Update on Forced Shock in New York State

Activists Speak Out at "Recipient Advisory" Meeting

By Darby Penney

A number of opponents of forced shock attended the New York State Office of Mental Health's (OMH) Recipient Advisory Committee meeting on July 23 to 24, 2007, including George Ebert, Lauren Tenney and a number of other Alliance members, George Badillo and me.

Many of the activists wore T-shirts with the slogan "Stop Forced 'Mental Health' Treatment!"

John Allen, OMH Director of Recipient Affairs, had promised we would have two hours to discuss the "Simone D." case and other forced shock issues. Simone D. faces 30 more forced electroshocks under court order. However, John only allowed about 45 minutes, and he probably took up about half that time responding to each person's remarks.

Still, we were able to make our points, and it seemed that most of the rest of the approximately 100 attendees agreed with our position. Several people among the group, including some I'd never met before, described their own experience of forced shock and called on OMH to stop the practice.

In an earlier phone conversation with David Oaks, director of MindFreedom, John Allen said that OMH was open to ideas about how to improve oversight and monitoring of ECT. I read a list of suggestions -- a number of which were suggested to me by advocate Laura Zeigler -- and handed it to John, who said he would share it with decision-makers at OMH.

I had to leave the meeting before Commissioner Michael Hogan arrived, but I heard from people who were there that his response to the group's call for OMH to stop forced shock was pretty much what John quoted to David during their phone call -- that this isn't a policy issue for a commissioner, it's an issue between patients, doctors, and the courts.

I worked at OMH for 16 years, and I believe that Hogan's statement is not accurate. The law allows (but doesn't require) OMH to seek court approval for treatment over objection (including shock) if doctors determine a person is incapable of making medical decisions. But as Commissioner, it's certainly within Hogan's purview to issue an official policy statement that OMH will no longer use this practice.

It's also disingenuous to suggest that this is not an "OMH Central Office" matter, since a State psychiatric facility needs to get sign-off from the OMH Chief Medical Officer to pursue forced shock, and has to work with the Central Office lawyers and the State Attorney General's Office to bring legal action.

Commissioner Hogan was asked directly if he would intervene in Simone D's case to keep her from being shocked again, and he said that was a hypothetical question.

I guess that means "No"?