Route 110/113 Rotary Interchange Information

PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING
Thursday, Nov 9, 7-9 p.m.
Great Hall, Searles Building
Methuen City Hall, 3rd floor
41 Pleasant Street, Methuen
This public meeting, the first of three, will give an update on the new study underway to improve safety and relieve congestion at the Route 110/113 Rotary. It will focus on the planning process and what has been done to date. Come to the meeting to learn about existing traffic, safety and environmental conditions, the potential impact of area growth (new homes and businesses) and to share your concerns about the Rotary area.
YOUR VIEWS ARE IMPORTANT!
The second public meeting (winter 2007) will describe and seek input on alternatives under consideration. The third public meeting (spring 2007) will present proposed recommendations for improvements.
For more information call Ethan Britland of the Massachusetts Executive Office of Transportation at (617) 973-8236 or visit the website at www.methuenrotarystudy.org.

Groups Ally in Fight, Filing Against Shocks

Groups ally in fight, filing against shocks
By: RORY SCHULER – Taunton Gazette
10/25/2006

TAUNTON – At least 20 New England activist groups have been lobbying for a Bay State ban on aversive therapies such as those used at the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center.

Pending state legislation, co-sponsored by Democrats Sen. Jarret Barrios, D-Cambridge, and Rep. Barbara L’Italien, D-Andover – Senate bill 376 and House bill 1120 – has been proposed to “ensure the humane treatment of disabled persons,” by prohibiting painful therapies such as electric skin shock.
“While the Massachusetts Constitution promises equality, irrespective of ability or disability, there are no statutes that prohibit procedures which involve the purposeful infliction of pain on people with disabilities with the intention of changing behavior,” states a letter provided by John Thomas, of The Arc of Massachusetts, representing a group of undersigned organizations, urging constituents to support the bills. “There are no statutes protecting them from physical contact or punishments, or protecting them from the denial of adequate sleep, food, shelter, bedding or bathroom facilities.”
With no formal Beacon Hill sessions scheduled for the rest of year, the bills have stalled, and won’t resurface until next year, at the earliest.
State Sen. Brian A. Joyce, D-Milton, has also sponsored an amendment to ban aversive therapy in Massachusetts and intends to file it again in the next session.
The letter’s undersigners – in addition to the Arc, 17 organizations and additional affiliates led by civil liberties boosters and advocates for the autistic – have combined resources to draw statewide and national attention to the methods of therapy in use at the center.
“These extreme, punishing physical interventions are illegal when inflicted upon nondisabled people, but when used on people with disabilities, are considered treatment or ‘aversive therapy,’” the letter says. “These procedures have never shown to be effective methods of permanently altering behavior, including that which may be self-abusive.”
School Committee member and Department of Social Services caseworker Alfred W. Baptista Jr., has made comparisons between the rights of prisoners and the rights of severely disabled children. While prisoners cannot be forced to undergo painful behavior-changing procedures, covered under cruel and unusual punishment prohibitions in the U.S. Constitution, it is legal to expose children to those therapies, as long as they are included in their court-approved and special educator-designed individualized education plans.
The state legislation, if ratified, would prohibit what the groups have labeled “the most extreme forms of punishing physical procedures.”
They include any technique designed to cause physical pain, such as hitting, pinching and electric shock; physical contact or punishment otherwise prohibited by law or that would be prohibited if used on a nondisabled person; and any program that denies adequate sleep, food, shelter, bedding or bathroom facilities.
Even state agencies have started shying away from recommending the institute and its heavily debated methods. Denise Monteiro, a public affairs spokeswoman for DSS, said the state’s caseworkers almost never place disabled children in the center’s care.
“It’s so controversial,” she said. “There are other methods. We don’t put our kids there and haven’t for years.”
In some situations, however, the center may serve a needed purpose.
“Each case is different,” Monteiro said. “If a parent of an autistic child feels it’s the only [solution], we tell them about the other options.”

rschuler@tauntongazette.com

A letter urging constituents to support bills for “the humane treatment of disabled persons” and against therapies such as electric skin shock has been signed by:
The Arc of Massachusetts, the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, Center for Public Presentation, Federation for Children with Special Needs, Doug Flutie Jr. Foundation, Coalition for the Legal Rights of People with Disabilities, Massachusetts Developmental Disabilities Council, Autism National Committee, Central Massachusetts Families Organizing for Change, Autism Alliance of MetroWest, Disability Policy Consortium, Disability Law Center, Community Resources for People with Autism, Massachusetts Office on Disability, TASH New England, Massachusetts Advocates Standing Strong, Advocates for Autism in Massachusetts and Massachusetts Mental Health Legal Advisors Committee.

©The Taunton Gazette 2006

Greenhouse Gas Initiative

This compact would reduce MA carbon dioxide emissions through participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative agreement and establish a cap and trade system for carbon dioxide.