Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I couldn't believe the title of the article but was relieved that this was an isolated, hopefully, case: FDA May Ban Shock Devices Used On Those With Special Needs - Disability Scoop You have to wonder about anyone that would actually be willing to use a shock device on a child or adult and just what limits they would have when it came right down to it. Obviously, this can't be the only institution that has the behaviors for which they feel it necessary to use this punishment.
I couldn't believe the title of the article but was relieved that this was an isolated, hopefully, case: FDA May Ban Shock Devices Used On Those With Special Needs - Disability Scoop You have to wonder about anyone that would actually be willing to use a shock device on a child or adult and just what limits they would have when it came right down to it. Obviously, this can't be the only institution that has the behaviors for which they feel it necessary to use this punishment.
See the Judge Rotenburg school and the parents who defend them
“People don’t use it anymore because they don’t need to. It is not the standard of care. There are alternative procedures that do not involve aversives like electronic shock,” said William Pelham, a behavioral specialist and director of the Center for Children and Families at the State University of New York at Buffalo. “And I am not talking about drugs as an alternative. I am talking about other behavioral treatments.”
Still, the parents say the shocks are making a difference in their children’s lives as nothing else has. In 2006, after New York issued an immediate ban on electric shock for behavior modification, Ms. Handon was among the parents of more than 40 children who sued and won a court injunction to keep treatments going.
The case has been in the courts for quite some time.
I have a friend in the Chicago area who works with developmentally disabled adults in a facility for around-the-clock care. She is vehemently opposed to the idea of ECT for ANYBODY. She has never gone into detail about why she feels this way but it is definitely a "sore" subject for her. I now wonder if it is beneficial for anybody; however, this kind of ruling makes it difficult to blindly trust ANY treatment options approved by the FDA. I know that times change and new information is learned to make changes (and rulings) necessary, but there is always a nagging question about all new procedures approved and the process used to get them on the market.
ETA: I guess I don't understand why each person/family can't make the choice they see fit for their child without making it ruling that basically forces parents to lose an option they have found beneficial.
I have a friend in the Chicago area who works with developmentally disabled adults in a facility for around-the-clock care. She is vehemently opposed to the idea of ECT for ANYBODY. She has never gone into detail about why she feels this way but it is definitely a "sore" subject for her. I now wonder if it is beneficial for anybody; however, this kind of ruling makes it difficult to blindly trust ANY treatment options approved by the FDA. I know that times change and new information is learned to make changes (and rulings) necessary, but there is always a nagging question about all new procedures approved and the process used to get them on the market.
ETA: I guess I don't understand why each person/family can't make the choice they see fit for their child without making it ruling that basically forces parents to lose an option they have found beneficial.
Because aversives are abusive especially shock treatment.
Employees shocked him for aggressive behavior, he says, but also for minor misdeeds, like yelling or cursing. Each shock lasts two seconds. "It hurts like hell," Rob says. (The school's staff claim it is no more painful than a bee sting; when I tried the shock, it felt like a horde of wasps attacking me all at once. Two seconds never felt so long.) On several occasions, Rob was tied facedown to a four-point restraint board and shocked over and over again by a person he couldn't see. The constant threat of being zapped did persuade him to act less aggressively, but at a high cost. "I thought of killing myself a few times," he says.
And, not only are they horrible, but they generally do not work. We are not allowed to abuse animals by shocking them, why do we think that disabled children are an ok target.
I do not agree that disabled children should be shocked. Not at all. However, my question remains "Why can't the choice obtain ECT be left up to the parents/care providers of the child?" Clearly, some families are happy with their choice to use this treatment option. Why should it be banned solely because some other families are not pleased with it?
It's like saying since I'm allergic to shellfish and almost died from exposure to it, it should be banned from sale everywhere in the USA. Some people like shellfish. Some people don't get sick from exposre to it. Why should they be deprived of the right to have shellfish because I want it banned?
You can't leave it up to the parents to decide what is abuse and what is not. There are parents that abuse their children and the states have decided when they cross the line. Good grief, mention spanking a "normal" child and everyone is ready to string you up in the city square yet, mention using electrical shocks on a child with special needs and people are ready to defend that being done but then, it is someone with special needs, right? Parents are not always aware of what is and is not good for their children and some don't really care so intervention is necessary. Intervention by people who believe that everyone, even people with special needs, deserve to be treated humanely. I remember reading about cattle prods being used on people. See there is a reason they are called "cattle" prods and not "human" prods. What kind of animal would be the one delivering this shock to person? How do people do that? I have never understood how someone can be so cruel to another. Just the presence of such a weapon waiting to be used on someone might very well end up being used on someone that wasn't signed up by their parents/guardians for such abuse. The weapons need to be gone!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Parents are not always aware of what is and is not good for their children and some don't really care so intervention is necessary. Intervention by people who believe that everyone, even people with special needs, deserve to be treated humanely. I remember reading about cattle prods being used on people. See there is a reason they are called "cattle" prods and not "human" prods. What kind of animal would be the one delivering this shock to person? How do people do that? I have never understood how someone can be so cruel to another.
Just the presence of such a weapon waiting to be used on someone might very well end up being used on someone that wasn't signed up by their parents/guardians for such abuse. The weapons need to be gone!
