Research By Kevin Perelman
Table Of Contents
1. 1939 — Wendell Johnson / Mary Tudor / University of Iowa — “Monster Study”
2. 1946–1953 — MIT / Quaker Oats / Fernald State School — Radioactive Oatmeal Study
3. 1950s–1970s — Albert Kligman / University of Pennsylvania / Holmesburg Prison
4. 1956–1971 — Saul Krugman / Robert McCollum / Willowbrook State School
5. 1963 — Chester Southam / Emanuel Mandel / Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital
7. 1950s–1970s — Psychiatrists and Behavioral Therapists — LGBTQ Aversion Therapy
8. 1970s — George Rekers / O. Ivar Lovaas / UCLA-linked Behavior Modification
9. 1950s–1960s — Donald Ewen Cameron / Allan Memorial Institute / McGill University
10. 1963–1979 — Harry Bailey / Chelmsford Private Hospital
11. 1945–1947 — Stafford Warren / Manhattan Project Medical Researchers
12. 1973 — David Rosenhan / Psychiatric Hospitals — “On Being Sane in Insane Places”
13. 1940s–1970s — Atomic Energy Commission / U.S. Federal Radiation Researchers
14. 1950s–1970s — Deep Sleep Therapy / Narcosis Treatment Movement
15. 1950s–1960s — Lauretta Bender / Bellevue Hospital — ECT on Children
16. 1970s–Present — Judge Rotenberg Center / Matthew Israel
17. 1940s–1970s — Pennhurst / Belchertown / Letchworth Village / State Institutions
18. 1954 — Muzafer Sherif / Robbers Cave Experiment
19. 1960s–1970s — Laud Humphreys / Washington University — “Tearoom Trade”
20. 1960s–1970s — Prison Behavior-Modification Programs / U.S. Correctional Institutions
21. 1950s–1970s — Token Economy Programs / Locked Psychiatric Hospitals
22. 1960s–1970s — Patuxent Institution / Maryland “Defective Delinquent” Program
25. 1940s–1980s — Eugenics Boards / State Hospitals / Psychiatric Institutions
26. 1950s–1980s — Psychiatric Restraint and Seclusion Practices / State Hospitals
27. 1960s–1980s — Psychiatric Drug Trials / State Hospitals and Institutional Settings
28. 1955–1975 — U.S. Army Chemical Corps / Edgewood Arsenal
29. 1951–1989 — UK Ministry of Defence / Porton Down
30. 1960s–1970s — Prison Drug and Behavior-Control Research / Correctional Institutions
31. 1960s–1970s — MKSEARCH / CIA-linked Post-MKUltra Behavioral Research
32. 1946–1948 — John Cutler / U.S. Public Health Service / Guatemala STD Experiments
33. 1970s — Genie Wiley Case / UCLA-linked Language Development Researchers
34. 1940s–1970s — Institutionalized Children / State Schools, Orphanages, Psychiatric Facilities
35. 1940s–1980s — Forced Sterilization of Institutionalized Children and Disabled People
36. 1950 — U.S. Navy / Operation Sea-Spray / San Francisco Bay Area
37. 1950s–1960s — U.S. Army Chemical Corps / Operation LAC
38. 1953–1965 — U.S. Army Aerosol Testing / St. Louis / Pruitt-Igoe
39. 1940–1974 — Department of Defense-affiliated Human Experimentation
40. 1993–Present — National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program / State ChalleNGe Academies
41. 1967–2005 — CEDU / Mel Wasserman — Troubled-Teen Schools
42. 2001–2009 — Academy at Ivy Ridge / WWASP / Robert and Narvin Lichfield
43. 1971–Present — Provo Canyon School / Youth Residential Treatment
44. 1976–1993 — Straight, Inc. / Mel and Betty Sembler
45. 2024 — U.S. Senate Finance Committee / Ron Wyden — “Warehouses of Neglect”
46. 1950s–1990s — Duplessis Orphans / Quebec Institutions
48. 1870s–1990s — Canadian Residential Schools / Canadian Government and Church Operators
49. 1944–1974 — Advisory Committee-documented Human Radiation Experiments / U.S. Federal Agencies
50. 1960s–1970s — Behavior-Modification Units in Prisons and Hospitals
51. 1960s–1980s — Residential Treatment Centers for “Unmanageable” Children
52. 1970s–Present — Private Military-style Schools for Troubled Teens
53. 1980s–2000s — Wilderness Therapy Programs / Aspen Education Group-type Programs
54. 1990s–2000s — Teen Transport / “Gooning” Industry
55. 1970s–Present — School Seclusion Rooms / Public Schools and Youth Facilities
56. 1970s–Present — Restraint Practices / Schools, Hospitals, and Youth Facilities
1. 1939 — Wendell Johnson / Mary Tudor / University of Iowa — “Monster Study”
Speech researcher Wendell Johnson at the University of Iowa designed this study, carried out by graduate student Mary Tudor at the Iowa Soldiers’ Orphans’ Home in Davenport, Iowa. Orphaned children were divided into groups and given either positive speech reinforcement or repeated criticism suggesting they had defective speech or were developing a stutter. The unethical issue was that researchers used authority, fear, correction, and labeling to create speech anxiety in vulnerable children who could not meaningfully refuse.
2. 1946–1953 — MIT / Quaker Oats / Fernald State School — Radioactive Oatmeal Study
MIT researchers, working with Quaker Oats and the Fernald State School in Massachusetts, used institutionalized boys in a “Science Club” where they were fed cereal containing radioactive tracers. The stated purpose was to study nutrient absorption. The unethical issue was the misleading framing: children in state care were made to feel selected or rewarded while being used in radiation-related research they and their families were not positioned to fully understand.
3. 1950s–1970s — Albert Kligman / University of Pennsylvania / Holmesburg Prison
Dermatologist Albert Kligman, affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania, conducted experiments on prisoners at Holmesburg Prison in Philadelphia. These included dermatology tests, drug trials, cosmetics testing, chemical exposure, and skin-irritant research. The unethical issue was the use of incarcerated people as a convenient captive population, where payment, confinement, and limited alternatives made “consent” highly questionable.
4. 1956–1971 — Saul Krugman / Robert McCollum / Willowbrook State School
Researchers including Saul Krugman and Robert McCollum conducted hepatitis studies at Willowbrook State School in Staten Island, an institution for children with intellectual disabilities. Children were deliberately exposed to hepatitis to study infection, immunity, and prevention. The unethical issue was that disabled institutionalized children were used as disease subjects in a setting where families had limited leverage and the children themselves could not meaningfully consent.
5. 1963 — Chester Southam / Emanuel Mandel / Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital
Cancer researcher Chester Southam and hospital director Emanuel Mandel were involved in research at the Jewish Chronic Disease Hospital in Brooklyn. Chronically ill and elderly patients were injected with live cancer cells as part of immune-response research. The unethical issue was that patients were not clearly told they were being injected with cancer cells, turning vulnerable medical patients into research subjects without proper informed consent.
6. 1960s–1970s — Eugene Saenger / University of Cincinnati / Department of Defense-linked Radiation Research
Radiologist Eugene Saenger at the University of Cincinnati conducted whole-body and partial-body radiation studies on cancer patients, with research connections to military concerns about radiation exposure. Patients were exposed to significant radiation so researchers could study human physical responses. The unethical issue was that seriously ill patients may not have understood the experimental purpose, the risks, or the military relevance of what was being done to them.
7. 1950s–1970s — Psychiatrists and Behavioral Therapists — LGBTQ Aversion Therapy
Some psychiatrists, psychologists, and behavioral therapists used electric shock, nausea-inducing drugs, shame conditioning, and other punishment methods to try to change sexual orientation. These practices appeared in hospitals, clinics, universities, and psychiatric settings. The unethical issue was that physical and psychological distress was used to force identity conformity, treating sexual orientation as a defect to be punished out of a person.
8. 1970s — George Rekers / O. Ivar Lovaas / UCLA-linked Behavior Modification
Psychologist George Rekers and behaviorist O. Ivar Lovaas were associated with UCLA-linked behavior modification work involving a young boy whose gender-nonconforming behavior was targeted. Masculine-coded behavior was rewarded, while feminine-coded behavior was discouraged or punished. The unethical issue was that behavioral psychology was used to suppress a child’s identity expression and train him toward socially approved conduct.
9. 1950s–1960s — Donald Ewen Cameron / Allan Memorial Institute / McGill University
Psychiatrist Donald Ewen Cameron, working at the Allan Memorial Institute in Montreal and affiliated with McGill University, used extreme psychiatric methods called “psychic driving” and “depatterning.” Patients were subjected to heavy electroshock, drug-induced sleep, sensory disruption, and repeated taped messages. The unethical issue was that psychiatric patients were exposed to procedures intended to break down and reshape mental patterns, often without meaningful consent.
10. 1963–1979 — Harry Bailey / Chelmsford Private Hospital
Psychiatrist Harry Bailey used deep sleep therapy at Chelmsford Private Hospital in Australia. Patients were placed under prolonged drug-induced sleep, often combined with electroconvulsive therapy. The unethical issue was that patients were chemically incapacitated for extended periods, reducing agency and exposing them to severe medical risks, including deaths associated with the practice.
11. 1945–1947 — Stafford Warren / Manhattan Project Medical Researchers
Manhattan Project medical researchers, including figures connected to nuclear medicine and military research, injected civilian hospital patients with radioactive substances such as plutonium, uranium, or polonium. The purpose was to study how radioactive materials moved through the human body. The unethical issue was that military-nuclear research used human subjects without meaningful informed consent.
12. 1973 — David Rosenhan / Psychiatric Hospitals — “On Being Sane in Insane Places”
Psychologist David Rosenhan sent pseudopatients into psychiatric hospitals claiming they heard voices. After admission, they behaved normally, but staff often interpreted ordinary behavior through psychiatric labels. The unethical issue was two-sided: the study exposed how labels could trap people inside institutions, but it also used deception and placed hospitals, staff, and real patients inside an experiment without informed participation.
13. 1940s–1970s — Atomic Energy Commission / U.S. Federal Radiation Researchers
The Atomic Energy Commission and related federal agencies sponsored or oversaw radiation studies involving hospital patients, prisoners, soldiers, children, and institutionalized people. These studies examined radiation exposure, radioactive materials, and human biological response. The unethical issue was that vulnerable populations were used in radiation-risk research before modern consent protections existed.
14. 1950s–1970s — Deep Sleep Therapy / Narcosis Treatment Movement
Deep sleep therapy, also called narcosis treatment, was used by some psychiatrists to keep patients unconscious or heavily sedated for days or weeks. It was sometimes combined with electroshock, psychiatric drugs, or other interventions. The unethical issue was that prolonged sedation removed patient agency and created serious medical risks while being presented as treatment.
15. 1950s–1960s — Lauretta Bender / Bellevue Hospital — ECT on Children
Psychiatrist Lauretta Bender at Bellevue Hospital in New York used electroconvulsive therapy and other aggressive psychiatric interventions on children diagnosed with severe psychiatric conditions. These children were often highly vulnerable and under institutional medical authority. The unethical issue was that children were subjected to seizure-inducing treatment during an era with weaker consent standards, limited oversight, and less understanding of long-term harm.
16. 1970s–Present — Judge Rotenberg Center / Matthew Israel
The Judge Rotenberg Center in Massachusetts, founded by psychologist Matthew Israel, became known for using electric-shock aversive devices on disabled children and adults. The shocks were used to suppress behaviors deemed dangerous, disruptive, or noncompliant. The unethical issue is that painful punishment was framed as treatment, raising serious concerns about disability rights, abuse, consent, and institutional control.
17. 1940s–1970s — Pennhurst / Belchertown / Letchworth Village / State Institutions
State institutions such as Pennhurst in Pennsylvania, Belchertown in Massachusetts, and Letchworth Village in New York housed children and adults with disabilities in overcrowded and often abusive conditions. Residents could experience neglect, restraint, isolation, overmedication, punishment, and lack of basic care. The unethical issue was that vulnerable people were treated as problems to manage rather than human beings with rights, dignity, and agency.
18. 1954 — Muzafer Sherif / Robbers Cave Experiment
Social psychologist Muzafer Sherif conducted the Robbers Cave Experiment with boys at a summer camp in Oklahoma. Researchers divided the boys into rival groups, encouraged competition and hostility, and later introduced shared goals to study cooperation. The unethical issue was that children were unknowingly manipulated into conflict, emotional stress, and group hostility as part of a social psychology experiment.
19. 1960s–1970s — Laud Humphreys / Washington University — “Tearoom Trade”
Sociologist Laud Humphreys, affiliated with Washington University, secretly observed men engaging in sexual encounters in public restrooms. He recorded identifying information and later interviewed some subjects under false pretenses. The unethical issue was the invasion of privacy, deception, and risk of exposing highly sensitive information that could have destroyed reputations, jobs, and families.
20. 1960s–1970s — Prison Behavior-Modification Programs / U.S. Correctional Institutions
Some correctional institutions experimented with isolation, drugging, punishment, rewards, token systems, and psychological control methods to reshape inmate behavior. These programs were often presented as rehabilitation or treatment. The unethical issue was that prisoners were a captive population with limited ability to refuse, allowing “therapy” to become coercive institutional control.
21. 1950s–1970s — Token Economy Programs / Locked Psychiatric Hospitals
Token economy systems were used in locked psychiatric wards where patients earned or lost privileges, comfort, activities, movement, or access based on compliant behavior. These systems were promoted as behavioral treatment. The unethical issue was that in locked institutions, basic freedoms could become behavioral currency, making treatment resemble obedience training.
22. 1960s–1970s — Patuxent Institution / Maryland “Defective Delinquent” Program
Patuxent Institution in Maryland used the label “defective delinquent” to classify certain people convicted of crimes. This psychiatric-criminal label could justify confinement beyond ordinary sentencing. The unethical issue was that medicalized labels were used to extend control, blurring punishment, diagnosis, treatment, and indefinite confinement.
23. 1950s–1960s — Donald Hebb / McGill University / Canadian Defence Research Board — Sensory Deprivation Research
Psychologist Donald Hebb at McGill University conducted sensory deprivation research with support connected to Canadian defense interests. Subjects wore goggles, gloves, and other devices while being placed in monotonous, reduced-stimulation conditions. The unethical issue was that the research showed how sensory deprivation could destabilize perception and thinking, raising later concerns about interrogation, psychological control, and military applications.
24. 1960s–1970s — Aversion Therapy Movement / MacCulloch, Feldman, Freund, McConaghy / Psychiatric and Behavioral Clinics — “Clockwork Orange”-style Conditioning
Psychiatrists, psychologists, and behavioral researchers in hospitals, universities, correctional institutions, and psychiatric clinics used aversion therapy to suppress behaviors, thoughts, identities, or impulses they considered undesirable. Real figures associated with this movement included Robert MacCulloch and M. Philip Feldman in Britain, Kurt Freund at Charles University in Prague, and Neil McConaghy at the University of New South Wales and Prince Henry Hospital in Sydney. These researchers used or studied methods such as electric shock, nausea-inducing drugs like apomorphine, shame conditioning, and repeated pairing of distress with targeted images, thoughts, or behaviors.
The comparison to A Clockwork Orange comes from the fictional Ludovico Technique, where Alex is restrained, forced to watch violent films, and chemically made sick until violence itself triggers nausea and terror. Real aversion therapy did not always look exactly like the fictional scene, but the underlying logic was similar: pair an unwanted impulse with pain, illness, fear, or disgust until the person becomes conditioned against it. The unethical issue was that suffering was used as a tool of behavioral control, especially against vulnerable people such as psychiatric patients, prisoners, institutionalized individuals, and LGBTQ people, turning “treatment” into punishment-based conformity.
25. 1940s–1980s — Eugenics Boards / State Hospitals / Psychiatric Institutions
State eugenics boards and institutional authorities approved sterilizations of people labeled mentally ill, disabled, “feebleminded,” poor, dependent, or socially undesirable. Many victims were in state hospitals, psychiatric institutions, or disability facilities. The unethical issue was that institutional and psychiatric labels were used to justify permanent bodily control and reproductive punishment.
26. 1950s–1980s — Psychiatric Restraint and Seclusion Practices / State Hospitals
Psychiatric hospitals used physical restraints, seclusion rooms, forced medication, and isolation to control patients. These practices were often justified as safety measures or clinical management. The unethical issue was that restraint and seclusion could easily become punishment, containment, or silencing of distress, especially when used on people with little power to object.
27. 1960s–1980s — Psychiatric Drug Trials / State Hospitals and Institutional Settings
Institutionalized psychiatric patients were used in medication trials while dependent on hospitals for housing, food, care, privileges, and possible release. New psychiatric drugs were tested in settings where patients had limited independence. The unethical issue was that “treatment” could function as experimentation, with patients pressured by dependency and confinement.
28. 1955–1975 — U.S. Army Chemical Corps / Edgewood Arsenal
At Edgewood Arsenal in Maryland, the U.S. Army Chemical Corps tested psychoactive drugs, nerve-agent-related substances, chemical agents, and incapacitating compounds on soldiers. The goal was to study military usefulness and human effects. The unethical issue was that military subjects were exposed to secret chemical and psychological-effect testing where consent, risk disclosure, and long-term health consequences were deeply contested.
29. 1951–1989 — UK Ministry of Defence / Porton Down
At Porton Down in the United Kingdom, military volunteers were exposed to chemical-warfare agents and related substances during defense testing. These tests involved nerve-agent research and other hazardous materials. The unethical issue was that military hierarchy can pressure participation, and the substances involved carried serious health risks that volunteers may not have fully understood.
30. 1960s–1970s — Prison Drug and Behavior-Control Research / Correctional Institutions
Some prison research programs combined drug testing, isolation, behavior conditioning, reward systems, punishment systems, and institutional discipline. These programs were framed as research, rehabilitation, or behavior management. The unethical issue was that prisoners had limited practical ability to refuse, and behavioral research could become a tool of prison control.
31. 1960s–1970s — MKSEARCH / CIA-linked Post-MKUltra Behavioral Research
MKSEARCH followed earlier CIA programs such as MKUltra and continued interest in drugs, behavior modification, covert testing structures, and human performance under chemical influence. The program reflected government interest in controlling, weakening, or altering human behavior. The unethical issue was that behavior-control research continued through secretive channels with serious problems involving consent, oversight, and abuse.
32. 1946–1948 — John Cutler / U.S. Public Health Service / Guatemala STD Experiments
U.S. Public Health Service physician John Cutler was involved in experiments in Guatemala where prisoners, soldiers, sex workers, and psychiatric patients were deliberately exposed to syphilis, gonorrhea, or chancroid. The goal was to study disease transmission and prevention. The unethical issue was that vulnerable people were infected without proper consent, making it one of the most severe U.S.-linked medical ethics violations.
33. 1970s — Genie Wiley Case / UCLA-linked Language Development Researchers
Genie Wiley, a severely abused and isolated child, became the subject of intense language-development research after being rescued. UCLA-linked researchers studied her language acquisition, trauma, and developmental recovery. The unethical issue was that the boundary between care, custody, and research became blurred around a traumatized child who needed protection more than experimentation.
34. 1940s–1970s — Institutionalized Children / State Schools, Orphanages, Psychiatric Facilities
Children in state schools, orphanages, psychiatric facilities, and disability institutions were used in medical, behavioral, drug, developmental, and psychological research. These children were often wards of the state or under institutional control. The unethical issue was that institutionalized children had little power to refuse and were treated as accessible research subjects.
35. 1940s–1980s — Forced Sterilization of Institutionalized Children and Disabled People
Minors and disabled people were sterilized under eugenic, psychiatric, or institutional policies justified by claims of disability, dependency, “feeblemindedness,” or social undesirability. These policies often targeted people already confined or supervised by institutions. The unethical issue was that permanent bodily control was imposed through medicalized labels on people least able to resist.
36. 1950 — U.S. Navy / Operation Sea-Spray / San Francisco Bay Area
During Operation Sea-Spray, the U.S. Navy released bacteria over the San Francisco Bay Area to study biological-warfare vulnerability and dispersal patterns. Civilian residents were not warned or asked for consent. The unethical issue was that an entire civilian population, including children and vulnerable residents, was exposed as part of a military test.
37. 1950s–1960s — U.S. Army Chemical Corps / Operation LAC
Operation LAC, meaning Large Area Coverage, involved the U.S. Army Chemical Corps releasing zinc cadmium sulfide particles from aircraft, vehicles, and rooftops to study dispersal patterns. Civilian areas were used to model biological-warfare spread. The unethical issue was that communities were turned into unwitting exposure populations for military research.
38. 1953–1965 — U.S. Army Aerosol Testing / St. Louis / Pruitt-Igoe
Military aerosol dispersal testing occurred around St. Louis, including areas associated with the Pruitt-Igoe housing project. The tests involved releasing particles to study how substances moved through urban environments. The unethical issue was that residents, including children and low-income families, became unwitting subjects in military aerosol testing.
39. 1940–1974 — Department of Defense-affiliated Human Experimentation
Department of Defense-affiliated entities, including Army, Navy, Air Force, CIA, Defense Nuclear Agency, and related agencies, sponsored chemical, biological, radiological, and behavioral studies. These involved soldiers, prisoners, patients, and civilians. The unethical issue was that military research priorities often outweighed transparency, informed consent, and protection of vulnerable subjects.
40. 1993–Present — National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program / State ChalleNGe Academies
The National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program places youth in military-structured residential programs using uniforms, cadet hierarchy, drills, discipline, physical training, strict schedules, and behavioral expectations. It is not automatically abusive, but it uses military-style structure to reshape youth behavior. The unethical concern is that youth already labeled as needing intervention can be placed into highly controlled environments where obedience and compliance become central goals.
41. 1967–2005 — CEDU / Mel Wasserman — Troubled-Teen Schools
CEDU schools, founded by Mel Wasserman, operated private emotional-growth and troubled-teen programs using confrontation, seminars, peer pressure, hierarchy, confession-style exercises, and behavior systems. Former students have alleged humiliation, coercion, psychological abuse, and rights violations. The unethical issue was that private youth programs could use therapeutic language to justify emotional control and forced conformity.
42. 2001–2009 — Academy at Ivy Ridge / WWASP / Robert and Narvin Lichfield
Academy at Ivy Ridge in New York was linked to the WWASP network, associated with Robert and Narvin Lichfield. Former students alleged isolation, restraint, surveillance, coercive discipline, and psychological abuse. The unethical issue was that parental fear of a “troubled” child could become a pipeline into private confinement and control.
43. 1971–Present — Provo Canyon School / Youth Residential Treatment
Provo Canyon School in Utah operated as a youth residential treatment facility. Former students have publicly alleged forced medication, restraint, isolation, and psychological mistreatment. The unethical issue was that youth treatment can become confinement and behavior control when children are isolated from outside support and placed under total institutional authority.
44. 1976–1993 — Straight, Inc. / Mel and Betty Sembler
Straight, Inc., founded by Mel and Betty Sembler, operated as a teen drug-treatment program. It used confrontation, peer control, restraint, humiliation, strict compliance systems, and group pressure. The unethical issue was that “treatment” could become behavioral domination through fear, coercion, and forced confession-style control.
45. 2024 — U.S. Senate Finance Committee / Ron Wyden — “Warehouses of Neglect”
The U.S. Senate Finance Committee, chaired by Senator Ron Wyden, released findings describing abuse, neglect, and failed oversight in youth residential treatment facilities. The investigation addressed taxpayer-funded systems where children were placed for treatment but allegedly suffered harm. The unethical issue was that institutions marketed as care providers could become warehouses of neglect, confinement, and abuse.
46. 1950s–1990s — Duplessis Orphans / Quebec Institutions
In Quebec, children known as the Duplessis Orphans were allegedly mislabeled as mentally ill and placed in psychiatric institutions. Many reported neglect, abuse, improper confinement, and loss of normal childhood opportunities. The unethical issue was that false or improper psychiatric classification was used to institutionalize children who should not have been treated as mentally ill.
47. 1800s–1970s — U.S. Native American Boarding Schools / Bureau of Indian Affairs and Church Operators
Indigenous children in the United States were removed from families and placed in boarding schools operated by government and church authorities. These schools were designed to suppress Native languages, culture, religion, identity, and family ties. The unethical issue was that children were controlled through forced assimilation, punishment, cultural erasure, and institutional discipline.
48. 1870s–1990s — Canadian Residential Schools / Canadian Government and Church Operators
Canadian residential schools removed Indigenous children from their families and placed them in government- and church-run institutions. Many children experienced abuse, punishment, neglect, forced assimilation, and suppression of language and culture. The unethical issue was that institutional control was used as state and church policy to erase identity and sever children from families.
49. 1944–1974 — Advisory Committee-documented Human Radiation Experiments / U.S. Federal Agencies
The Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments later documented federal radiation studies involving patients, prisoners, soldiers, children, and hospital subjects. These studies were connected to military, medical, and nuclear research priorities. The unethical issue was that many subjects lacked meaningful informed consent and were chosen because they were dependent, institutionalized, or otherwise vulnerable.
50. 1960s–1970s — Behavior-Modification Units in Prisons and Hospitals
Behavior-modification units in prisons and hospitals used rewards, punishments, isolation, drugs, token systems, and privilege control to shape conduct. These systems were often described as treatment or rehabilitation. The unethical issue was that when people cannot freely leave, behavioral treatment can become institutional obedience training.
51. 1960s–1980s — Residential Treatment Centers for “Unmanageable” Children
Children labeled unsafe, defiant, disturbed, or unmanageable were placed in locked or semi-locked treatment settings. These facilities could use medication, restraint, seclusion, privilege systems, and compliance plans. The unethical issue was that labels could justify confinement, and children had limited ability to challenge the diagnosis, placement, or treatment.
52. 1970s–Present — Private Military-style Schools for Troubled Teens
Private military-style schools marketed uniforms, drills, discipline, obedience, hierarchy, strict routines, and physical training to parents seeking control over a “troubled” child. These schools often borrowed military imagery without being actual military institutions. The unethical issue was that discipline could be sold as transformation while avoiding the oversight expected in official public systems.
53. 1980s–2000s — Wilderness Therapy Programs / Aspen Education Group-type Programs
Wilderness therapy programs sent youth into remote outdoor settings using survival stress, isolation from home, group pressure, forced endurance, discipline, and limited outside contact. Companies such as Aspen Education Group became associated with this broader industry. The unethical issue was that children could be placed in physically risky, isolated environments where refusal or reporting abuse was extremely difficult.
54. 1990s–2000s — Teen Transport / “Gooning” Industry
Private teen transport agents, sometimes called “goons,” removed youth from homes and transported them to residential treatment centers, wilderness programs, or disciplinary schools. Removals could happen at night, by surprise, or under physical control. The unethical issue was that children could be frightened, restrained, and transported without meaningful consent.
55. 1970s–Present — School Seclusion Rooms / Public Schools and Youth Facilities
Schools and youth facilities used locked, enclosed, or isolated rooms to control children during behavioral incidents. These rooms were often used on children with disabilities or emotional distress. The unethical issue was that isolation can become punishment, trauma, or containment instead of care, especially when children are left alone while already dysregulated.
56. 1970s–Present — Restraint Practices / Schools, Hospitals, and Youth Facilities
Children in schools, hospitals, psychiatric settings, and youth facilities have been physically restrained using holds, takedowns, prone restraint, mechanical restraint, or prolonged staff control. Restraint is often justified as safety intervention. The unethical issue is that restraint can injure, traumatize, silence, or kill children when overused or misused, especially when applied to disability-related or emotional behavior
