In Massachusetts, it's a good day to be a kid. That is, unless you're an autistic kid.
A story in today's Boston Herald online edition details how the state legislature is set to debate outlawing spanking of any kind in the state, including in one's own home. As stated in the article:
...If signed into law, parents would be prohibited from forcefully laying a hand on any child under age 18 unless it was to wrest them from danger, lest they be charged with abuse or neglect. ...
This would make Massachusetts the first state in the US to ban spanking. Massachusetts has long been known to be a very liberal state. And this proposed ban on spanking is evidence of that bent. Inexplicably, however, that liberal concern of the state for the welfare of children doesn't exist if you happen to be on the autism spectrum.
As this article in the online Village Voice pointed out, at the Judge Rotenberg Center in Canton, Massachusetts, administering electric shocks to autistic students in this residential "school" is an everyday occurrence.
...The only thing that sets these students apart from kids at any other school in America (aside from their special-ed designation) is the electric wires running from their backpacks to their wrists. Each wire connects to a silver-dollar-sized metal disk strapped with a cloth band to the student's wrist, forearm, abdomen, thigh, or foot. Inside each student's backpack is a battery and a generator, both about the size of a VHS cassette. Each generator is uniquely coded to a single keychain transmitter kept in a clear plastic box labeled with the student's name. Staff members dressed neatly in ties and green aprons keep the boxes hooked to their belts, and their eyes trained on the students' behavior. They stand ready, if they witness a behavior they've been told to target, to flip open the box, press the button, and deliver a painful two-second electrical shock into the student at the end of the wire. ...
So, as the Boston Herald notes, laying a hand on a child forcefully in any manner would earn you being charged with abuse or neglect, while in the Judge Rotenberg Center (JRC) withholding food and shocking kids is considered therapy. And if a small shock doesn't get the desired result, then just increase the level of shock.
...They still withhold food from some students as an aversive, but shocks are their main treatment. The school began using electric shock in 1989, but the device they first used, called SIBIS, was so weak that many students grew accustomed to it, eroding its effectiveness. So Israel developed the GED, which he registered with the Food and Drug Administration in 1995. (The GED was classified in such a way that it only required FDA registration, not approval.) When students grew innured to that, Israel brought forth the GED-4, three times as powerful as the original GED. That version is not registered with the FDA, which now says the Rotenberg Center is exempt because it's only using the machines in-house. ...
And although Dr. Israel, the founder and head of the JRC, justifies the use of involuntary shocks because of self injurious violent behavior on the part of students, its use is not limited to that.
...But the GED isn't only used when a life is at stake, or when a student hurts himself or another, but also for "noncompliance" or "simple refusal." "We don't allow individuals just to stay in bed all day," says Dr. Robert von Heyn, a Rotenberg clinician, in a video for parents. "We want to teach people. So we may use the GED to treat noncompliance." Other behavior that doesn't appear dangerous also could earn a zap. While it might seem excessive to shock a student for nagging his teacher, Israel asks, what if the kid nags all the time, every minute, every day? The nagging interferes with his learning, so he can't learn self-control and develop normally. JRC's choice is to shock him, stop the nagging, and let him learn. ...
As a parent, I am not the biggest proponent to spanking. Generally speaking, I try my hardest to avoid it, and consider each episode at least partly a failure of parenting on my part. But I also think that parents need to be given latitude in raising their own children, and that a swat to the butt is not the worst thing in the world.
I believe that I know the difference between a swat on the butt and child abuse. Unfortunately, it would appear that the state of Massachusetts has gotten it entirely backwards. A swat on the butt will get a parent arrested if this law passes, but starving kids or jolting them with electric shocks for non-compliance in school gets you paid hefty sums of money from the state.
