Carlbrook

[Anonymous]

stir...stir..stir..

I don't have clinical research, I don't have to, only a son that likes the program way better than the snotty private school environment he was in before.  THAT was abusive.
Would Julie like to have parents arrested for sending kids to schools in their own neighborhood that perhaps the child doesn't fit well with?

What about Catholic Schools? Are you taking on Catholic education next, Julie?

Give me a break.

[Troll Control]

How is asking for scientific evidence of efficacy stirring?  I don't get that.

You say you won't take someone's word for things, but you flippantly advise that everyone else just take your word for it that Carlbrook works.  Well, I'm sorry, but that just doesn't float.  

Why is it that the BM industry is the only treatment modality that refuses to do efficacy research?  The short answer is that they already know it doesn't work, so why cut into revenue by documenting it?

If your only contingency is that your kid likes it, why not let him choose wherever he wants to go?  I'd bet dollars to doughnuts it wouldn't be Carlbrook.

[Anonymous]

On 2006-04-03 21:26:00, Anonymous wrote:

"Why no new postings on Carlbrook - understand there is still a lot of problems with lots of parents upset and kids walking"

This was the question and I answered it.  I'm a parent and I'm  not upset.  It's hard for any of you to understand, obviously, but my kid likes Carlbrook better than the previous schools he had been to and yes, had other options (including staying home) and CHOSE it.  He repeated some classes, got his GPA up, had a wonderful therapist and is going to his first choice college next year.  I know that some of his friends are not "happy" there but he's had a good, challenging, rewarding time.

[CCM girl 1989]

:lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

[Troll Control]

"I don't have clinical research, I don't have to..."

The scary part is that these parents - not just this one in particular, but all program parents - say this routinely.  It is the standard response when questions are asked about recidivism, long-term effects, efficacy and safety.  

To me it is particularly astounding that these parents will wontonly send their kids to these places without regard to the fact that there is not a single, solitary shred of evidence (besides anecdotal) that shows that these programs are capable of helping any kids at all, but have been proven through clinical research to be ineffective at best and harmful at worst.

In what kind of esteem do they hold their children?  I often wonder.

_________________
"Compassion is the basis of morality."

-Arnold Schopenhauer[ This Message was edited by: Dysfunction Junction on 2006-04-04 14:47 ]

[Anonymous]

It's astounding to me that you could make the arrogant assumption that we (some parents NOT all) haven't done our research and don't hold our children in high esteem because we don't agree with you.  My kid needed less help than most and he wasn't so screwed up and angry that he actually was able to get something from the experience.  I looked at a study presented to the three of us when we were trying to make the decision to send our son to Carlbrook.  They only have a couple of years of graduates and while they aren't making any promises or guarantees, lots of graduates are still in college, sober and doing well.  Certainly not all are.  Do I have the figures clutched to my chest the way all of you do?  No.  Again, I don't have to.  I'm not trying to sell the school. We're almost finished and it's been good. Traveling to Carlbrook, missing work, spending holidays in family therapy is not something that parents that don't care do. It's a better program.  We all know there are bad ones. We'll never know if doing nothing or doing Carlbrook was the right thing to do.  But, for now, it doesn't feel like a waste at all.

[Troll Control]

We'll never know if doing nothing or doing Carlbrook was the right thing to do.

You would if you did the research you said you did.

I just don't believe you when you say you did your research, simply because there is no data that supports your conclusion.  You can frame it up however you want to so you can feel better about it, but you can't change the facts.  

There is no data to support your conclusion, therefore your conclusion was based on either the word of a salesman/"salesparent" or your own feelings, not research or data.

_________________
"Compassion is the basis of morality."

-Arnold Schopenhauer[ This Message was edited by: Dysfunction Junction on 2006-04-05 10:11 ]

[Anonymous]

Who says I feel bad?  I feel good about it.  I'm happy it's almost over so I can see him more but hey, he feels good, we all feel good.  If you are going to say we drank the Kool-Aid, that's fine.  It's better than cocaine.

[Troll Control]

No, that's not what I'm saying at all.  Of course a happy and healthy child is the end result ALL of us want.

Don't confuse attacking your logic or your argument with attacking you as a person.  I know it's hard to separate in an emotionally-charged debate, but you will need to be able to do this.

My point all along has been that you placed your kid there based on absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Carlbrook is able to help him.  That still stands.  No matter what way you spin it, the clinical research shows that this type of program is ineffective at best and damaging at worst.

This is why I call all of these programs "faith-based."  One must have faith that they work, because the evidence strongly states that they don't.

I just get awfully tired of the Bush-like spin you folks put on these programs.  "Don't believe science.  Don't believe your own eyes.  Believe me."  I can't do that.  

I'm sorry and disappointed that many of you have the ability to do just that.  


_________________
"Compassion is the basis of morality."

-Arnold Schopenhauer[ This Message was edited by: Dysfunction Junction on 2006-04-05 06:45 ]

[Anonymous]

On 2006-04-04 11:49:00, Anonymous wrote:

"stir...stir..stir..



I don't have clinical research, I don't have to, only a son that likes the program way better than the snotty private school environment he was in before.  THAT was abusive.

Would Julie like to have parents arrested for sending kids to schools in their own neighborhood that perhaps the child doesn't fit well with?



What about Catholic Schools? Are you taking on Catholic education next, Julie?



Give me a break.



"

Personally?

A whole lot of Fornits people disagree with me, because they have a higher mistrust of certain aspects of government, but I want something like the FDA for any facility that claims to treat mentally ill students on site.

I want the practitioners licensed, I want professional standards specified and enforced (including therapist/patient confidentiality), and I want proof that a given therapy is safe and effective before it is applied to human beings.

The latter, except in the case of experimental trials.


I want the first human trials of experimental therapies for teens to be on consenting adults in the 18-young twenties age range.

For pre-adolescent pediatric experimental therapies, I want human subjects to be only those for whom other therapies have been ineffective.

I want parents to have to give informed consent for their child to participate in experimental trials, and I want the parameters, including time period, of the experiments to be defined in advance.

I want therapies demonstrated to be unsafe or ineffective to be ineligible for future approval for experimental trials so the "experimental" designation cannot be abused.

In short, I want *ethical* treatment.

I want it to be as illegal to use level-system behavior mod. and LGATs on children as it would be to use Lydia Pinkham's on them as a treatment for cancer.

I want an end to the snake oil salesmen and the medicine shows in pediatric and adolescent psychiatry.

I want it to be illegal for parents or anyone else to stop or censor the mail of a child living away from home, except in the very limited cases where an adult could legally have his mail stopped.  While the child is placed away from home, in a facility or wilderness program, free speech rights should inhere in the child, not in the parents on the child's behalf.

I want it to be illegal for parents or guardians to transport a child across state lines from his home for the purpose of enrollment in a therapeutic program without the review of a family court judge.

I want it to be illegal for parents or guardians to transport a child who is a US citizen out of the US against the child's will.  I want the travel entity acting as a carrier for the child to be required to obtain a notorized affidavit of the child's uncoerced consent to leaving the US and file it with the State Department for inclusion in the child's State Department file.  (State already keeps those files whenever a citizen travels to certain countries.)  I want the informed consent to be read aloud to the child to ensure the child understands and doesn't just skim over the form, and to include notifying the child that the child has the right to request he be picked up by child protective services and provisions made for him to remain in the US, instead of exiting the US.  I want it to include informing the child that no adult may retaliate against him for refusing to leave the US.

It would improve two problems---the other of which is a foreign parent in a divorce kidnapping the kid out of the US in violation of custody orders.

I want no more snake oil.

I want quality, ethical treatment for mentally ill minors.

Catholic schools don't claim to provide residential treatment for mentally ill children.

Julie

[Anonymous]

On 2006-04-04 11:21:00, Anonymous wrote:

"Just what I thought...stirring the pot so that Julie could put on her Birkenstocks and start running her mouth.  New York Times Best Selling Author??  Hard to believe. Does that make you an expert.  Bill O'Reilly is a best selling author, too.



By the way, Carlbrook doesn't take ANY court ordered kids and kids, especially those over 18, must agree with the decision to be there.  



Julie, why don't you continue to stir up the other threads as an anon so you can write and write and write...



"

OMG.  Birkenstocks?  That's too funny.  I'm a conservative Republican.  I'm one of those eeeeviiillll Bush supporters.  

:rofl:  :rofl:  :rofl:

Too funny.

NYT?  _Cally's War_, John Ringo and Julie Cochrane.

(Cally's War hit 31 on the NYT hardcover fiction list in October 2004.  It's something of a big deal in the genre because science fiction novels rarely make the list at all.)

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/141652 ... oding=UTF8

As I said, a sequel and my first solo novel are under contract with Baen Books.

Ginger can verify that I sign my posts.  I think I posted a single truly anon post months ago, in a medication pro or con thread.

Birkenstocks.  Too damned funny.

No, what makes me an *advocate* is that I have bipolar disorder (type II) with pediatric onset, although it wasn't diagnosed until later.  When I was a kid, the psychiatric profession believed, erroneously, that kids couldn't get it.  My young daughter also has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder.  Since it's genetic, many of my family members also have mental illnesses, many first manifesting when they're kids.

My entire family has a vested interest in psychiatric snake oil being illegal.  We have a vested interest in getting the same kind of federal consumer protections the FDA provides for drugs and implants or the USDA provides for meat.

Mentally ill people have a right to safe, effective, confidential treatment---no matter what age they are.

Parents have no right to waive their kids' right to safe and effective treatment.

What makes me an educated advocate is that I have a BS in Psychology from Georgia Tech and have kept up with the portions of my field that relate to the particular illnesses my family is riddled with.

Writing science fiction is just my job, but it does give me access to a substantial audience.

Julie

[Anonymous]

Julie,
My kid is not mentally ill.  Maybe that's a reason he's done well there. I don't think Carlbrook takes seriously mentally ill kids.  My kid is 18 and has chosen to stay and finish the program.  He could have come home without repercussions from me because I wasn't 100% sold on the program, my ex was.  All I can say is he's not being held against his will, chose to go there and will be home very soon.  Is it possible that it may have been a good thing for this boy?  He seems to think so. He's actually proud of himself.  I'll know more this time next year.

[Troll Control]

My kid is not mentally ill.

Why on earth did you send him to a residential treatment center?   ::

[Anonymous]

After visiting about 20 schools all over the country I had a definite list of places I would NEVER let him go to.  I looked at traditional boarding schools that didn't have enough- or any-therapy components.  I felt Carlbrook was the happy medium.  My son's psychiatrist recommended it.  My son is not on any medications.  My ex- who has control of the situation- would have picked a much harsher environment (possibly why we cannot be married.)  The combined therapy and good enough academics made it the best choice.  I was scared to death but as I said earlier, it helped our son.  I was proven (at least at this point) wrong. I'm VERY happy to admit that.

[Deborah]

You physically visited 20 schools all over the country? That's alot of financial expense. Which others did you consider?