There is a terrific article on the Justina Pelletier case at the website of the Citizens Commission on Human Rights by Kelly Patricia O’Meara, titled Modern Day Salem—Boston Psychiatric Unit’s Imprisonment of Teenager Justina Pelletier Needs State Investigation into Reckless Endangerment of Psychiatric Diagnosing.
O’Meara compares to the the Salem witch trials the Children’s Hospital psychiatrists who recklessly ignored Justina’s medical diagnosis and treatment in favor of a subjective, non-scientifically verifiable psychiatric diagnosis and treatment.
The article highlights the DCF and psychiatrists’ obsessive zeal in continuing Justina’s psychiatric treatment despite their causing her condition to dangerously deteriorate. The writer points out some of the discrepancies between the DCF social workers’ court testimony and their prior discussions with Justina’s original medical doctor, and discrepancies between the Children’s Hospital psychiatrists guidelines for Justina’s case and those same doctors’ statements published in earlier research papers:
For example, the affidavit accused the Pelletiers of “obstructing her care,” and also reported that Boston Children’s Hospital does “not know where the parents picked up the current diagnosis and they are hard to disprove.”
The social worker failed to include in the affidavit that she had spoken directly to Tufts’ Dr. Korson, who had explained Justina’s mitochondrial diagnosis in great detail. The Juvenile Court judge ruled in favor of Boston Children’s Hospital and Justina became a ward of the state, severely restricting the Pelletiers’ access to their daughter.
In fact, the February 2013 “guidelines” drafted by Boston Children’s Hospital in regard to Justina’s case included: “set strict limitations on medical discussions with the family and eliminate interaction with providers outside our hospital” such as Dr. Korson. Unbelievably, the family and the treating physician were to be excluded from any conversation about the health and well-being of the 15-year-old captive.
The “guidelines” are a direct contradiction to what the psychiatric “team” muttered in published psychiatric papers. For instance, Dr. Simona Bujoreanu, Assistant in Psychology, and Dr. David DeMaso, psychiatrist-in-chief, both of Boston Children’s Hospital, co-authored an article entitled “Enhancing Working Relationship between Parents and Surgeons.”
In describing the treatment modality, DeMaso and Bujoreanu explain:
“The working relationship between parents and surgeons is fundamental in providing excellent health care to children and adolescents. The breakdown of this working relationship has a significant potential for detrimental effects on individual well-being and adverse systemic outcomes….”
So not only do these so-called medical practitioners forcibly take over the case of a child who is being treated for Mitochondrial Disease, which had indeed been medically and scientifically verified through exploratory surgery, so the “doctors” can implement their ideology of behavior modification. But these schnooks are apparently doing what they can to cover up their criminally negligent treatment of an innocent child.
I’m beginning to believe that not only is this “behavior modification” some sort of indoctrinated ideology being practiced by these “doctors,” but with their outright zeal in this case it gives the feeling of bordering on a kind of religious zealotry.
Apparently Justina’s father, Lou Pelletier is ready to file a “writ of habeas corpus in Massachusetts Supreme Court for ‘wrongful imprisonment’,” according to ABC News. And who can blame him?
The Pelletiers really need to press a multitude of criminal charges against the Children’s Hospital doctors as well as the DCF social workers who have been complicit in causing Justina’s condition to deteriorate as it has.
The aforementioned Citizens Commission on Human Rights article concludes:
Additionally, under the United Nation’s 2013 Report by the Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the Pelletiers certainly could claim Justina’s human rights have been violated: “Medical care that causes severe suffering for no justifiable reason can be considered cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and if there is State involvement and specific intent, it is torture.”
Surely, when a child’s life is at stake, even the governing bodies overseeing those institutions that claim to represent the best interests of children, would demand proof of the medical diagnosis. Or is it possible that Massachusetts has so easily forgotten the dreadful prosecutions of Salem, born from rumor, speculation and belief?
(Cross-posted on the LewRockwell.com Blog.)