They might snow the state, which wouldn't be a monumental feat, but no one here is under any illusion that they aren't an RTC as defined by Ga ORS.
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... rt=0#97854Are you willing to state publicly that HLAs PRIMARY PURPOSE is education?
http://www.strugglingteens.com/news/nat ... iller.htmlExcerpts from
NATSAP's plea to Congressman George Miller
Re: Legislation to Curb Child Abuse in Residential Treatment Programs
We appreciate the intent of the introduction of this legislation, but are concerned the excellent work being done by a large number of residential treatment programs [RTC] will be impacted negatively if their interests are not considered.
which devote themselves to society's need for the effective care and education of struggling young people.
Since NATSAP programs are located throughout the country and serve primarily private paying families, they [all?] fall under DIVERSE LICENSURE LAWS AND REGULATIONS.
In addition to membership in NATSAP, the majority [now, the 'majority'] of our members are licensed
or accredited either by a state licensing board or by a national or regional accrediting agency.
NATSAP programs, however, have legitimate concern that it would be very dangerous for either the federal or any state government to create prescriptive regulations without input and representation from our member programs. For example, our organization is quite concerned about your proposed legislation in SECTION. 303. Eligibility (b) (3) that states "In the case of each child who is a resident of the facility and whose domicile is another State, the facility meets the standards of such other State for the operation of such a facility, including any licensing standards". Given the vast array of administrative rules in different states such a clause would create an unreasonable administrative nightmare, and in effect allow the most restrictive rules in all states to dictate treatment standards for every state. [And that would be a bad thing? Sounds like it could be in the kids best interest] We urge you to omit SECTION 303 (b) (3), and furthermore ask that you meet with representatives from our organization to discuss a variety of issues with your proposed legislation.
In the private pay market, parents retain the ultimate control to authorize, pay for, and select the type of TREATMENT they feel most appropriate for their child. [Sounds like RTC. Otherwise, treatment would read EDUCATION]
We support an approach that does not suppress the diversity of legitimate methods in our profession and yet protects the interest and concerns of parents and children enrolled in our programs.
***
State/Federal oversight is like the black plague to programs. Why?
