A Call for Ethical and Unprejudiced Leadership
and Practice in the Field of Psychology
An Autism & Mental Health Community
Letter
This letter is to the American Psychological Association (hereafter
referred to as APA), and to all professionals in the field of
psychology. This letter calls upon APA and professionals who adhere to
the APA Code of Ethics to act in a manner that is ethical and consistent
with that Code of Ethics. Two recent APA documents are relevant to this
call to action. They are, the 2006 "Resolution Against Torture and
Other Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment or Punishment" (hereafter
referred to as 2006 Resolution), and the 2007 "Reaffirmation of the
American Psychological Association Position Against Torture and Other
Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and Its Application
to Individuals Defined in the United States Code as "Enemy Combatants""
(hereafter referred to as 2007 Resolution). With fervor, we are
advocating for people with autism, developmental differences, and mental
health challenges; urgently entreating that they may be given the same
respect with regard to human rights as alleged "Enemy Combatants," or
any other human beings. As professionals who adhere to the APA Code of
Ethics, nothing less than an unprejudiced stance in this matter should
be considered acceptable.
Currently, children and young adults with autism, developmental
differences, and mental health challenges are being treated in a manner
that clearly meets the definition of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman,
and Degrading Treatment or Punishment, as defined by the two previously
mentioned APA documents. The Judge Rotenberg Educational Center
(hereafter referred to as JRC) in Massachusetts has a long history of
using electric shock, food deprivation and prolonged mechanical
restraint, as well as other painful and dehumanizing aversive
techniques.
The
use of the phrase "effective treatment," does not make such techniques
humane or acceptable. Furthermore, attempting to justify them as
"treatments" of "last resort" may not be completely accurate. It has
been clearly demonstrated that positive behavioral approaches, based on
a careful analysis of the functions dangerous or disruptive behaviors
may be serving are as effective and more enduring than behavior change
techniques based on pain and fear. JRC uses a device that they call the
Graduated Electronic Decelerator (GED), to deliver painful electric
shocks. Reporters, legislators and others who have experienced the
2-second shock from this device describe it as incredibly painful. A
report from the New York State Educational Department noted that JRC was
not only using electric shock for dangerous and self-injurious behaviors
but also for behaviors that are benign or idiosyncratic such as
"nagging, swearing and failure to maintain a neat appearance," or
"slouching in a chair." The director of the Judge Rotenberg Center
testified at a legislative hearing that one student received 5,300
electric shocks in one day. In his testimony, he stated that over a
24-hour period, this student, a teenager who weighed only 52 pounds, was
subjected to an average of one shock every 16 seconds. During some
periods, the student was automatically shocked every second if he lifted
his hand off a paddle. A copy of the New York State Report can be found
here:
http://boston.com/news/daily/15/school_report.pdf
and a myriad of additional information on the school and its practices
can be found by googling the Judge Rotenberg Center.
Proponents of behaviorism have voiced their opposition to these
practices. Although the Director of the Judge Rotenberg Center often
defends his practices by stating that he was trained by B. F. Skinner,
Dr. Skinner made it very clear that he did not condone such practices.
At the age of 83, he was interviewed by Daniel Goleman of the New York
Times. In an article published August 25th, 1987, titled,
"Embattled Giant Of Psychology Speaks His Mind," his view is stated.
“The use of punishment is another issue Dr. Skinner still feels
impassioned about. He is an ardent opponent of the use of punishment,
such as spanking, or using ''aversives'' -such as pinches and shocks -
with autistic children. ''What's wrong with punishments is that they
work immediately, but give no long-term results,'' Dr. Skinner said.
''The responses to punishment are either the urge to escape, to
counterattack or a stubborn apathy. These are the bad effects you get
in prisons or schools, or wherever punishments are used.'' The
complete article can be viewed here:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?es=9B0DE3D6143CF936A1575BC0A961948260&sec=health&spon=&pagewanted=print
The
1965 experimental research of O. Ivar Lovaas, Benson Schaeffer, and
James Q. Simmons, conducted at the University of California, Los
Angeles, concluded that electric shock applications did not have
enduring effectiveness. In conclusion, they questioned the need for
shocking children with Autism by stating, “A basic question, then, is
whether it is necessary to employ shock in accomplishing such an end or
whether less drastic methods might suffice.” (Journal Of
Experimental Research in Personality 1, 99-109 (1965))
A recent Mother Jones article about this institution
began like this, “Rob Santana awoke terrified.
He'd had that dream again, the one where silver wires ran under his
shirt and into his pants, connecting to electrodes attached to his limbs
and torso. Adults armed with surveillance cameras and remote-control
activators watched his every move. One press of a button, and there was
no telling where the shock would hit—his arm or leg or, worse, his
stomach. All Rob knew was that the pain would be intense.”(Mother
Jones, August 20, 2007). A horror from the Abu Ghraib prison scandal?
No, torture carried out in the name of treatment, right here in the
State of Massachusetts, against the most vulnerable of our young people
-- and designed and implemented by Psychologists.
It is
additionally noted that programs that are built around scientific
knowledge and principles will generally welcome peer review and a
continual improvement process. Currently and historically, JRC
practices are remarkably deficient in these areas. As leaders in the
field of psychology, and as professionals who are intolerant of torture,
APA has an opportunity, if not an obligation, to demonstrate leadership
in this matter. Please consider the following facts and arguments.
Section 1 of the American Psychological Association Code of Ethics,
creates a standard of excellence in regards to the personal
accountability of psychologists to their Code of Ethics. It also
establishes a means for resolving professional ethical issues between
psychologists and with organizations with which Psychologists may be
affiliated.
Sub-Section 1.05 of the Code of Ethics covers the topic of Reporting
Ethical Violations. This sub-section related to reporting, places a
grave responsibility upon APA members to report apparent ethical
violations that have "substantially harmed or are likely to
substantially harm a
person or organization." This reporting "may include referral to
state or national committees on professional ethics, to state licensing
boards, or to the appropriate institutional authorities."
Within the 2007 Reaffirmation, reference is made to the 2006 Resolution,
stating emphatically that it is "a comprehensive and foundational
position applicable to all individuals, in all settings and in all
contexts without exception." We are in agreement with this
position.
We are pleading with APA psychologists, and all psychologists who
independently and voluntarily follow the APA Code of Ethics, to consider
that the 2006 Resolution is inclusive of all human beings. We ask that
it be applied toward those who are receiving treatment/services related
to symptoms associated with autism, developmental differences, and
mental health challenges, including such that may cause or contribute to
self-injurious behavior. This letter is an earnest appeal to APA
leadership and all professionals in the field of psychology to
demonstrate ethical practices and adhere to the principles of the 2006
Resolution and the 2007 Reaffirmation in opposing the use of skin-shock
and food deprivation that are currently
being administered as "treatment" for self-injurious behavior,
aggressive behavior, and other behaviors that are being considered as
precursors. Skin-shock or food deprivation under any other context, or
being administered to any other population segment would be considered
an inhumane form of punishment that in reality is truly torture.
According to the 2006 Resolution, there can be no exception for this
type of degrading treatment.
Although there are some children and young adults who are able to
communicate how they have been "substantially harmed by a person or
organization," there are many others who are unable to do so. Even
those young people with the ability to communicate how they are being
harmed are virtually unheard. Regardless of the individual’s ability to
communicate and describe torture and its physical, mental and emotional
effect upon them, this type of "treatment," is still inherently wrong.
Is it not the responsibility of a professional or any human being to
take action when they are personally aware of acts that are inhumane and
degrading forms of torture?
At the JRC this "treatment" is being authorized under court order.
While Judges may have extensive expertise within the framework of law,
they are reliant upon the testimony of experts (in these cases,
Psychologists) to assist them in making decisions. Experts within the
field of psychology need to see an example of leadership from
organizations such as APA. Good leadership provides guidance and
constraints in all areas that are conducive to professionalism and best
practices.
In conclusion, we are respectfully appealing to APA members and
leadership on the basis of professionalism and unprejudiced application
of your own code of ethics, and consistent with your 2006 Resolution and
2007 Reaffirmation, to formally and specifically declare your position
regarding the use of skin-shock "treatments," food deprivation, and any
other aversives that inflict pain or deprive basic human rights at JRC
or elsewhere. We are calling upon APA members to apply the Code which
condemns the treatment that is currently taking place at JRC.
We
respectfully request that the APA send this letter to its members, post
it on their website and/or publish it in a newsletter or other
publication that reaches its full membership. We request that the APA
as a professional organization, and as professional individuals actively
and vociferously advocate for best practices while opposing that which
is torture. We furthermore request that the APA, as an organization,
make a formal and specific declaration of its stance in
this matter and exercise appropriate discipline, thereby demonstrating
that the Code of Ethics will be applied without prejudice. Your example
in this will be a voice of hope for those who have been locked away,
subjected to daily torture and unseen and unheard for too long.
Written and Presented by:
Derrick Jeffries / Person with Asperger’s Syndrome
Nancy Weiss / Co-Director, The National Leadership Consortium on
Developmental Disabilities, Center for Disabilities Studies, University
of Delaware
The following individuals and organizations endorse this message:
"I know of nobody who is purely Autistic or purely neurotypical.
Even God had some Autistic moments, which is why the planets all spin."
~ Jerry Newport