FDA Might Ban Shock Therapy Following Complaints from Rotenberg Students

The use of "electrical stimulation devices" for manipulating aggressive or self-injurious behavior might be used no longer if the U.S. Food and Drug Administration continue to investigate its pros and cons.

Various complaints from former students at the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center in Canton, Massachusetts - which is the only facility in the U.S. that uses electrical stimulation devices to change behavior - may influence the FDA's decision on the matter. Students have complained about the treatment for various reasons.

Former students at the educational center told FDA investigators that they received the therapy for small lapses in behavior such as "noncompliance with staff direction, talking too much and being disruptive in class," stated in this CBS News article. Others also said they were burned by the devices, and afterward suffered from feelings of anxiety, fear, and depression - not exactly the desired result when trying to treat people with special needs.

The United Nations asked the federal government back in 2012 if they could probe the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center. That's when UN Special Rapporteur Juan Mendez declared that shock therapy performed on autistic patients is "torture." In 2002, an autistic 18-year-old at the education center received electrical shocks 31 times in seven hours for an alleged attack on a staff member. The technique, skin shock therapy, emits electrical shocks while the device is attached to the patient's arm. The treatment is approved by parents and a judge before being administered.

The purpose of administering the shock treatment is to prevent patients from being aggressive or self-injurious, but the educational center is believed to have abused the use of the shocks. Now, the FDA is convening an advisory panel meeting to seek scientific and expert opinions regarding all aspects of the treatment to determine whether or not it should still be legal.

However, there are proponents of the treatment, including patients who claim that the therapy helped their conditions that were untreatable with medications. But this might not matter if the FDA decides to ban the treatment because of its misuse and negative outcomes.