Robert Marcus (1)
Friday, August 26, 2011
Sunday, July 10, 2011
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Aversive Stimuli
Welcome,
This is my very first blog! But I'm no stranger, as my "pen name" suggests, to speaking my mind.
Today's Boston Globe Op-Ed page offers a strong defense for the program at the Judge Rotenburg Institute which uses "aversive stimuli" such as brief shocks to quell self-destructive behaviors in individuals who have otherwise been unable to paticipate in learning opportunities.
And yesterdays's Globe, and other recent reports, indicate how seniors in nursing homes who have dementia have been given anti-psychotic medications administered for their sedating qualities ; a convenience rather than a therapeutic tool AND a boon for the pharmaceutical companies.
What's the connection?
The US Supreme Court ruled, in Rogers vs Greenblatt, a case initiated here in the early '60's at Boston State Hospital, that no one may be given an anti-psychotic medication until a very thorough legal/clinical protocol was followed.
The same sort of protocol was applied to aversive treatments as well!
But these protections have broken down. We don't trust our courts any more, often with good reason. Guardians ad litem? or ad "LITE?"are supposed to represent the interests of the individuals(seniors, developmentally disabled and/or mentally ill individuals) in these "Rogers" hearings; but do they? or are they even made available in these tough economic times?
Believe it or not, the implications in health care reform extend to these issues as well. The compromise of necessary treatment by ignorance and indifference, and collusion with the pharmaceutical and insurance industries cannot continue.
Scrutiny of our judicial system must be close on our priorities as well!
This is my very first blog! But I'm no stranger, as my "pen name" suggests, to speaking my mind.
Today's Boston Globe Op-Ed page offers a strong defense for the program at the Judge Rotenburg Institute which uses "aversive stimuli" such as brief shocks to quell self-destructive behaviors in individuals who have otherwise been unable to paticipate in learning opportunities.
And yesterdays's Globe, and other recent reports, indicate how seniors in nursing homes who have dementia have been given anti-psychotic medications administered for their sedating qualities ; a convenience rather than a therapeutic tool AND a boon for the pharmaceutical companies.
What's the connection?
The US Supreme Court ruled, in Rogers vs Greenblatt, a case initiated here in the early '60's at Boston State Hospital, that no one may be given an anti-psychotic medication until a very thorough legal/clinical protocol was followed.
The same sort of protocol was applied to aversive treatments as well!
But these protections have broken down. We don't trust our courts any more, often with good reason. Guardians ad litem? or ad "LITE?"are supposed to represent the interests of the individuals(seniors, developmentally disabled and/or mentally ill individuals) in these "Rogers" hearings; but do they? or are they even made available in these tough economic times?
Believe it or not, the implications in health care reform extend to these issues as well. The compromise of necessary treatment by ignorance and indifference, and collusion with the pharmaceutical and insurance industries cannot continue.
Scrutiny of our judicial system must be close on our priorities as well!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)