Why does the Boston Globe continue to defend JRC?
December 23, 2007
Arc editorial
By Bill Henning, Boston Center for Independent Living & John Thomas, The Arc
In its editorial "A shocking error of judgment" (Dec. 21), the Globe seems to be following the example of Pontius Pilate. By washing its hands of its past defense of the Judge Rotenberg Center, the Globe conveniently omits the fact that as recently as last year, its editorial page was defending JRC's methods. The Globe's refusal to acknowledge its own culpability suggests to readers it does not share complicity in JRC's legacy of abuse. Last year, after the state's Division of Professional Licensure fined 14 JRC staff for misrepresenting themselves as "Psychologists" the Globe dismissed the finding as "paperwork errors".
Five of the 14 JRC staff held themselves out as Psychologists in Massachusetts Probate Court while testifying regarding the treatment of children at JRC. On March 2, 2007, an investigation by Inspector General Gregory Sullivan concluded these "paperwork errors" resulted in JRC overcharging the state and several municipalities by $800,000 for services that were supposed to be billed at a rate commensurate for that of a Psychologist - funds that have yet to be refunded.
If recent history isn't enough to warrant further scrutiny, we can go back 15 years, when the Globe reported an incident at JRC (then-BRI) where Matthew Israel, BRI president, claimed 5,300 shocks "were administered in a successful effort to save [a] student's life."
A closer examination might have led to the discovery of systemic failures that led to the tragedy of an innocent child being subjected to 77 consecutive electric shocks. Instead, they were written off as mere "paperwork errors." Using its definition of the term, we suppose that's the most accurate way to describe the Globe's blind defense of JRC over the years.