I struggled with how to start this, because it’s so hard not to understate how bad this is. A professor of Psychology used a technique that has been widely and consistently discredited to assume consent from a young man with an IQ too low to consent, and then rape him.
I’ll share a link with more information at the end, but here’s the important parts. Rutgers Psychology Professor Anna Stubblefield was working with a young man identified as “DJ.” DJ has a host of disabilities including Cerebral Palsy and Intellectual Disability. He’s unable to talk, and between that and his very limited intellectual ability means that he is unable to give consent to sex. Without language and without the ability to comprehend what is happening to him or learn more about it, DJ cannot consent to sex any more than he could consent to a loan. This makes it Professor Stubblefield’s actions rape. There’s another layer of embarrassment for me and everyone else with a PhD in Psychology.
Facilitated communication is a technique whereby a person (a “facilitator”) “helps” an individual with a significant disability to write or type. Supposedly, the individual is able to think (often in surprisingly advanced prose) but is unable to move his or her hands or fingers accurately. The fact is that any time this has been tested, it has been found that responses are coming from the facilitator. If you show the person being “helped,” “1+1=?” and show the facilitator, “2+2=?” then the response will be “4.” I don’t think the facilitator is generally doing this on purpose, but there is now a large body of research saying that this technique is not to be used (we can actually go back over twenty years http://www.apa.org/divisions/div33/fcpolicy.html). It very much appears that while people with profound disabilities can connect to people and can be wonderful parts of families, there is no evidence that they all have hidden abilities to read and write.
Professor Stubblefield’s actions took a particularly bad turn, but they’re not unique in this case. There have also been cases where facilitators have been convinced that their clients are reporting sexual abuse http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wendrows-sex-abuse-cases-dismissed-facilitated-communication/story?id=15274276. While these are now reliably dismissed, this was not always the case. This gives a ringer of an example of why it is important for practitioners and parents to pay close attention to research. The fact that this happened to a psychologist shows just how hard this can be, but her current and unfolding trial are a very big reminder of why it’s so critical.
For updates on the case: http://www.nj.com/essex/index.ssf/2015/09/professor_rejects_claim_she_raped_disabled_man.html
For a thorough review of the evidence against Facilitated Communication: http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/facilitated-communication-persists-despite-scientific-criticism/