Taking any form of legal action against anyone,on the basis of malicious gossip, is wrong and lowers the legal bar to the level of Saem.
On the same level, 'facilitated communication' is as bogus as witchunting.
Jacobson, John W.; Mulick, James A.; Schwartz, Allen A. A history of facilitated communication: Science, pseudoscience, and antiscience science working group on facilitated communication. American Psychologist, 1995 Sep, v50 (n9):750-765.
Jacobson, John W.; Mulick, James A. Facilitated communication: Better education through applied ideology. Journal of Behavioral Education, 1994 Mar, v4 (n1):93-105.
Jacobson, John W.; Mulick, James A.; Schwartz, Allen A. If a tree falls in the woods . . . American Psychologist, 1996 Sep, v51 (n9):988-989.
Sailor, Wayne. Science, ideology, and facilitated communication. American Psychologist, 1996 Sep, v51 (n9):984-985.
Allen, Brad; Allen, Stephanie. Can the scientific method be applied to human interaction? American Psychologist, 1996 Sep, v51 (n9):986.
Fernald, Dodge. Tapping too softly. American Psychologist, 1996 Sep, v51 (n9):988.
Dillion, Kathleen M. Facilitated communication, autism, and ouija. (includes related articles) Skeptical Inquirer v17, n3 (Spring, 1993):281 (7 pages).
Facilitated communication is a treatment technique used for people with limited communication skills. It is widely used for autistic children and has reported miraculous cures. Other experts however, consider the technique as similar to the Ouija board because of common physical characteristics. Issues are raised about the facilitators, the technique of both the procedures and the influence of the operators. The messages obtained from both are also analyzed. The wrong use of facilitated communication could produce deleterious effects in some families.
(With thanks to J.M. Price, Ph.D.)