Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > Hyde Schools
NOTICE TO POTENTIAL PARENTS
Lars:
--- Quote ---On 2005-11-24 15:17:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I can posit "some" people got ill from it.
I can also posit for "some" people this fish saved them from starvation and whatever other ills associated with it, the cure was worth the pain.
Metaphors aside, I seriously wish there was an easy metric for this sort of thing, because while the attrition and run-away rate is relevant on some level, its never the less an unknown and not necessarily correllated.
People leave Hyde for a wide variety of reasons and the number of posts on a website by anonymous posters does not make the case any more compelling.
There are definitely "some" who seem to have been abused at Hyde. There definitely seem to be "some" who had great experiences at Hyde. Both sides want to claim substantial numbers, but neither side has the ability to back them up.
Should Hyde disclose attrition (including run-aways)? Absolutely! I'll sign up for that request, as for me that's basic consumer information.
But without that data, while there may be many with valid tales to share on this site, any discussion of the numbers being on one side or the other seems fundamentally suspect."
--- End quote ---
As another poster mentioned, the Class Notes section of their bulletin should shed some light on how many viewed their experience positively enough to stay involved. Most people who make it through there never look back. Actual numbers? I couldn't give you an exact percentage for how many give money to the school or return for alumni weekends, for example. But I bet it's pretty low. Most of the people I've stayed in contact with feel the way I do - they're embarassed to admit they went there.
And the posts on this website do make a strong case. I can't speak for others, but I spent three years in Bath and I know what went on there. If one of their "success stories" wouldn't send a kid there in a million years, that should tell you something.
Anonymous:
--- Quote ---On 2005-11-24 15:48:00, Antigen wrote:
"
--- Quote ---
On 2005-11-24 15:17:00, Anonymous wrote:
There are definitely "some" who seem to have been abused at Hyde. There definitely seem to be "some" who had great experiences at Hyde.
--- End quote ---
Do you think those who had a good time might have developed an unhealthy insensitivity to those who were abused? And do you not think that's a kind of damage?
--- End quote ---
On this site I have seen the detractors of Hyde calling people names (cultists, brainwashed, etc. etc). On this site I have seen some pro Hyde people say that many of the people with discipline problems and others who are just detractors didn't get it. Both statements can be seen as invalidating (and thus being insensitive to) others.
That said, many of the anti- and pro- Hyde folks here post thoughtful personal experiences and observations about Hyde.
What I think creates unnecessary acrimony (and at least perceived insensitivitly on both sides) is the format of this website which allows everyone to be anonymous instead of requiring posters to use anonymous but unique pseudonyms that make linear conversations more possible.
If your question is more specific to this stream, then I have to throw it back at you and ask that if you have more direct knowledge about the assault alleged above (but which no one seems to have any real facts) and about why they Paul Hurd situation was not exemplary -- in either case in a fashion that makes the responsive comments insensitive, I think everyone would encourage you to point that insensitivity out more directly.
Anonymous:
1. Your statement about not knowing if the student provoked it suggests you don't know the details. Without those, your post is meaningless. In your follow on post you add new facts about choking the student. Again, we don't know what led up to it, but if a student is a danger to himself or others, that would certainly justify physical restraint in my book. Beyond that, I would need the details of the incident to evaluate it. Hence my comment that your post is basically meaningless.
As I've written before, the Paul Hurd incident to me is not evidence of Hyde being bad. There is no school in the country not rocked by sexual assault, rape an other outrageous behavior by supervisorial adults. And like the catholic church, many remove the teacher without legal action to avoid scandal. Hyde did not have to deal with this situation so openly....but instead said, hey, we believe in honesty and openness, so we are going to let you in on an embarassing thing that hurts us all, but to be consistent, this is how we must handle it.
They aired their dirty laundry publicly and openly and handled the situation responsibly.
That, to me, is evidence of their integrity.
That, to me, is evidence of Hyde's leadership.
You can spin it how you want, but what didn't happen was Hyde trying to keep it quiet and sweep it under the rug. Instead it sent a letter to the entire alumni community....not just current family and students. Personally, I don't know if I would have ever found out about it, but for their aggressive exemplary behavior. I tipped my hat to Hyde for this one."
**********************************************************************************************
You certainly have put a lot of time and effort into researching all the posts and have articulated YOUR OPINIONS. I give you credit for this. This board is for all posts both positive and negative and you have given us your positive spin on Hyde. This is your right.
My opinion, (which I too am entitled to) difers with yours. I will respond to a couple of the above statements.
I was at the weekend where this incident happened. I was not at the site where it happened, but as you know at Hyde it takes approximately 1 min and 30 seconds for rumors to fly. I was told not only by students, but faculty alike that this boy was with his father when having an arguement with Mr McMillan. The boy spit at Mr McMillan, and he reacted by pinning him against the wall and choking him. You can defend this action all your want, but it is MHO that Mr McMillan should have had enough self control not to react the way he did. He is a top administrator and this is innapropriate behavior.
You state, "There is no school in the country not rocked by sexual assault, rape an other outrageous behavior by supervisorial adults. To me this comment in itself is outrageous. Your inference is that because it is the norm for other schools, it is not so outrageous for it to happen at Hyde. Sorry guy, but I didn't pay $35,000 per year for my daughter to be around this!!
You also state, "As I've written before, the Paul Hurd incident to me is not evidence of Hyde being bad." Who said that this one incident is what makes Hyde bad?? All that potential families need to do is read all the posts where parents and students tell their story! They can judge for themselves!
In this particular incident with Paul Hurd, Hyde did discuss this openly, but in my experience at Hyde this is rare! It is very rare for Hyde to air their dirty laundry.
As I said at the beginning. Everyone on this board is entitled to their own opinion, and this is mine! I would not be so arrogant, (like you) to say I am right and you are wrong. We have two differing opinions!
Antigen:
--- Quote ---On 2005-11-25 07:53:00, Anonymous wrote:
Again, we don't know what led up to it, but if a student is a danger to himself or others, that would certainly justify physical restraint in my book.
--- End quote ---
Ok, then how are we defining what is and is not a threat to oneself or others? Speaking from my own experience in a similar program (similar in some ways, not identical) here's how that went and I'll explain why I think it's similar.
In the Seed and Straight, just like the rest of the troubled parent industry, the parents, staff and (to some extent) client group believed they would be deadinsaneorinjail without the Program. I keep hearing that about Hyde, too.
It's hard to say how much a kid actually believed that at any particular time. But that's how it works; if you disagreed and let it slip by word or gesture or posture or facial expression, there would be consequences. I keep hearing that from former Hyde students too.
So it appeared for all the world that everyone but the misbehaver believed that the effective operation of the Program was absolutely as necessary to our individual and group survival as insulin to a diabetic.
So talking out in group, as in mocking the whole stupid program, or just trying to walk away, defying the authority that kept the rest of us sitting ram-rod straight in our chairs or in any way undermining the false consensus or chain of command was deemed a threat to everyone's life. Hell, when my dad asked the Parents group for support for a project of his that was unrelated to the Program, he got reemed out for trying to kill us all by diverting funds and volunteer hours away from us. If they thought they could get away with it, I bet they would have slammed his ass on the floor and sat on him till he decided to work his program again.
I'm hoping Hyde is not quite THAT extreme. And, from all I'm hearing, it's not. But that still leaves the question, and it's a really important question; how does Hyde determine what is and is not a threat to a student's self or peers? Without that crucial bit of information, you (Hyde supporters) sound to me just about like a wife beater saying "The bitch didn't know when to shut up."
Not very compelling. Actually, kind of ugly.
The inspiration of the Bible depends on the ignorance of the person who reads it.
--Robert G. Ingersoll, American politician and lecturer
--- End quote ---
_________________
Drug war POW
Straight, Sarasota
`80 - `82
Anonymous:
Is anyone out there capable of doing a Dun and Bradstreet?? This would certainly prove whether it is correct that Hyde and the Gauld Family are well off or whether they are truly doing this out of the goodness of their heart like they say!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version