Child abuse, Skinner style

[danohu]

Wow. Drop what you're doing, and go read this article:

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.

Now, this is already astoundingly nasty stuff. The justification is that these are severely disabled children who would otherwise be locked up, drugged to the eyeballs, or killing themselves. I can't accept it - because I wouldn't want anybody to have that power over anyone, certainly not in such a regimented system - but at least I can see the defence. Only, read on and it gets far worse:

Sometimes, the student gets shocked for doing precisely what he's told. In a few cases where a student is suspected of being capable of an extremely dangerous but infrequent behavior, the staff at Rotenberg won't wait for him to try it. They will exhort him to do it, and then punish him. In these behavior rehearsal lessons, staff members will force a student to start a dangerous activity - for a person who likes to cut himself, they might get him to pick up a plastic knife on the table - and then shock him when he does.

And worse:

New York state inspectors concluded that "the background and preparation of staff is not sufficient," that JRC shocks students "without a clear history of self-injurious behavior," and that it uses the GED "for behaviors that are not aggressive, health dangerous, or destructive, such as nagging, swearing, and failing to keep a neat appearance."

Edit: wow, there have been some totally fascinating comments on this. Thanks, everybody :)

Comments

[serena-lesley.livejournal.com]

The teachers are trained (albeit one of the points the inquiry mentions is that they don't feel the training is adequate)
In this case perhaps it's best to assume that their training is not, in fact, adequete?

Are you aware of what happens to many people who 'look after' vunerable groups? Having seen documentaries where a reporter 'infiltrates' a nursing home, special needs hostel etc, I'm aware how easy it is for 'carers' to get carried away by it all and issue punishments or restraint (knocking them to the floor and pinning them there) for very little reason, simply because they enjoy it. Verbal attacks aimed at people who can't speak, behaviour designed to knock the 'patient' or 'pupil' down to such a low point that they are easier to control. Where are the safeguards against this? These are electric shocks we're talking about here! It's wide open to abuse.

The circumstances in which the punishments are given are changing. I mean, 'This child is untidy, shock him.' WTF?

The end result is not that the pupils have a better quality of life. The end result is that they're made to be 'easier to control' which gives their 'carers' a better quality of life. Let's be honest about what we're dealing with.

[azekeil.livejournal.com]

It is true, it does mean that the pupils (patients?) are easier to control. But the benefits must be there for the pupils as well or they would not request to join the system.

The implementation will always be questionable, but as I say, with strict controls in place I believe the ends probably justifies the means.

[serena-lesley.livejournal.com]

But the benefits must be there for the pupils as well or they would not request to join the system.

See my comment below for my full response to this. In short, I believe that the students who request to be put on the program do it because they want to behave in a way that gets them positive attention, and they see the behaviour of their classmates on the program changing, and want that for themselves.

I will not accept that when a child wants to be good, that shocking them is the only way to achieve that. They have come to mentally link the backpacks to good behaviour and it's now a crutch for them. I'm strongly of the opinion that the school should find these students a different and less harmful crutch.

[azekeil.livejournal.com]

I agree with you here. As before, the details of the implementation are questionable, but I believe the system as a whole is sound, if control over the teachers can be enforced properly.

[serena-lesley.livejournal.com]

Also, apologies to oedipamaas49 for wading in here (I was linked to your post) without even so much as a 'hello'. So, um, hello. *Waves*

[oedipamaas49.livejournal.com]

hello! you're more than welcome; it's been fun and informative watching the pair of you slug it out!

[serena-lesley.livejournal.com]

Heh, it's similar to a discipline discussion that we've been having at home, which is why linked me here in the first place. As it happens, my son has since responded brilliantly to positive action where previously, punishments were exacerbating the problem. It's a process that requires more dedication from the carer, but the results far outshine the alternative of anger and punishment. ;)