CASE HISTORY( Raymond and David)

A very alert baby and very curious child. He talked and walked early. He loved to take things apart and parents found they had to find things such as old motors, etc. as this would keep him busy for hours.

Mr. and Ms. M. have thirteen children. The mother had to go to work but had a teenage girl always home while mother worked. They always managed to have necessary food and heat and a good home life. Ms. M. swears there were no pre-school behavior problems. As long as the boy had intricate things to work on he was content. Both parents believed in firm discipline but never punished the children physically.

R. entered school-last grade- there was no kindergarten(l964). After a couple of days in school, Dr. Greene, school psychologist, and Ms. Barber said the boy would not sit still and was mischievous. He wanted to go to the boy's room too frequently and they would find him in the boiler room peering at the boilers. The school authorities recommended a transfer to Oak Haven where they claimed a special class would assist him. When Ms. M. asked "Why?" they said the child just would not behave properly. Mother believes ;he child was not test- ed at Hopkin Hill School.

After two days at Oak Haven, the boy was expelled for his annoying and mischievous behavior. His mother was furious and tried hard to get them to keep her boy in school. She knew he needed to, learn but they did not want him in school. After three months at home Ms. M. net D;. Greene by chance and she asked if R. was in school? When Ms. M. in- formed her that he was not in school Dr. Greene said, "We must get him back." R. did go back to school. After a few days Ms. M. was called in and told that her boy again had to be transferred to another school- this time it was Westcott School-another special class. No psychological tests were given the boy but the mother was told he was disturbed. Dr. Greene, as well as Ms. Barber, knew this child had a good home life. Both had visited the M. home.

After one week at Westcott the boy was sent home with a note which said that he was suspended until further notice. They said he was into trouble and he made the teachers angry. He always tried to touch things that were not to be touched, such as the phonograph.

Parents did not have money for professional assistance. They did contact Mr. Sherman who was a Representative for Coventry and requested his help. He said he would try to help---he called the mother two or three times and said he was working on the problem. Ms. M. did go to see Mr. Sherman with her boy. Mr. Sherman said he could see no reason why the boy could not be in school but he finally just stopped calling.

Ms. M. called Judge DiCiantis (family court) and asked his advice. He suggested that she bring the case to court. When ~e was asked how this could be done he said the school department should do it. If the school did not do it, the police should do it. Neither the school or police would act to help Ms. M. The school informed Ms. M. her child was to be expelled permanently; Ms. M. said she would make trouble for the school. Ms.. M. met a school nurse (Ms. Green, Coventry High School) who advised Ms, M.:"Make trouble for the state, not the school."

-2-

Mrs. M. was having similar problems with another boy. He entered school the same time as R. D. also caused the school problems and his mother was called in and it was the same thing as with R.

As the mother tells her story, she recalls how very bright D. was before school. He loved cars at the age of two and all who knew this boy marveled at his ability to name and remember every car make. D. was different from R. He was more apt to withdraw when he was up- set, while R. became aggressive. D. also was labeled emotionally dis- turbed and the transfer experiences were identical to R.'s case.

At one time when the mother was insisting that D. be kept in school, the school personnel claimed that he had a heart ailment. Ms. M. had Dr. Vidal examine the boy and this doctor refused to sign a slip saying that this boy had a heart ailment and, therefore, could not attend school. Since both cases are so similar, this story will include both boys. They were always together in court, testings, etc..

During this time that the boys were being shifted from school to school in Coventry, Ms. M. had them tested at Butler's Hospital. She was told that there was nothing wrong with her children and that there was no reason why they should not be in school, public school.

She also went to Rhode Island Hospital Children's Clinic. The boys were tested and the doctor told her that her children were fine and they should be in school. Ms. M. said, "They will not take my boys in school; they have no place for them." The Dr. said to her, "You are the parent, and you should insist." In spite of all these things, the school remained firm and persisted in saying that the boys were emotionally disturbed and there was no place for them in Coventry.

Ms. M. hired a lawyer--Mr. Eugene LaFerriere. He went to court and the court found the children were not neglected so they could not stay at child welfare clinic. Judge Healey recommended the youngsters be tested at Ladd School (school for the retarded). After this testing, the judge recommended the Montanari Clinical School in Florida, stating that that was all the state had to offer these boys. Mrs. M. said he did s8y,"naybe, someday; we'll have something for these boys, but we do not have anything at this time." This constant struggle to find a suitable school for these active youngsters went on for a period of four years. Ms. N. said the boys were in school for a total of 15 days in all this time. Although Ms. M. requested the results of the tests and wanted to know what the tests meant her lawyer said he did not know about them. Up until this time, he claims he has no idea of test results.

Ms. Dore, social worker, told Ms. M. that after two years in Florida, the boys would be normal and then could attend regular school. The boys were acting out at home and felt peculiar since no school wanted them. Ms. M. was informed by school people that, if she did not consent to send her boys to Florida, the truant officer would pick them up and they would be placed in reform school. She did not want to con- sent to sending them away, but she felt she had no choice.

-3-

Judge Healy asked her if she gave permission to the state to send the boys away for PROPER EDUCATION. She consented verbally but never signed any papers.

There was a pitiful scene at the airport. Both boys were crying and begging her not to send them away. The social worker asked Ms. M. to hide in the ladie's room so that the boys could leave more easily. On Jan. 10, 1968, both R. and D. left Rhode Island and their family.

The man who ran the school in Florida was called Monty--school is named after him. Ms. M. has never seen a school report. When she asked Monty for reports on her children's progress, he told her to contact Rhode Island Child Welfare---when she contacted Ms. Dore at the agency, she was told that only the agency could see the reports on her children. Monty resented the mother calling his school; he said it upset the boys to have her call and he told her to only contact the Welfare Agency.

Ms. M. was angry. She was not able to rest because of worry over her children. She visited Child Welfare and asked why she could not call her children. She was told that all calls had to be monitored. Ms. M. attempted to call about 15 times in two years. She succeeded in talking to her children five times. At other times she was told that it was raining or the boys were sick. Ms. M, was puzzled and asked, "How come both boys are sick at the same time?" This mother was re- fused any information; she was told the school did not want to upset her. The boys did tell her they were kept in a "youth-all" and de- scribed this place as a jail with bars.

Ms. M. tried to reach someone that would ;help her get her children back home. Finally, her son borrowed the money and she sent the boys their plane tickets. Boys returned home on Dec. 19, 1969. They com- plained of being beaten with aluminum bars. When Ms. M. took the boys to Dr. Kessler in Coventry, he did write a note on bruises he found on the boys.

Ms. Dore said R. was to remain at home but D. would have to re- turn to Florida. Ms. M. asked, "Where will R. go to school?" Ms. Dore said she would find a school for him.

Pills were sent home with the children. The mother was told to give them daily dosages. She felt the boys seemed very drugged at the airport and she did not continue the drugs. Bottle of Prolixin on which it stated 8 tablets per day is at Foundation headquarters.We note that there is no doctor's name on the prescription label.

Ms. M. noted that R. was very hostile and kept saying his parents hated him and sent him away. D. seemed quieter and more manageable.

Ms. M. had to get lawyer again to find a school for R.I, Ms. Dore placed the boy in the training school because he was angry at everyone. Then he threatened to burn the school down, he was placed at the Medical Center (Adolph Meyer Building.) He is there now but Fs allowed to come home on week-ends. Ms. M. thinks he is receiving better treatment and is improving some.

After D. was sent back to Florida in Jan. 1970. R. kept begging his mother to get his brother back home. He, finally. a couple of weeks after D. had left, told his sister while she visited him at the Medical Center of the treatment he had received in Florida, at the hands of a male attendent.

R. begged his sister not to tell his mother because it was so dirty. This attendent was R's friend. He had won the boy's confi- dence by giving him candy and cigarettes. Then one night this man went into the boy's bedroom and asked if he could sleep in his bed. He sexually molested the boy. R. got away from him and locked him- self in the bathroom. The attendant threatened to kill R. if he did not come out. The boy did come out frightened nearly to death. This male employee of the school kicked R. in the ribs and told him never to run from him again. R. told his sister that this action continued every night from then on. After he reported the treatment to Monty, it got worse!

R. managed to run away a few times and took refuge with some neighbor people. He claims that these people know what is going on at the school. Ms. M. has made strong attempts to be heard since then. She is almost out of her mind worrying about her son D. and seeks to have him home as soon as possible.

As Reported By Mother
July 1970

The Foundation became very involved in this case. Many lawyers were consulted--judges were approached---articles were printed in the newspaper. As Executive Director of this organization, I gave intense effort and time to help this family, as well as no little amount of money. Blocks were placed in our path every inch of the way. This family's story has been documented and is a disgrace in every way. Much has happened since I first met this mother. At this time both boys are at the ACI. Some day I will write a book that will give details of how the state and its ignorance and neglect of children causes criminal acts. The people's money assisted in de- stroying these youngsters.

Marie Friedel
September, 1979.