Wessely Challenges Government to Ring-Fence Mental Health Spending

[frederic83]

@Mark Wow, that's a post!

Regarding the paper, the researcher is french, he did some conferences about Time (the paper is an experiment he did to validate, in some way, his theory). What I understand is that it is not about the Planck length, but to calculate all the speeds and positions, the computer needs information from the "future", so that is not possible with our computers, whatever the power of the computer is. I have to find the conference where he talks about this and I will give some precision.

From my understanding, there is no link with quantum decoherence although it looks like a transition between the classical physic to a new level of physics, where Time and information are different and that leads to the Information Physic.

I think it was proven that there are no hidden variables in QM, with the Aspect experiment, an experiment that was reproduced several time. But the interpretation of QM is actually in debate.
As I see it, we are in front of an extremely complex epicycles model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferent_and_epicycle
The researchers add a new epicycle to the model to fit the data, and it works! But it is not the reality. It is just the feeling of a fogged brain.

 

[soti]

Here's another one with fewer billiard balls. Paper argues that if even a few causal interactions are combined force dynamics predicts indeterminacy even with deterministic interactions, because of how we conceive force relations.

http://psychology.emory.edu/cognition/wolff/papers/WolffBarbey2015.pdf

 

[chipmunk1]

From my brief scanning of his material, it does not seem any more dictatorial than say any major religion.

It should be possible to design a world in which behaviour likely to be punished seldom or never occurs. We try to design such a world for those who cannot solve the problem of punishment for themselves, such as babies, retardates, or psychotics, and if it could be done for everyone, much time and energy would be saved.

Real world application of skinnerian theory. The Judge Rotenberg center was founded by one of his students.

The center was founded as the Behavior Research Institute in 1971 by Dr. Matthew L. Israel, a psychologist who trained with B. F. Skinner

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judge_Rotenberg_Educational_Center

Were they able to create "Utopia"?

The UN didn't think so.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywi...sm-shock-therapy-is-torture-says-un-official/

 

[Hip]

The Judge Rotenberg center was founded by one of his students.

So it seems you couldn't find anything bad about Skinner himself, so instead you criticize someone who attended his classes.

That is a bit like blaming Nietzsche for the Nazis.

 

[chipmunk1]

So it seems you couldn't find anything bad about Skinner himself, so instead you criticize someone who attended his classes.

That is a bit like blaming Nietzsche for the Nazis.

There is a lot of negative to say about Skinner but his research was only theoretical(aside from torturing animals)

This was not just someone who took his classes. He studied 10 years under Skinner and subsequently tried to apply his theories in the real world.

Israel started the school in the early seventies as an experiment to see if he could change behavior by applying the theories of B.F. Skinner. Skinner, the famed psychiatrist who Israel studied under at Harvard. theorized that applied behavioral analysis could change difficult or dangerous behaviors and Israel started working with severely disabled individuals. Soon Israel started a school where “aversives” such spanking with a spatula, pinching the feet, and forced inhaling of ammonia were punishments given when a student exhibited an unwanted behavior. Several students died at the school, and the school now uses a device that is strapped to each student, where a two second shock is manually delivered by personnel that only have a high school degree. The school was investigated by numerous media outlets including Mother Jones Magazine, and an investigation with the Department of Justice is ongoing.

Israel, who is 77, and has close family in California has been an outspoken advocate for his school. In the 1980’s and 90’s he often refused to appear for any sort of interview without having dozens of parents at the taping of the interview. At his final testimonial in the Massachusetts Capitol, he called an incident in 2007, where a former student actually made a prank call and got other students shocked, “as bad as September 11th.."

http://brembs.net/operant/skinnerbox.html

The Skinner Box
A Skinner box typically contains one or more levers which an animal can press, one or more stimulus lights and one or more places in which reinforcers like food can be delivered. The animal's presses on the levers can be detected and recorded and a contingency between these presses, the state of the stimulus lights and the delivery of reinforcement can be set up, all automatically. It is also possible to deliver other reinforcers such as water or to deliver punishers like electric shock through the floor of the chamber. Other types of response can be measured - nose-poking at a moving panel, or hopping on a treadle - both often used when testing birds rather than rats. And of course all kinds of discriminative stimuli may be used.

One reason the JRC stays open is that there are large influential "professional" ABA (applied behavior analysis) organizations which can be counted on to condone the unethical practices used by the JRC. Those organizations include the Behavior Analyst Certification Board, the Association for Behavior Analysis International, and the Association of Professional Behavior Analysts. Example, ABAI once gave their highest "humanitarian" (I'm not kidding) award to those promoting the JRC's practices. Also the JRC staff is led by Board Certified Behavior Analysts who have the highest credential available in the field of ABA.

 

[Hip]

Firstly, you cannot blame educators for the behavior of their students. That's why we do not imprison parents when their children commit crimes.


Secondly, anything that happened in the 1970s has to be assessed by the moral standards of the time, not by contemporary moral standards. I find it rather silly when people try to retrospectively apply today's moral standards to yesterday. It's ignorance of cultural history.

In the 1960s and 1970s, 50% of drivers in the Formula One Grand Prix were killed on the track. Yet when drivers complained about the risks, newspaper journalists at the time said complaining was unmanly, and that drivers should accept the risks as part of the sport. That was the 1970s.

And standard police tactics for questioning suspects in the 1970s were to take you down in the basement of the police station, and beat the shit of you until you confessed.

A few electric shocks seem pretty tame in comparison to what went on in that era. And they are certainly pretty tame to the treatments like public flogging that are still given today in countries like Saudi Arabia, one of the allies of the West.

 

[Cheshire]

A few electric shocks seem pretty tame in comparison to what went on in the 1970s.

Well, I was born at the beguinning of the 1970's, slaps and spankings were still tolerated but I never witnessed any physical punishment in an education context, let alone a few electric shocks!!!

Secondly, anything that happened in the 1970s has to be assessed by the moral standards of the time, not by contemporary moral standards. I find it rather silly when people try to retrospectively apply today's moral standards to yesterday. It's ignorance of cultural history.

You seem to mix up everything here. Actions must be replaced in a certain context to be better understood. Sure. But submissions of people to inhumane treatments are to be condemend whenever and wherever they happen. And it's not ignorance of cultural history.

With such a mentality, one can support women's genital mutilations because they are "cultural". The atrocity of slavery is as awfull in a southern US plantation of the 19th century, as in the Roman Empire or now in some parts of the world. And there has always been people living in those days that condemned such practises.

Forcing students to inhale ammonia as punishments is just silly and undefensible, be it in 1750, 1960 or now.

Now one can try to understand the cultural context that made that possible. As one'll study the cultural context that made the bad treatment ME/CFS patients received at the beguinning of the 21th century possible.

 

[Hip]

Well, I was born at the beguinning of the 1970's, slaps and spankings were still tolerated but I never witnessed any physical punishment in an education context, let alone a few electric shocks!!!

I was born mid-1960s, and like many of the boys (but not the girls) in my school, I was regularly given "the strap" when I did something naughty, which is being hit with great force by a thick leather strap on the palms of the hands. It causes excruciating pain for around an hour or so, pain like being burnt with a red hot poker, but causes no damage.

This pain I experienced when given the corporal punishment of "the strap" at school would I think have been infinitely worse than a brief electric shock.

However, in no way did I see this punishment as inhumane, either at the time or in retrospect. And in discussion, neither do friends of my own age who remember these sort of punishments think they were inhumane. If anything, we view them as character building, and view modern kids that do not experience corporal punishment as possibly missing out on what could be an important part in the making of a man.

It's not necessarily a good thing to surround children in cotton wool and protect them from every harsh experience, as parents do today. With this approach you risk creating spoilt children who demand too much from their parents — and most middle class children in the UK and I think US are far too demanding of their parents. When I was growing up, parents controlled their children; now children control their parents.

Perhaps France had a more gentle approach to schooling, but that's how it was when I was at high school in the UK in the 1970s. I lived in France for a while in my 20s, so I have a bit of understanding of how things work there.

 

[A.B.]

This pain I experienced when given the corporal punishment of "the strap" at school would I think have been infinitely worse than a brief electric shock.

I can't believe you're trying to downplay this. You really are disturbed. You're also misrepresenting the "treatment", which is a lot more than one brief electric shock.

 

[chipmunk1]

Firstly, you cannot blame educators for the behavior of their students. That's why we do not imprison parents when their children commit crimes.
.

Yes true but I think it is not surprising that an ideology (I won't call that philosophy or science) that reduces human beings to automatons, that are solely shaped by positive and negative reinforcement and need to be programmed for their own good and safety, turns out to be dehumanizing and cruel in practice. It's just built in into this ideology that individual human beings don't matter and are irrelevant.

Eventually they will be viewed as a function of their behaviour either it is desirable or it is not. That is all that matters. The person doesn't matter anymore in this system.

Skinner would probably think that the person doesn't exist anyway and the sooner we get rid of that superstition the better.

Secondly, anything that happened in the 1970s has to be assessed by the moral standards of the time, not by contemporary moral standards. I find it rather silly when people try to retrospectively apply today's moral standards to yesterday. It's ignorance of cultural history.

The electroshocks are still happening today I believe. One of the patients had a part of their ear bitten off by one of the staff some years ago.

 

[Hip]

Yes true but I think it is not surprising that an ideology (I won't call that philosophy or science) that reduces human beings to automatons, that are solely shaped by positive and negative reinforcement and need to be programmed for their own good and safety, turns out to be dehumanizing and cruel in practice. It's just built in into this ideology that individual human beings don't matter and are irrelevant.

Eventually they will be viewed as a function of their behaviour either it is desirable or it is not. That is all that matters. The person doesn't matter anymore in this system.

Skinner would probably think that the person doesn't exist anyway and the sooner we get rid of that superstition the better.

I can't really reply to the points your are making, because as I mentioned earlier, I don't really know Skinner's work. I'd have to read his books in order to come to any conclusion about his ideas and his humanity. You only get the measure of an individual by reading their writing.

Certainly some personality theorists have more humanity than others. Jung I have always loved, for his incredible humanity and spiritual dimension.

Just with a cursory glance at Skinner's idea, you could view them the context of Burgess's book and film "A Clockwork Orange". But I'd need more than a cursory glance before I gave you my full opinion.

Have you read any of Skinner's literature yourself? How did you formulate your opinions about his work?

I can't believe you're trying to downplay this. You really are disturbed.

I don't know the details of these shocks applied at the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center. But apparently you do, so please explain what you know a bit further. I have had electric shocks from accidentally touching the UK 230 volt electric mains. You only need a few seconds touching 230 volts before it kills you. Yet I would not say it was particularly painful.

And if you look on YouTube, you find kids using 100,000 volt stun guns on themselves just for a laugh.

 

[A.B.]

I don't know the details of these shocks applied at the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center.

Indistinguishable from torture.

 

[A.B.]

As tasteless as it is to discuss electricity when it is clear that the victims suffer horribly: voltage is not a linear measure of how painful or dangerous electricity is.

 

[chipmunk1]

I can't really reply to the points your are making, because as I mentioned earlier, I don't really know Skinner's work. I'd have to read his books in order to come to any conclusion about his ideas and his humanity. You only get the measure of an individual by reading their writing.

Certainly some personality theorists have more humanity than others. Jung I have always loved, for his incredible humanity and spiritual dimension.

Just with a cursory glance at Skinner's idea, you could view them the context of Burgess's book and film "A Clockwork Orange". But I'd need more than a cursory glance before I gave you my full opinion.

Have you read any of Skinner's literature yourself? How did you formulate your opinions about his work?

I have read about operant conditioning and similar ideas. So far everything I read from Skinner seemed either weird or scary and it does point into a certain direction which I find disturbing. He tried very hard to explain human behaviour as simple equation like 1+1=2 as if he had invented a new branch of mathematics. It seems very superficial and even nonsensical upon closer examination. He really believes that his rather simplistic theory can explain anything in human life.

Then what I find far more disturbing is my impression that he seems to view human behaviour as defective or inefficient by default and he has the idea that human nature needs to be managed by his science.

Ethical control may survive in small groups, but the control of the population as a whole must be delegated to specialists—to police, priests, owners, teachers, therapists, and so on, with their specialized reinforcers and their codified contingencies."[76]

"It is a mistake to suppose that the whole issue is how to free man. The issue is to improve the way in which he is controlled."[77]

A rather dark and pessimistic view of human existence in my opinion. Fortunately his view not mine.

Chomsky wrote:

In this book Skinner maintained that his efforts in the rat and pigeon laboratory had proven the universal validity of his conception of learning as operant behavior and reinforcement, and generated a "technology of behavior" that could and should be applied to human beings. Only the pre-scientific superstitions preserved in the "literatures of freedom and dignity" blocked the socially beneficial implementation of behavior-control technolog

And if you look on YouTube, you find kids using 100,000 volt stun guns on themselves just for a laugh.

The voltage alone doesn't determine the pain level/effect. With the right application voltage above 50 can kill.

The device they are using was upgraded because the traditional devices weren't painful enough. It was designed to cause pain.

The center claims that using skin shocks, which are comparable in pain intensity to a bee sting, can help control severe self-injurious behavior like head-banging and cutting, without use of medication. (A reporter who tried the device, however,compared the feeling to “a horde of wasps attacking me all at once.”) On ist website, JRC also argues that its punitive approach is twice as effective as using rewards to change behavior, even for the most severe cases.

 

[chipmunk1]

One expert said of the shock, “Technically, the lowest shock given by Rotenberg is roughly twice what pain researchers have said is tolerable for most humans (James Eason, Professor of Biomedical Engineering, Washington and Lee University, New York Times, December 25, 2007).

 

[Hip]

Ethical control may survive in small groups, but the control of the population as a whole must be delegated to specialists—to police, priests, owners, teachers, therapists, and so on, with their specialized reinforcers and their codified contingencies.

Skinner is saying the above, but hasn't the above always been the case anyway? For centuries mindset and behavior in Europe was controlled by the church and its priests, and by Monarchs and their representatives.

Let me guess. This is not evidence at all, or it's all relative?

It's better than the videos, but there is still not much meat in that article. OK, it looks like I am going to have to do some Googling myself in order to find some info:

So this article says:

Mendez said he was "very concerned" about the use of electric shocks, which are inflicted on autistic children through pads applied to their skin.

About half of the school's students carry the generators that are triggered by care assistants using remote-controlled zappers, which then send a electric charge to skin pads on the children's arms and legs.

"I feel very strongly that electricity applied to a person's body creates a very extreme form of pain. There a lot of lingering consequences including mental illness that can be devastating," Mendez said.

This article says:

The center claims that using skin shocks, which are comparable in pain intensity to a bee sting, can help control severe self-injurious behavior like head-banging and cutting, without use of medication.

(A reporter who tried the device, however, compared the feeling to “a horde of wasps attacking me all at once.”)

over the 40-odd years that it has been operating, JRC has never published a single randomized controlled trial demonstrating the superiority — or even lack of inferiority — of its methods, compared with standard therapy, in a peer-reviewed journal.

Of course, many parents of children at JRC have become strong advocates for the program. They believe that the JRC’s approach — barbarous as it may look from the outside — is the only thing that has helped their children avoid self-injury and participate in school.

They tell compelling stories about children who had been so dangerous to themselves that they’d caused brain damage, now being able to sit at a computer and learn.

This article is a very good one. Some quotes:

Ever since it was founded, 40 years ago, the school has been the subject of fierce controversy. Critics say the use of pain on society's most vulnerable members is a disgrace that should not be tolerated in any country.

But supporters of the school, including several parents, say its practice of "aversive therapy" has improved lives, and in some cases saved their children from self-induced injury or even death.

It was here that Israel parted company with Skinner, who explicitly states in Walden Two that punishment is not allowed.

But once Israel had discovered what he believed to be its transformative potential, there was no holding him back. He devised a new regime for children with special needs, including those on the autistic spectrum. By mixing positive rewards for good behaviour with punishment for bad, he believed he could steer children away from self-harming or aggressive habits.

Israel is fully aware of the controversial nature of what he does. He is, he says, at the centre of a "political firestorm". "Any humane person wants to avoid punishment," he says. "Most professionals don't want to touch it, even though they know it's a very effective treatment."

But he insists the shocks feel no worse than a two-second bee sting. And that the alternatives are far worse. Students can be so dangerous to themselves or others they can threaten lives, he says, and more conventional care centres are often ill-equipped to deal with them. They end up either expelled, or heavily doped with psychotropic drugs.

Israel takes pride in turning nobody away, however severe their condition. "Some of our students have been expelled from 20 or more programmes, and we take all of our students off the drugs they are on when they come here. Compare that with skin shocks that have no side effects and no long-term damage," he says.

Here is Brandon, the boy who was shocked 5,000 times in one day. Israel tells us he used to vomit up his food, starving himself to 52lb (24kg). Over footage of Brandon vomiting and spitting, he says, "We found there was no medical solution to his problems. The only thing that saved his life was a remote control skin shock device."

"Most people aren't aware of the severity of the problems some individuals have. We have a student who has pulled out 11 of his adult teeth by himself. A young woman hit her head so hard with her knee she detached her retinas. There's a boy who pushed his hands way down his throat and ripped up parts of his oesophagus. Once you've seen that sort of self-abuse, why wouldn't you want to try a treatment, even though it's controversial?"

 

[chipmunk1]

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2007/08/school-shock

 

[Hip]

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2007/08/school-shock

Good article. Like the other articles I quoted, it shows that the work done at the Judge Rothenberg Center is controversial, but may well do good.

The opinions stated earlier in this thread that this institution employs inhumane treatment seem far too simplistic. The issue is nuanced.

 

[Luther Blissett]

This post contains details of abuse of children and torture, please do not read if you think it may be to much.

Shocks have been used at JRC for an incredibly wide variety of behaviors.

Although JRC claims that the intention is to stop self-harming or violent behaviors, it also has shocked students for many other things, including: involuntary body movements, waving hands, blocking out sound overstimulation by putting their fingers in their ears, wrapping their foot around the leg of their chair, tensing up their body or fingers, not answering staff quickly enough (xxx), screaming while being shocked, closing their eyes for more than 15 seconds, reacting in fear to other students being shocked, standing up, asking to use the bathroom, raising their hand (Miller), popping their own pimple, leaving a supervised area without asking, swearing, saying “no” (Ahern and Rosenthal 13), stopping work for more than 10 seconds, interrupting others, nagging, whispering, slouching, tearing up paper, and attempting to remove electrodes from their skin (Ahern and Rosenthal 20-21).

Additionally, students are shocked for having 5 verbal behaviors in an hour. These behaviors can include talking to oneself, clearing one’s throat, crying, laughing, humming, repeating oneself, or “inappropriate tone of voice” (xxx).

A former JRC teacher recalled how “one girl, who was blind, deaf, and non-verbal was moaning and rocking. Her moaning was like a cry. The staff shocked her for moaning. Turned out she had a broken tooth.

Another child had an accident in the bathroom and was shocked” (Ahern and Rosenthal 3). The behaviors that JRC considers punishable by shocking are also discovered by surveillance footage, with shocks then administered after the fact.

Shock has even been used as a threat to pressure students to say positive things about JRC in front of the state legislature (Berrington). Non-speaking students tend to be subjected to shock the most, and are the ones who often have a more difficult time speaking up about their abuse (xxx).

There is no rule at JRC about how old a child must be before they can be subjected to shock aversives, and Massachusetts law does not place an upper limit on the amount of pain that a student can be subjected to, short of death.

One psychiatrist who visited JRC described it thus: “Street kids, kids of color, carrying these shock backpacks. It is prison-like and they are prisoners of the apparatus” (Ahern and Rosenthal 7).

In addition to shock aversives, students of the JRC are also subjected to food deprivation. At JRC, this is couched in language like “Loss of Privilege,” “Contingent Food Program,” and “Specialized Food Program” (Kindlon, et al.) Students on these programs lose portions of their food whenever they do anything staff deem a negative behavior.

One student described her franticness, loss of concentration, and restlessness due to hunger, causing her to lose more food. Often, she would lose all of her food for the day. Students who have lost food receive Loss of Privilege Food at the end of day, which consisted of ground up chicken chunks, mashed potato, spinach, and liver powder that was ice cold. Many students were unable to eat the Loss of Privilege Food (xxx). The Specialized Food Program is more restrictive, and does not give make-up food at the end of the day (Ahern and Rosenthal 19).

JRC students are also deprived of the ability to sleep. The rooms have alarms that would go off if someone moved in bed, waking others up. Students with the GED are made to sleep with the pack on them, which is physically very difficult, and also increases the feeling of fear among students, who are often terrified of being shocked while sleeping. One student described being given a GED-4 shock while she was asleep: “My fears came true one day and I was given a GED-4 shock while I was asleep. It was not explained to me why I got this shock. I was terrified and angry. I was crying. I kept asking why. And then they kept telling me ‘No talking out.’ After a few minutes Monitoring called, and told the staff to shock me again for ‘Loud, repetitive, disruptive talking out.’ […] After this incident I really stopped sleeping” (xxx). The JRC deprives students of basic physiological needs, including sleep and food.

Sometimes, students are left shackled, restrained, and secluded for months (Ahern and Rosenthal 2). One student described being kept in a small room with one other staff member for a year and a half. A mother of a JRC student reported that her child had been placed in restraints for two years

I'm stopping there because because the point should have got through.

http://autisticadvocacy.org/2014/08/prisoners-of-the-apparatus-the-judge-rotenberg-center/

 

[alex3619]

This kind of shock therapy is outlawed in many places for dogs. It was previously used to control barking. Its considered inhumane.

Inhumane for dogs, OK for children?