Parents Sue to Use Cattle Prod on Adult Autistic Son
You see a story about a home for people with disabilities and electric shock used as behavior modification, and you think it's going to be about uncaring group home workers using inhumane but expeditious methods. But in the case of a 48-year-old Chicago man with autism, it's not the attendants who are wanting to use a cattle prod on him, it's his parents. And the management objects.
Bradley Bernstein's parents have found that a jolt from a cattle prod will keep him from banging his head against the wall, which they fear will damage his eyes and his ability to communicate. It also helps control his violent outbursts. Sometimes they only have to show him the cattle prod, and he settles down. When the group home refused to allow the shocks, claiming that there are better behavioral tools available, the Bernsteins sued.
Bradley's mother claims the shock is about the same as what you'd get walking across a carpet and touching something metal, and that the shock calms her son. A post on the Special Education Law Blog on the story counters with the fact that a cattle prod can administer 4500 volts of electricity, and even lesser jolts can have severe side effects. It's hard for me to believe that using such a device could ever be the best, or even an acceptable, choice for altering behavior; but I also know that sometimes the solutions that parents come up with, out of love and frustration and desperation, don't look so good to the outside world.
Do you think it's ever justified to use electric shock for behavior modification? Pick an answer from the poll above, and share your thoughts in the comments.
Comments
I feel very sad that Mr. Bernstein and his family did not receive the help they needed when Mr. Bernstein was a child. The suggestion of using a cattle prod was a serious mistake made by a professional who apparently did not know what else to do and considered a cattle handling device to be acceptable for use on a human. It is sad that the family felt the need to heed his suggestion and did not instead find other help from someone else who could provide assistance which was not painful, was not demeaning, and which had a long-lasting positive effect. One problem with punishment is that it appears to work immediately, but the effect lasts only so long as the punishment is present. Also, it does not change the environment or circumstances in order to prevent the behavior. It does not teach alternative behaviors. It only presents pain or the threat of pain. It leaves the individual and his family and support providers in perpetual roles of victim (of self-abuse and punishment) and punisher–unless they refuse to use such methods.
Positive behavior supports had not been developed when Mr. Bernstein was a child, but they are available now and are very powerful when implemented properly. First a functional behavior assessment must be performed to determine the likely reason why Mr. Bernstein hits himself and the situations in which he is likely to do this. Some people with autism who have developed the ability to communicate effectively have reported that they hit themselves when they have a pain in their head or a headache, when they hear certain sounds that are very uncomfortable, when they have visual processing difficulties, and so forth. Sensory processing problems need to be investigated and addressed. When Mr. Bernstein was a child much less was known about sensory issues.
Focusing on providing painful consequences after Mr. Bernstein hits himself will not help him to cope with any sensory problems or discomfort. If he is dealing with a sensory problem, imagine his dilemma of being uncomfortable and doing the only thing he knows may work (hit his head) and then being given an electric shock because of that.
After a functional behavior assessment establishes the likely reasons for the behavior (sensory issue, escaping a situation, attention/communication, gaining something tangible, etc.), then a positive behavior support plan can be designed to change the environment and the supports he is provided, teach new behaviors including increasing his communication skills through augmentative communication methods, and make other changes to improve the overall quality of his life.
Punishment procedures are not the answer, no matter how extreme the behavior. Positive behavior supports are extremely powerful. TASH http://www.tash.org and the Autism National Committee http://www.autcom.org, among others, endorse its use and can provide more information.
Cattle prods, electric skin shock, and any other punishment procedures (which I will not list, as they are all horrendous), should never be used on people. Their use harms the people who are punished and the people who are doing the punishment. These emotional wounds can be deep and quite difficult to heal.
I congratulate the staff in Mr. Bernstein’s group home who refused to deliver the electric shock. I hope that they and the family will receive the help that they need to support Mr. Bernstein using positive behavior supports and by otherwise improving the overall quality of his life. With the proper supports, individuals can learn to use other methods to express themselves and to deal with their difficulties.
Two extremely useful references for positive behavior supports are these:
Functional Assessment and Program Development for Problem Behavior by O’Neill, Horner, Albin, Sprague, Storey, and Newton, 2nd edition, 1997 (Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Pub.).
Working Together: A Guide to Positive Behavior Support for Families and Professionals, 2006 (Baltimore, MD: TASH).
Judy Bailey, M.Ed.
Centreville, VA