bILL h.180

Unequal Rights

In Massachusetts disabled people can legally be harmed by aversives, while it is illegal for aversives to be used on abled people. Aversives are actions taken to change a person’s behavior that are physically unpleasant or painful. Examples of aversives include a person having the bathroom, sleep or food withheld from them. Other examples include a person receiving a pinch, a slap or even an electric shock.

Many disability rights advocates, for decades have fought to end the use of an aversive that the United Nations has identified as torture. This aversive is the graduated electronic decelerator (GED) which administers high voltage electric shock to disabled people. This device is only used at the Judge Rotenberg Center, in Canton, MA.

Some of the residents of the JRC come from Massachusetts, but most come from other states, including a large percentage from New York.

On the surface it would appear that ending the practice of aversives could be easily fixed in Massachusetts. This is because protecting against harm, and addressing unequal rights could be assumed to be politically popular in a progressive state like Massachusetts.

So, the question
remains “why is
progress so slow?”

Barriers to Change

  • Most people are unaware, or not fully informed about the harms of aversives to disabled people. They also have little knowledge of the positive alternatives to aversives.

  • In MA legislative hearings, caregivers whose children were given the GED, shared their belief that the device saved their child’s life, and improved their child’s outcomes. Legislators tended to value this testimony more than the survivors who endured aversives and testified against their use.

  • Aversives can be determined to be part of a “behavioral plan” and approved of by a legal guardian. Therefore, those under a guardianship, who are harmed by aversives, have no legal rights to opt out of aversives.

  • The JRC is very profitable, and spends considerable money on lawyers, lobbyists and campaign contributions to continue to be allowed to use aversives.

  • There is poor disability representation in the state legislature, including on the Joint Committee on Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities. In addition, the Autism Commission has poor disability representation. Note: Disability representation is defined here as disabled self advocates.

  • The status quo in the State House has been for bills that would ban the use of aversives, to “go to study.” Going to study usually means that a bill will not be voted on for the current legislative session.

Solutions

Federal

  • Currently the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is considering a ban on the GED.

  • Educational campaigns can share the alternatives of aversives.

Massachusetts

  • Bill H.180, An Act regarding the use of aversive therapy.

  • This bill if passed would offer equal rights against physical harm to both disabled and abled people. This bill would go beyond a ban of the GED and also ban the use of a range of aversives on disabled people, in MA.

  • End state funding to the JRC. In the last fiscal year the state spent $28 million.


New York

  • Bill VS.8935, An Act to amend the social services law, in relation to prohibiting the use of aversive conditioning and other certain punishments.

  • This bill, known as Andre’s Law would ban NY residents from being sent to the Judge Rotenberg Center. It would also prohibit the use of aversive conditioning and other certain punishments.


supportERS

MA Legislation

From the 2023-2024 legislative session Bill H.180 had support from:

  • 37 legislative petitioners, including Boston legislators Lydia Edwards, 3rd Suffolk, Adrian C. Madaro, 1st Suffolk and Nick Collins, 1st Suffolk.

  • 39 advocates who testified at the bill’s Nov. 13, 2023 hearing.

  • 1,000 constituents who passed messages onto their legislators, indicating their support for this bill.

From the 2021-2022 Legislative Session, Bill H.225 (the same bill but with a different bill number) had support from:

  • 41 legislative petitioners including Boston Representative Jon Santiago, 9th Suffolk.

  • The Boston City Council who signed a resolution to support this bill including District 8 councilor Kenzie Bok, and City Councilors at Large Julia Mejia, Ruthzee Louijeune and Erin Murphy.

  • Advocates who testified at the bill’s Nov. 22, 2021 hearing.

  • The 2021 Massachusetts Democratic Party Platform (pages 14-15) that included the following language: “Massachusetts Democrats will fight for…” “..The end of the use of the graduated electronic decelerator on people with disabilities.”

  • 496 people who signed a petition for the Attorney General to have the JRC be in compliance with Mass law 115 CMR 5.14 for “the prohibition on pain for behavior that is not dangerous or destructive.”

  • Advocates who sent 4,278 letters to legislators to support this bill through the Action Network.

NY Legislation

From the 2023- 2024 legislative session Bill VS.8935 (Andre’s Law which would ban NY residents from being sent to the Judge Rotenberg Center) has support from:

  • Disability rights advocates at a May 7, 2024 protest.

  • 3 legislative cosponsors.

Federal OVERSIGHT

In May 2023 the FDA requested comments from the public in consideration of a ban on the GED device (that administers high voltage shocks on disabled individuals at the Judge Rotenberg Center). Supporters of a ban included:

  • MA Governor Maura Healey who shared her views on aversives, in the press.

  • Disability rights advocates who shared 791 comments detailing why they supported a ban with the FDA.

Hightlight

The 34 organizations that comprise the #StopTheShock Coalition support MA bill H.180, NY Bill VS.8935, and an FDA ban of the GED device.

Calls To ACTION

Currently the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is considering a ban on the GED. Some members of Congress are trying to take away the FDA's power to make that decision even though their role is to be a regulatory agency. This new language is being snuck into a funding bill and if passed would stop the FDA from being able to ban these devices.

Help stop a bill that would allow the Judge Rotenberg Center use the GED device without a court order further reducing individual rights.

SOURCES

ASAN.(2024). #StopTheShock. ASAN.

Brown, Lydia X. Z. (last updated July 15, 2021). Bearing Witness, Demanding Freedom: Judge Rotenberg Center Living Archive. autistichoya.

Zullo, Darin (January 22, 2024). Self-advocates lead movement against Judge Rotenberg Center’s controversial skin shocks. The Scope, Boston.