BOSTON GLOBE

SCHOOL AIMS AT THERAPY CRITICS
EX-WORKERS AT BRI GOT LAWSUIT DRAFTS'
Wednesday, March 23, 1994

By David Armstrong, Contributing Reporter

Four former employees of a facility that uses a controversial shock treatment for self-abusive students received "draft" libel lawsuits in the mail from the school's lawyer, a not-so-subtle message that their criticism was not appreciated. The "draft" lawsuits, which have not been filed in court, were just one of several tactics two ex-employees said were used to intimidate and harass them after they made allegations that their former employer, the Behavior Research Institute, abused some of its students.

One of the former workers, Annemarie Millard, alleges -- and BRI's president confirms -- that after she made the abuse charges last year, the Rhode Island school investigated her personal life and even obtained a court transcript of a child custody hearing involving her daughter. "This disrupted my whole life," Millard said recently. "They were digging into my personal life, trying to pour salt into my wounds."

For critics of the school, which uses electric shock punishment to curb the violent, self-abusive behavior of many of its 64 students, the Millard incident was only the latest attempt by BRI to silence opponents and stifle debate about the school.

For the school, which makes no apologies for its tactics, allegations like those made by Millard threaten BRI's fragile existence. In any instance where BRI deems criticism to be unfair or untrue, the publicly-funded school moves aggressively.

"We defend ourselves and we do it vigorously," said BRI's attorney, Roderick MacLeish Jr. of Boston. "We can't be trampled over by this. We will not allow people to come in and make irresponsible and outrageous comments."

But school opponents complain that the tactics border on bullying.

"You have to be very brave to speak out against them," said state Rep. David Cohen (D-Newton), a longtime critic of the school. "It is really an act of courage."

At least two critics have been sued for libel or slander and others have stopped complaining about the school after they were publicly chastized or threatened by BRI.

A Michigan attorney said she received a letter last month from the school's lawyer seeking an immediate retraction of statements she made criticizing BRI.

"I was surprised by it," Kathleen Harris said of the letter. "There was an implied threat of litigation."

The treatment of Millard was part of a campaign by BRI to influence production of a report on the school by the CBS News Program "Eye to Eye With Connie Chung."

Millard told the program she witnessed Dr. Matthew Israel, president of BRI, beat a student with a spatula five years ago, a charge the school adamantly denies and says it can prove is false.

Three other former employees who spoke to CBS were also mailed "draft" libel suits by the school in September, months before the program aired. One employee responded to the threatened lawsuit by going to BRI and signing an affidavit claiming the other employees "were vindictive" and CBS was "out to get BRI."

MacLeish defended the mailing of "draft" lawsuits, saying it was intended to get the employees to recant their allegations as a way of avoiding a lawsuit.

The fight with CBS was viewed as a matter of survival by the small school, which is based in Providence and houses its students in group homes in southeastern Massachusetts, Israel said.

BRI students, many of whom are severely mentally retarded or autistic, come from eight states and their $150,000-a-year tuition is paid by those states.

Several advocacy groups have been trying to pass legislation in Massachusetts outlawing the use of "painful aversives" -- including the electric shock treatment used by BRI. And the state of Massachusetts, which unsuccessfully tried to close the school in 1985, has stepped up its regulation of BRI and has made new threats of revoking the school's license.

MacLeish said these attacks on the school have forced BRI to respond forcefully when it is criticized.

"We are being hit from every corner and we have to respond," he said. ''There can be a legitimate debate over aversive therapy, but when people start telling lies, what are we supposed to do? Roll over and say, 'Here are the keys, take it away?' We didn't start this battle."

The school spent thousands of dollars on legal fees fighting CBS and incurred other costs, including travel expenses for some of the 50 parents who went to Providence to confront Chung when she interviewed Israel.

Chung, who was frequently interrupted and yelled at by parents while interviewing Israel in his office last August, said the BRI report "was one of the most difficult and disturbing stories I have ever reported on. In fact, a lot of people didn't want us to do this story."

Added Judy Rybak, producer of the Chung report, "Nobody at CBS has ever had an experience like this, not even '60 Minutes.' "

After the report was aired, the school continued to attack CBS and won favorable media coverage.

A review of the program by The New York Times Sunday concluded that the ''Eye to Eye" segment "inspired shabby tricks of the trade; the evidence was hyped, the case loaded, the institute's reputation probably damaged."

ARMSTR;03/22 NIGRO ;03/23,09:18 BRI23