 25 / MyFoxBoston.com) - Video of a disabled teen tied down and given painful electric shocks for seven hours should be made public, the youth's mother said, so everyone can see what she describes as the "torture" her son went through at the controversial school, the only one in Massachusetts that uses pain to treat its clients.

"This is worse than a nightmare," Cheryl McCollins said about her disabled son, Andre. "It is horrific. And poor Andre, who had to suffer through this, and not know why."

The ordeal began after Andre hit a staff member. Inside a classroom, as a camera was recording, he was tied to a restraint board, face down, a helmet over his head.

He stayed like that for seven hours without a break, no food, no water, or trips to the bathroom. Each time he screamed or tensed up, he was shocked, 31 times in all. His mother called the next day to check on him.

"I said, 'Andre.' I said, 'Hello.' And so he said, 'Help me,'" McCollins said.

After spending three days in a comatose state, not eating or drinking, Andre was taken to Children's Hospital, where he was diagnosed with "acute stress response" caused by the shocks.

"The doctors took all the shackles and all those things off of him. Andre's not talking to me. I'm just holding him and telling him how much I love him, and asking him please to talk to me, just tell me what happened," McCollins said.

What happened that morning in October 2002 became clear after the Rotenberg Center showed her the video of Andre's ordeal, recorded by the classroom camera.

"When I viewed the tape, I saw Andre walking into a room, someone asking him to take off his coat. Andre said no, they shocked him, he went underneath the table trying to get away from them. They pulled him out, tied him up and they continued to shock him," McCollins said.

"When you look at that videotape, what was the purpose of all those shocks?" asked FOX Undercover reporter Mike Beaudet.

"I have no idea," McCollins replied.

"Did you get an apology?" Beaudet asked.

"No, they felt what they did was therapy," McCollins replied.

"Does that look like therapy to you?" Beaudet asked.

"No, it was torture," McCollins said.

For now, the public can't see for themselves what Andre's treatment looks like because the Rotenberg Center asked a Norfolk Superior Court judge to seal the video tape, saying it would be unsettling for viewers who didn't understand the context. The judge agreed, and the video remains under a protective order.

"This is video they fought vehemently not to release, fought vehemently to keep quiet and I think now are very concerned that this tape is out there," said attorney Andrew Meyer, who represents Andre McCollins in a lawsuit against the Rotenberg Center.

"The Judge Rotenberg Center has consistently gotten away with being able to soft sell their treatment, to whitewash what they've done about it being therapeutic: 'It's not so bad, it helps these children.' But the eyewitness accounts that we now have about what actually goes on at this center puts to lie everything they've been saying," Meyer said.

But not everyone agrees. When asked about the perception that electric shock therapy is torture, school attorney Michael Flammia said, "Absolutely wrong."

Flammia would not talk about Andre McCollins.

"But I can tell you I'm familiar with every kid who has been at the school, who have been at the school over 20 years and I can promise you the treatment here is safe, it's effective, it's administered properly and every kid has benefited enormously from it," Flammia said.

"We talked with a parent who says, 'Put that video out there, let the public see what happened to my son here. Let them see what she calls torture,'" asked FOX Undercover's Beaudet.

"The matter is in the hands of the courts and we have complete confidence in the court system on that particular matter," Flammia replied.

"So you don't want us to see that video?" Beaudet asked.

"It's in the hands of the court," Flammia replied.

But McCollins says the public needs to see the video of what happened to her son.

"I hope this stops it. I hope this tape being exposed puts an end to this torture. Because I feel it. You watch it, you feel it," McCollins said. "How do we sit here and let this go on?"

It's certainly getting tougher for the Rotenberg Center to use these shocks.

New York and Massachusetts recently barred shocks on new students, though the school is fighting those restrictions in New York and is planning to do so here.

This is also not the first time this kind of video has become a problem for the center. Last year, the school's founder, Matthew Israel, was indicted on charges that he ordered video of improperly shocked students to be erased despite an ongoing investigation.

Israel agreed to a deal that gives him pre-trial probation in exchange for his stepping down from the school.

Read more: http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/undercover/teen-tied-and-shocked-for-hours-mom-calls-it-torture-20120219#ixzz1nF9kXJ00

A Former Judge Rotenberg Center Worker Speaks Out, Letter to the Editor

Canton Patch

September 13, 2011
Greg Miller worked for the Rotenberg Center in Canton for three years and speaks about his experience.

Warning: Some of the content in this letter may be disturbing. Reader discretion is advised.
By Greg Miller
There is so much for me to share about my three years of experience as a staff in Judge Rotenberg Center that I wanted to share them in writing.
Please note that other former JRC teachers and staff and even psychologists have contacted me in the past to tell me that they appreciate my speaking on behalf of the students, and to tell me of legal threats that keep them from speaking out vocally against JRC’s practices. I can share only my own experiences and opinions. No doubt JRC has attempted to discredit me and what I have to share.
My Background
I worked for the Judge Rotenberg Center for over three years, between 2003 – 2006. I worked as a Teacher’s Assistant, and I turned down offers to work at JRC as a classroom teacher because I was too busy with my studies.
I have a Master’s Degree in Elementary Education from Lesley University. I previously taught as a classroom teacher in Watertown Public Schools, Lincoln Public Schools, and Winchester Public Schools. I worked too many hours as a classroom teacher to be able to also study alternative medical approaches for the treatment of children with learning difficulties and autism, and JRC offered me an opportunity to continue to work with children and youth while putting myself through school with ideal work hours.
The reason why I remained at JRC for three years instead of leaving on my first day of training was that I liked JRC’s commitment to getting students off of psychiatric drugs. Students were arriving at JRC looking very drugged up and in very rough conditions. I was a very dedicated worker and supporter of JRC at the start of my employment. JRC always treated me fairly as an employee.
Then my opinion of JRC started to change significantly to where I felt I needed to leave JRC and to speak out against its practices. I started to get signs of traumatic stress while working at JRC, and my doctor advised me repeatedly that I should leave JRC for my own health reasons. I became more aware of what was actually happening to individual students at JRC that parents were not permitted to see, and I wondered how many parents would actually be supportive of JRC if they saw what was happening to their children as I did.
My Opinion on the Use of JRC Shock Therapy
I believe that electric shocks are harmful not only to the student receiving a shock, but to all other students in the room witnessing the traumatic shock incidences. Electric shocks are not necessary to help JRC’s population of students. I saw much use of electric shocks that I felt were unwarranted to appear in student plans, and it seemed to me that individualized student plans were designed without proper oversight or adequate safeguards to prevent misuse of the shock devices.
I was having signs of traumatic stress including nightmares, night sweats, and elevated blood pressure, so that my doctor advised me that I needed to leave JRC. So imagine what it is like and what harm is being done to students who are actually on electric shock devices, who are committing no "wrong" behaviors, but who must witness their classmates getting shocked all day long!
I have witnessed the traumatic effects of electric shocks not only on the students receiving shocks, but also on other students in the room witnessing the shock “treatments” even though they have exhibited no behaviors. It was not uncommon to have incidences where I would reach for my pencil in my JRC apron pocket, on which hung the remote controls, to have students crying out and or jumping up, or throwing their task up in the air, and even grabbing me, because they thought I was going to shock them.
These were all behaviors that would cause students to be shocked depending on the individual student’s plan, so groups of students would all get shocked together, all out of their reaction of fear due to myself or another staff reaching for a pencil in our pockets. If any staff chose not to shock students at such times, we would immediately lose our jobs for “refusing to follow student plans.”
I have participated as required in following student plans to shock multiple students, including when they reacted to watching a fellow classmate tied up in a restraint chair getting attacked by a staffer with a plastic knife (being held) to the student’s throat. This was a judge-approved Clockwork-Orange-type “treatment” for a student who swallowed a small X-Acto knife blade. A staffer, according to the plan, would run up to the student who had all four limbs tied all day long to a restraint chair, and pretend to force a plastic knife down the student’s mouth while another staff pressed the remote control to give a shock to the student. The staff would repeatedly yell in a gruff voice, “Do you want to swallow a knife?”
Sometimes a number of students watching this would act out in fear and receive shocks for jumping out of their seat, crying out, or dumping their task in reaction to the violence. I highly doubt that the judge ordered all 40 plus other students in the same classroom to have to watch this violent “treatment” of their classmate with his arms and legs tied to a chair. This took place day after day for weeks, with their classmate unable to defend himself in any kind of way. I felt nauseated just being in the room during those treatments, and I was not one of the humans with electric shock devices strapped to my body, so I could only imagine what the students were going through.
I have witnessed terrible injuries including bloody scabs all over the torso, arms, and legs caused by the electrodes. While I have heard of Dr. Israel previously claiming that the injuries were due to staff not properly rotating electrodes after shocking a student, the reality was that some students exhibited behaviors resulting in up to 30 shocks in a day. Some students stopped their behaviors after receiving their maximum 30 shocks for the day. Most of the shock devices used two electrodes to pass current through a specific distance of human flesh to maximize the amount of pain from the same amount of current. Two red skin marks from electrodes per shock, times 30 shocks in a day, quickly adds up so that very soon electrodes will be placed over previous marks resulting in bloody scabs. In these cases, the multiple patches of bloody scabs have nothing to do with staff failing to rotate electrodes after shocking students. Rather it exemplifies that the electric shocks approach were not appropriate for the student, and that other approaches should have been found.
Dr. Israel has previously compared the electric shock devices to bee stings. I vividly remember nearly getting the wind knocked out of me during training at JRC back in 2003 when (I was) permitted to test out the weakest of JRC’s electric shock devices on my own arm. That was no bee sting!
I have worked with a young lady who was so underweight while on electric shock devices that she had a test tube sewn into her stomach to feed her when she would not eat enough. Upstairs there was a photo of her on the wall near Dr. Matthew Israel’s office from when she first entered JRC, looking comparatively plump.
I have witnessed a student with autism getting shocked for sitting at his desk with his eyes closed for more than 15 seconds because his mother didn’t like the fact that he closed his eyes. I wondered what it might feel like for me to try to shut my eyes at night to go to sleep after I had been shocked several times during the day for closing my eyes! Initially in his behavioral plan, the student was shocked for closing his eyes while walking down the hallway with the reason that it was “health dangerous” to close one’s eyes while walking down a short carpeted hallway.
Later, JRC added more and more places where this student would get shocked for closing his eyes. Students with autism characteristically see the world as over-stimulating and overwhelming. I saw a photograph of the student at a young age with his eyes closed while holding up a large fish on a fishing trip. I don’t believe students should be shocked for having autism.
Besides shocking a student for the behavior of “closing eyes” while sitting at one’s desk for more than 15 seconds, or while walking down the hallway, shocking students for reacting to their classmates getting shocked, or shocking a student with all four limbs tied to a restraint chair while a staff violently attacked the student with a plastic knife to teach him a lesson, there were many other behaviors for which students were shocked that felt absolutely wrong to me. Students during my time at JRC were shocked for tearing a paper cup or Kleenex while sitting and watching television during their break, shocked for standing up and raising a hand and asking to go to the bathroom, shocked for pulling apart a loose thread, shocked for going to the bathroom in one’s clothes after signing that they need to use the bathroom for over two hours, shocking a blind, nonverbal girl with cerebral palsy for making a soft moaning sound in an effort to communicate and also shocking her for holding a staff’s hand, to name a few examples of many.
I am still unaware of even one study done that demonstrates that student behaviors remain “changed” after leaving JRC, once off the shock devices.
I was told repeatedly as a staff member at JRC that not only were these student behavior plans permitted by the judge, but some of the plans were ordered by the judge. Looking back, I question what the judge knew. Certainly JRC had a huge lack of oversight and it seemed that there was inadequate protection for the students.
On more than one occasion, I remember arriving to work and being surprised by drastic changes to individual student plans, where many behaviors for which a student would be shocked were eliminated from the student’s plan or else moved to a “minor” category for which the student would not be shocked. I remember being told by a student’s case manager that the behavior plans were changed because the student had an upcoming court date to prepare for. I do not believe that the judges were given the full picture of what they were approving when approving electric shocks on students.
After looking back, and to summarize some of the atrocities I witnessed and participated in while working at JRC, it is difficult for me to understand how I could have done something so cruel to other human beings. No doubt I was operating on misinformation, and misled to believe many of the same arguments that I hear parents arguing today. I truly believed that JRC was the only school that could help this population of students without the use of psychiatric drugs that turned children into zombies and ruined their livers.
Some children, not all, do respond to the threat of pain as long as they are strapped up to electric shock devices. But it is my strong opinion that JRC used electric shocks for many behaviors when other alternatives were available, and to the exclusion of more effective treatments. Psychologists leaving JRC told me that they had other treatments based on real research in established psychological journals that they wanted to use, but they were not allowed to use those other methods because Dr. Israel favored exclusively the use of electric shocks.
Dr. Israel was out to prove the power of his electric shock devices, and in doing so, somewhere along the line the shock devices must have become more important to him than individual students. It is my opinion, as a former JRC teacher who later worked at another school serving a very similar student population as the JRC students with autism, that NO shocks are necessary to control student behaviors at JRC.
If I was given the opportunity, I would sincerely apologize to each and every student I shocked at JRC. I certainly applaud Senator Brian A. Joyce and many others who have worked so diligently to end what I consider to be torture. Torture that is allowed and exists only in Canton, Massachusetts.

Matthew Israel, Founder of the School of Shock to Face Criminal Charges

Care2.com
posted by: Kristina Chew
May 26, 2011
Video included

When I first heard about the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center (JREC) in Canton, Massachusetts, I couldn't believe that such a school existed. The JREC is a school for that uses electric shocks to discipline students with disabilities including autism, mental retardation or emotional-behavioral issues. The school was founded by a Harvard-trained psychologist, Matthew Israel and has long attracted controversy among disability rights activists, parents and experts in the field of mental health.

Today, the Boston Globe reports that Israel faces criminal charges over an incident in 2007, when two teenagers with disabilities who were residents at the JREC were wrongfully administered a number of shocks after a prank phone call by someone posing as a supervisor ordered them.

If the use of electric skin shock on children with disabilities is not troubling and barbaric enough, the suit against Israel also suggests how woefully poor the JREC's administrative practices are and also brings into question the training and supervision of its staff at all levels. From the Boston Globe:

A court official who works at the Norfolk County Superior Court said that today's schedule of cases lists a defendant named Matthew Israel facing two charges, misleading a grand jury and accessory after the fact to a crime.

The charges against Israel are believed to be related to the destruction of some of the center's digital surveillance tapes that would have showed what occurred the night of Aug. 26, 2007, in one of the center's residential group homes in Stoughton. That night, staffers received a prank phone call from someone posing as a supervisor, saying two teenagers, including Dumas's son, should be administered electrical shocks as punishment for bad behavior earlier that day.

As part of a deal with the Massachusetts state attorney office, Israel is to step down as director of the JREC that he founded 40 years ago and will be on probation for five years. The JREC's daily activities are to be overseen by a court-appointed monitor, as part of the agreement.

As the mother of a teenage autistic son, my beloved boy Charlie -- a child who has had some very severe behavior issues including self-injurious behavior -- I could never even imagine sending him to a place like the JREC where methods that amount to torture are used. As I wrote on a blog formerly known as Autism Vox, an ABC News story reported that families have been "willing to try aversive stimulation to save their son from self-destruction" and have described the JRC as the only school that would take their children due to the severity of their behavioral issues.

Indeed, despite widespread criticism about the methods used by the JREC, the state of Massachusetts has still given its approval for the center to keep functioning. But some states -- including New Jersey, where we live -- who had placed individuals with disabilities at the JRC have now stated that they will no longer send students there, due to the JRC's aversive practices.

The JREC has launched a national search for a replacement for Israel, the Boston Globe notes. While I respect the needs of families who feel the JREC is the right placement for their children, I don't think I'm the only one, and certainly not the only disability advocate, who thinks that the JREC should simply be closed. Here in the US in the 21st century, it is an embarrassment that a place that uses such aversive treatments including electric shock (delivered in a specially designed backpack) on individuals with disabilities is still allowed to operate.

Judge Rotenberg's Matthew Israel Fined & Reprimanded

State fines center for allowing clinicians to call themselves ’psychologists’
October 6, 2009
By Abbie Ruzicka, Globe Correspondent

The director of the Judge Rotenberg Center in Canton has been fined by the state’s Division of Professional Licensure for allowing 14 unlicensed clinicians at the school to use the title ‘‘psychologist,’’ the Massachusetts Board of Registration of Psychologists announced today.

Dr. Matthew Israel was fined $29,600 and a reprimand was placed on his license, according to the board. Israel has been licensed to practice psychology in Massachusetts since 1974, according to state records.

The Rotenberg center ceased using the title of ‘‘psychologist’’ in 2006 after the Board of Registration of Psychologists first brought forth its concern over the misuse of the title, and changed their titles to ‘‘clinicians,’’ Rotenberg spokesman Ernie Corrigan said.

The center’s use of ‘‘psychologist’’ for clinicians prior to 2006 was consistent with what it believed the word meant at the time.

‘‘There’s genuine confusion,’’ Corrigan said, citing a 1996 change in state law that requires psychologists to be licensed by the state. Before 1996, doctorate and master’s degree-level clinicians trained in psychology were allowed to use the psychologist title.

‘‘These were highly educated people,’’ he said.

The Rotenberg center, which treats adults and children from across the country with autism, mental retardation, and emotional problems, is believed to be the only facility in the country that uses electric shock therapy to curb its students' behaviors.

In the past, the center has been the target of numerous government investigations and legislators have put forth efforts to limit the use of skin shock and aversion therapy.
In total, Israel and the Rotenberg center have paid over $200,000 to the state in fines, according to a court settlement in July of this year.