Here is an excellent article on this matter by a retired PhD psychologist.
A Discussion of Justina Pelletier and Boston Childrens Hospital
http://www.madinamerica.com/2014/03/discussion-justina-pelletier-boston-childrens-hospital/
The following are excerpts:
One of the points that has emerged fairly clearly is that Boston Children’s Hospital (BCH) procedure for pursuing a commitment of this kind is a well-oiled machine. The BCH physicians and staff on the one hand, and the DCF staff on the other, work closely to prepare their cases, and the courts are usually cooperative. Psychiatric evidence is afforded a high measure of credibility and deference, and, as in this case, the child is routinely ordered to remain at BCH.
The problem with all of this is that BCH stands to make a great deal of money on every child that is court-ordered to remain in their care. The conflict of interest is glaring. Its like a judge routinely sending convicted criminals to a private prison that he himself happens to own. The difference is that any judge who engaged in activity of this sort would be looking at criminal charges and disbarment. But in psychiatry, this sort of thing is common.
The matter is particularly compelling in that reports are emerging that BCH tends to pursue these kinds of court orders in cases where the family has good insurance. Justina was kept at BCH for eleven months. I have seen no reports as to the size of the bill, but Im sure it wasnt trivial.
BCH and Harvard
David R. DeMaso, MD, is the head of psychiatry at BCH. He is also a professor at Harvard, and is a member of Harvards Psychiatry Department Executive Committee. He is evidently highly regarded at the University, and has his own Harvard Catalyst page. Theres a tab on this page labeled Similar People, and one of the people listed as similar to Dr. DeMaso is our old friend Joseph Biederman, MD, the eminent inventor of pediatric bipolar disorder. This is the bogus diagnosis that legitimized the prescribing of neuroleptic drugs to children as young as two years old for temper tantrums. Even some psychiatrists spoke out against this spurious and destructive activity, but the practice continues. The fact that Dr. DeMaso would allow Dr. Biedermans name to remain on his Similar People tab seems noteworthy. There is also a connections page on Harvard Catalyst, listing three publications co-authored by Dr. DeMaso and Dr. Biederman.
Dr. Biederman is on record as promising Johnson & Johnson a positive result for their drug Risperdal if they would fund his study. Why would any reputable physician allow someone like that to remain on his Similar People tab?
I did a PubMed search to see if there were other links between BCH psychiatrists and Joseph Biederman. In addition to the DeMaso publications, I discovered papers co-authored by Joseph Biederman and at least two other members of the BCH Department of Psychiatry Leadership Team: Joseph Gonzalez-Heydrich, MD (7 articles, as recent at 2012); and Deborah Waber, MD (3 articles, as recent at 2012).
The gag order was clearly an attempt to prevent them from drawing adverse publicity to BCHs psychiatry department. Courts are supposed to be impartial. Why would the court in this case have assumed that the psychiatry departments motives were benign, that its diagnoses were valid and accurate, and that its practices were judicious and efficacious? Why did the court not recognize the financial conflict of interest when it ordered that Justina be kept involuntarily in the locked psychiatric ward at BCH?