Spring Creek Lodge

[Anonymous]

I'm 39, I have a 10 year old daughter with some special needs, I tutor/teach a seventeen year old who is an incredibly sweet girl but who these places would consider a "troubled teen" in a heartbeat.  I tutor her because her pshrink says she is unable to attend a regular school.  Her parents (and I, not that that matters) agree.

As a parent, I would be laughing if it wasn't so damned sad that relatives or friends or parents are whinging about a seventeen year old boy being more under the "control" of his girlfriend than of his parents.

I'd be more worried for one that *wasn't*.  

Men who, as teenage boys, made complete idiots of themselves over some teenage girl, and ignored everything their parents said---which is most men---are the ones who mostly end up healthy, functional grown men.

The men who are really screwed up are the ones who are still living with Dear Mama at thirty-five.

A boyfriend/girlfriend having more influence over a teen than the parents is normal and healthy.  Even when the boyfriend/girlfriend has scarily more influence over the teen than the parents do is normal and healthy.

It's okay that parents are scared spitless over that.  That's normal, too.  All parents of normal, reasonably healthy kids (which just means kids who have a typical number of random abnormalities and problems) are frequently scared spitless for our offspring.  That's parenthood, comes with the territory.

Is Alex a screwed up wild child?  Apparently.  Is he wild beyond and outside the normal spectrum of mild to wild in any generation of teens?  Doesn't look it.  Looks like he's a bit wilder than average.

I don't blame his parents at all for being scared spitless.  I blame them for overreacting and providing a "solution" that (in my opinion) is worse for any child than any problem.

Mr. and Mrs. Alex's Parents: You're either naive or control freaks, and the responsible thing to do would be to wise up and transfer your kid to a reputable 6 week or 3 month drug rehab program, not a troubled teen RTC.  Reputable 6 wk to 3 mo. drug rehab has good success rates.  Troubled teen RTCs just further damage your child--if you leave your kid there and don't have disastrous, family shattering results, you'll be very lucky.

Nobody likes being told they're screwing up, but you're screwing up.

There is no excuse for sending a drug abusing adult or child to any facility for longer than 100 days, *maximum*, because there isn't any good evidence that adding more time does any better job of getting someone off drugs and keeping them sober.

The only thing sending a drug abusing child to a facility for longer than 100 days does is get the inconvenient, unpleasant kid out of your hair and put the kid through hell---for no other reason than getting him out of your hair or exerting absolute control over every minute of his life, 24/7.

I would not send my child to a WWASP facility, any WWASP facility, even if she was in the hospital in critical condition from OD-ing on crank.

I'd send her to rehab somewhere in that case, but not any WWASP facility.  I'd never send anyone, even someone at death's door, to any rehab facility for a course of rehab longer than three months.

Why?  

There is no sensible reason to believe that any rehab course longer than three months, max, does any better than a three month or less rehab course.  Advertising form places that try to sell you long Programs doesn't count as a sensible reason.  They don't have reputable, scientific studies that say these Programs are good for the people who go through them.  The available reputable evidence goes the other way.

Look at what the government itself says when it defines "long term" for drug rehab treatment:

"The median length of stay for completed long-term residential treatment episodes was 75 days, ranging from 73 days for cocaine to 91 days for opiates."

73 to 91 days is "long term"---not six months to years.  Judges aren't putting, for example, 25 year old drunk drivers in adult versions of six months to multi-year residential Programs like SCL.  They would exist for adults, and repeat drunk drivers or drugged drivers *would* be getting sent if they *worked*.  They don't.

Or not any better than a drug rehab course that is 3 months *at the most*.

You can get all kinds of actual research information from http://oas.samhsa.gov -- which is the site I culled that quote from.

Julie

[Mykidsmom]

On 2006-01-09 16:19:00, Anonymous wrote:

"I'm 39, I have a 10 year old daughter with some special needs, I tutor/teach a seventeen year old who is an incredibly sweet girl but who these places would consider a "troubled teen" in a heartbeat.  I tutor her because her pshrink says she is unable to attend a regular school.  Her parents (and I, not that that matters) agree.



As a parent, I would be laughing if it wasn't so damned sad that relatives or friends or parents are whinging about a seventeen year old boy being more under the "control" of his girlfriend than of his parents.



I'd be more worried for one that *wasn't*.  



Men who, as teenage boys, made complete idiots of themselves over some teenage girl, and ignored everything their parents said---which is most men---are the ones who mostly end up healthy, functional grown men.



The men who are really screwed up are the ones who are still living with Dear Mama at thirty-five.



A boyfriend/girlfriend having more influence over a teen than the parents is normal and healthy.  Even when the boyfriend/girlfriend has scarily more influence over the teen than the parents do is normal and healthy.



It's okay that parents are scared spitless over that.  That's normal, too.  All parents of normal, reasonably healthy kids (which just means kids who have a typical number of random abnormalities and problems) are frequently scared spitless for our offspring.  That's parenthood, comes with the territory.



Is Alex a screwed up wild child?  Apparently.  Is he wild beyond and outside the normal spectrum of mild to wild in any generation of teens?  Doesn't look it.  Looks like he's a bit wilder than average.



I don't blame his parents at all for being scared spitless.  I blame them for overreacting and providing a "solution" that (in my opinion) is worse for any child than any problem.



Mr. and Mrs. Alex's Parents: You're either naive or control freaks, and the responsible thing to do would be to wise up and transfer your kid to a reputable 6 week or 3 month drug rehab program, not a troubled teen RTC.  Reputable 6 wk to 3 mo. drug rehab has good success rates.  Troubled teen RTCs just further damage your child--if you leave your kid there and don't have disastrous, family shattering results, you'll be very lucky.



Nobody likes being told they're screwing up, but you're screwing up.



There is no excuse for sending a drug abusing adult or child to any facility for longer than 100 days, *maximum*, because there isn't any good evidence that adding more time does any better job of getting someone off drugs and keeping them sober.



The only thing sending a drug abusing child to a facility for longer than 100 days does is get the inconvenient, unpleasant kid out of your hair and put the kid through hell---for no other reason than getting him out of your hair or exerting absolute control over every minute of his life, 24/7.



I would not send my child to a WWASP facility, any WWASP facility, even if she was in the hospital in critical condition from OD-ing on crank.



I'd send her to rehab somewhere in that case, but not any WWASP facility.  I'd never send anyone, even someone at death's door, to any rehab facility for a course of rehab longer than three months.



Why?  



There is no sensible reason to believe that any rehab course longer than three months, max, does any better than a three month or less rehab course.  Advertising form places that try to sell you long Programs doesn't count as a sensible reason.  They don't have reputable, scientific studies that say these Programs are good for the people who go through them.  The available reputable evidence goes the other way.



Look at what the government itself says when it defines "long term" for drug rehab treatment:



"The median length of stay for completed long-term residential treatment episodes was 75 days, ranging from 73 days for cocaine to 91 days for opiates."



73 to 91 days is "long term"---not six months to years.  Judges aren't putting, for example, 25 year old drunk drivers in adult versions of six months to multi-year residential Programs like SCL.  They would exist for adults, and repeat drunk drivers or drugged drivers *would* be getting sent if they *worked*.  They don't.



Or not any better than a drug rehab course that is 3 months *at the most*.



You can get all kinds of actual research information from http://oas.samhsa.gov -- which is the site I culled that quote from.



Julie



"

Anyone who has done a minimal amount of research on any WASP program can easily see that there is far too much negative information on far too many independant web sites.

I ran into a sales person for Spring Creek Lodge when I was seeking a program for my son.  Boy was he smooth... he had me ready to sign on the bottom line until I started checking them out...

I guess what I am saying is that from someone who has a child who spent 104 days in wilderness (says to this day that it was the best experience of his life) and is now in a boarding school for the next 6-9 months -- do your research... I would pull this kid in a heartbeat from any WWASP program especially that one.

As far as the length of time goes, my first sniff of trouble was that the length of the contract -- why should you have a predetermined contract? What if your child is ready to come home before then... when I hear about these kids staying for years it makes me sick.

If I had a child in a facility (and I do) and I was not getting excellent feedback on how the child was progressing and that they both (the child and the facility) felt like they were progressing -- I would pull them.  

Kids will be kids but if they are not moving forward then either it is not a good match or there is something seriously wrong.

Sorry didn't mean to ramble... ::soapbox::

[Anonymous]

On 2006-01-09 15:53:00, CaughtInTheMiddle wrote:

"

On 2006-01-09 15:01:00, Ashley's Mom wrote:


"

On 2006-01-09 14:48:00, Anonymous wrote:



" Just as you could say it was wrong of Jacki to have sent alex there. I could say it is wrong that you let and pay for you daughter to dress and dye her hair, tattoo her body like that. She said she wasn't aloud to have piercing other then her ears one time I was around her. Then Alex comes home with a bar in the back of his neck. On ashley's vampire site she talks about the tattoo/piercing party she had. wonder how many other kids got in trouble with their parents for getting something done to their bodies. But it is not my place to tell you how to raise your daughter. Ways I handle my kids to ways you or millions other handle there's will never match. Could I say I totally disagree that a parent should allow there child to look like that? YES Dose it matter or make me right? NO 50% could say it is screwing up her life. how she is excepted as an adult what type of doors in life it may open for her. 50% could say she will be fine she is expressing herself she is artistic. In the end it is up to you.



I know.. But Jacki sent her child to a abusive bad bad place! She didn't hear any of this until after he was placed there. Even ashleys mom admits to that. Now it is her job to do what she thinks is right for him. Then I will hear.. What dose she have to think about he could be abused. There is so much info. she is doing more then most of these parents possibly do. There is Doctors here that are reviewing and keeping a close eye on what is going on with him she isn't taking only SCL word on it all, until she can find the best place for him. one could say that allowing your child to look and hang in a group such as she dose is abuse. Drug use is higher in the goth world then some. Vi lance is high because they are not excepted by all. It is still the parents job to raise and make decision with there kids. Not everyone is going to agree."

Now, who is this?  Is it necessary to insult me in that way?  I never said his parents were "bad" or put them down.  Yep, we had several tattoo/piercing parties at our home.  We have several friends who received tattoos, including Ashley.  It was done by a close friend, and we were present.  No, no underage kids received anything unless the parents were there to sign a waiver.  Yes, a couple parents actually came and did just that!  We had nothing to do with Alex's piercing.  Didn't know about it until his father told me.  Ashley will be 18 in a few weeks, she could go anywhere and get whatever she wants, but she won't.  This way, we know who is doing the work - we like to call this "communication". Hair dye - washes out in a about a week.  Big deal!  Yes, she does only have ear piercings.  Will she get more after she turns 18, I hope not - but who knows.  


Didn't know it was an abusive facility, well maybe his parents should have done more investigating before shipping him off, it wasn't hard, we did it."

 I am not insulting you in any way. I said it is your right as a parent. That I do not have to agree. how is that an insult? I am sure there are things I do you may not agree on. I have tattoos also you are missing the point. You do not have to explain it is your choice.

Maybe they would have more time IF Ashley wasn't controlling him? "

My God, get over this "Ashley is controlling him" crap.

He is a teenage boy.  All normal teenage boys frequently listen to their girlfriend and frequently ignore their parents.

All normal, red-blooded teenage boys are "whipped" by the...very personal attributes...of whoever they're dating, whether they're abstinent or not.

I don't know any of you guys personally, but making this boy's girlfriend out to be a female cross between Svengali and Voldemort just makes you all look like idiots.

Sure, you have reasons to worry about Alex and want to get him to sobriety.  *Fine*.

When that kid turns 18, you are going to have to deal with everyone who completely disagrees with how you are dealing with him helping him get enough independence from you, if he wants it, to make his own choices.

Like it or not, on his 18th birthday, your coercive power is over.

You don't have the power or luxury of saying, "It's my kid, I'll raise him however I think best, dammit!  Mind your own damned business!"

Your kid isn't a kid anymore.  Six months is long enough to really harm your child, but it isn't long enough to, "Raise my kid however I think best, dammit!"

You have no rational choice but to open up to the larger community and the society you live in.

You're not "running out of time."  You've already run out.  The coercive approach you're taking is a lousy choice.  You have a lot of other, better choices available.  You're going to either end up like Ginger's mom--so brainwashed and convinced in the sanctity of The Program that you are totally estranged from your kid, or looking back on putting your kid in the Program as the worst decision of your life.

For you and your relationship with Alex, if you don't move him to a three month or less reputable drug rehab or bring him home, this is all going to end badly.

I believe you love your kid and mean well, but you've made a bad choice.

Julie

[Antigen]

On 2006-01-09 13:53:00, CaughtInTheMiddle wrote:

Of course that is how you would see it. It couldn't be Ashley's mom isn't telling the truth or easily manipulated by the kids. why? Because she isn't the parent with the kid in a place you don't like. If Ashley's mom says it it must be true. Because you know her so well. Please people open your eyes.

Or maybe Ashley's mom isn't so easily manipulated. Maybe Alex has (had) some idea what was best for himself. This is not a toddler we're talking about. This is a young man who, in a few short months, will be a legal adult.

Maybe it's Jackie who's being manipulated. He's in a place that 'you don't like?' Lady, take a step back. WHY is it that so many people who have had dealings with WWASP are so vehemently opposed to it? What, you do like them? Do you have any idea what they do? Or do you, like Jackie, just flippantly disregard as manipulation anything that threatens your pretty idea of what's going on here?

It (the Bible) is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies.
--Samuel Clemens "Mark Twain", American author and humorist

[Antigen]

On 2006-01-09 14:48:00, Anonymous wrote:

Just as you could say it was wrong of Jacki to have sent alex there. I could say it is wrong that you let and pay for you daughter to dress and dye her hair, tattoo her body like that.

Please! If you don't have an argument, just admit it. You can't POSSIBLY believe this is a fair comparison!

Pray: To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf of a single petitioner confessedly unworthy.
--Ambrose Bierce

[Antigen]

On 2006-01-09 15:19:00, Anonymous wrote:

I know lawyers have to be paid, but Ginger probably has enough information from you to be able to substantiate who you are when you post. That means when Alex is coming up on his 18th birthday, you can come on here and ask for donations to his legal defense fund.

Wait a second! No, I can tell which ISP (Internet Service Provider, as in AOL or Comcast or RoadRunner or what have you) and I can see which individual IP address a post is coming from. I don't get names and addresses. That's confidential information held by the ISP. They only release that if they absolutely have to under court order or some such. There are NO GROUNDS in this situation (as in most) for that sort of thing. I just don't want anybody to get overly creeped out.

I don't release that little bit of info I have, either. Who the hell would want to post on a site where hackers could easily gain access to that? Nobody worth talking to.

And ya'll ARE worth talking to! All of you.

Jackie, I especially want to extend a warm welcome to you. It does take some moxie and resolve for you to come over here and to consider criticizm of your parental decisions.

There's merit to that criticizm in this case. Please get that kid the hell away from the crazy cult people ASAP! And, on a more personal note as another mother, don't ever believe even for a moment any word or deed that makes you think your son doesn't love you. Even if we want to, it's as impossible to not love one's parents as it is to not love your children.

Don't sweat the

Petty Things

Don't pet the

Sweaty Things

Water what you want to grow.
--Curiosity

[Antigen]

On 2006-01-09 15:53:00, CaughtInTheMiddle wrote:

Maybe they would have more time IF Ashley wasn't controlling him?

Look, now that's just silly! Ashley is an 18yo girl not some maniacal wizard with magical powers to control others.

I'll confess to making the same mistake, though. A lot of the problems between us and our daughter a few years back were our fault. That's a fact. At the time, though, noooooo, it couldn't POSSIBLY be us! Why, we're ... whatever. In our minds, it was ALL about this bad boyfriend controling her.

I just don't get the sense that this is an accurate assessment of the situation.

Any priest or shaman must be presumed guilty until proven innocent.
--Robert A. Heinlen, American science-ficiton author

[Antigen]

On 2006-01-09 16:14:00, Aunt Shelly wrote:

"I must say that there was miscommunication on both sides.  Everyone wanted what they wanted and we all lost, especially Alex.  I hope that something can be worked out between both Ashley and the Azzopardi's before Alex comes home.  Maybe we can concentrate on that.  "

I'd worry about getting Alex home safe and sound first. Work out the deal w/ the potential future ex inlaws later.

I think you're seriously underestimating the risk here. It's not just that SCL sucks experientially. It's extremely dangerous, especially to someone who's already emotionally and mentally fragged out.

I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life, I absenteed myself from Christian assemblies.
--Benjamin Franklin, American Founding Father and inventor

[Antigen]

"Mykidsmom", if you want to troll for referals, buy a goddamned Google ad!

Ya'll, please don't take any too-good-to-be-true offers for help from this friendly stranger. Evidently, he or she is not allowed direct, unsupervised communication w/ their kid either.

WWASP is not the only, maybe not even the worst scam for troubled parents.
 

One does not have to appeal to God to set the initial conditions for the creation of the universe, but if one does He would have to act through the laws of physics.
--Stephen Hawking, English scientist

[Shlee]

On 2006-01-09 15:45:00, CaughtInTheMiddle wrote:

" Sorry forgot to sign in. I have never tried to  hide who I was. I talked about my daughter. Things I new that you would know. Sorry I am not the best speller but I will get over it. So dose /does it make you feel big and bad to threaten that you have my ip address should I put cameras around my house so my car and house doesn't get vandalized. The point that you would try to find out who I was. Is a bit disturbing. This is my point exactly you try to scare people. so why would they listen or want their child around you? I have said many times this is my opinion or understanding and that a lot of emotions for every one was happening. Things were said earlier on that was done in a finger pointing way. Then I decided to try and talk about things that may have misunderstood on both sides. Trying to help. Finger pointing wasn't. You have no idea unless you found away to listen to my phone conversations and have put a bug on me so you can hear everything I say what I am doing about it. Do you think the things you have said are going to make Alex happy?"

It's unfortunate that you twisted my words around and took it as a threat.  I was not threatening anyone at all, I was just stating that no one should hide behind Anon. posts anymore, especially if you have such strong opinions.  I wasn't finger pointing in any way, just stating facts.  And do you honestly think Alex wouldn't like anything we're syaing on his behalf.  I don't think he would appreciate the constant lies and bashing of my family and I and our cause of helping him.  Or is that side of it not being told?  Also, I am really tired of being accused of the vandalism that occured.  I had no part in it and was quite shocked to have the police calling my cell phone when I was on my way to work that morning.  Do you have any evidence whatsoever that I did it?  No, no you do not and your assumptions are childish.

[Mykidsmom]

On 2006-01-09 18:08:00, Antigen wrote:

""Mykidsmom", if you want to troll for referals, buy a goddamned Google ad!



Ya'll, please don't take any too-good-to-be-true offers for help from this friendly stranger. Evidently, he or she is not allowed direct, unsupervised communication w/ their kid either.



WWASP is not the only, maybe not even the worst scam for troubled parents.

 

One does not have to appeal to God to set the initial conditions for the creation of the universe, but if one does He would have to act through the laws of physics.
--Stephen Hawking, English scientist

"

Not trolling for referrals -- the I was offering an alternative.  Is it only your point of view that is welcome here?  I thought this was a place to give and get information.

It was on this site that I got the information that kept me from sending my kid to a WWASP program in the first place.

It was this site that steered me away from Discovery Academy, Provo Canyon School, etc.. etc..as well any type of level or behavior modification plan.

I have no vested interest other than from what I have heard SCL is a dangerous place especially for a younng person who is suicidal.  Someone with those kind of problems should be evaluated in a hospital not a boarding school.
 
Give me a break here.  I am genuine -- really and for the most part I'm totally on your side.

And for your information I can visit my child whenever I want with no advanced notice.  I can just show up and spend the day with him -- get your facts straight before you lump me in with everyone else -- I'm not stupid.

There are a few good places out there.

[CaughtInTheMiddle]

On 2006-01-09 17:56:00, Antigen wrote:

"

On 2006-01-09 15:53:00, CaughtInTheMiddle wrote:


Maybe they would have more time IF Ashley wasn't controlling him?

Look, now that's just silly! Ashley is an 18yo girl not some maniacal wizard with magical powers to control others.



I'll confess to making the same mistake, though. A lot of the problems between us and our daughter a few years back were our fault. That's a fact. At the time, though, noooooo, it couldn't POSSIBLY be us! Why, we're ... whatever. In our minds, it was ALL about this bad boyfriend controling her.



I just don't get the sense that this is an accurate assessment of the situation.

Any priest or shaman must be presumed guilty until proven innocent.
--Robert A. Heinlen, American science-ficiton author

"

I am not good at explaining what I am trying to say I guess. I said she is more controlling in the relationship, and he is more egger to please. I didn't say this is abnormal. In some relationships it could be flip where the guy is more controlling then the girl. He was going to go to the 3 month program. The brochures may have said 12 month but Jacki talk to someone there and they said they had a 3 month program maybe some how that got missed in translation between alex and them. [ This Message was edited by: CaughtInTheMiddle on 2006-01-09 21:30 ]

[CaughtInTheMiddle]

I have been trying to give you info, I have said they have doctors here keeping an eye on things they are looking for a better place for him. You would know none of this if I wasn't here and didn't decide to share. I would like to see what you have as evidence that Jacki is lying. I don't believe she has lied to me. She may have forgot to tell me something I am sure. In the last year her son totaled a truck and could have killed himself then I girl was in a comma for a month or so, because of Alex's poor judgment, then the house caught on fire then her mother died, then her son got busted with drugs and has admitted to having a drug problem. If you can prove it please do. You know who I am There is no need for me to change my name. What you can be slee which isnt your name but I must be Aunt Pam I think not the name I have is just fine.

[Anonymous]

It seems that the program will allow families to sign a 3 month contract only if they otherwise won't commit, but I think they'll face heavy pressure and a detail of the offenses Alex has committed while in the program (may include horseplay, disrespect to staff, etc.) used as part of their standard recommendation to keep him there longer.  

Also, I am glad that a doctor is supervising Alex.  I think this will prevent the staff from roughing him up during restraints, if they know that he's being seen by a physician regularly.  Unfortunately, there's no quick test to check for mental abuse or PTSD symptoms that Alex may experience now or at a later time.

I am very glad to hear that the aunts are so involved and that the parents are willing to look into other facilities.  I'm in my 20's myself and wouldn't wish a program on anyone, especially SCL or TB.  Pulling Alex from the program would be a tremendous way to show him that he is cared for and supported.  Only someone who's lived with the hell of being confined in a program can fully understand how badly everyone in there wants to go somewhere safer and fairer.  It was what we all dreamed and prayed for each day.  We all wanted to be rescued.  I really hope that his family gives him that ASAP.

[Antigen]

How do you have doctors 'here' keeping an eye on a kid who's held incommunicado out in Montana?

Seriously. I'm not accusing you of lying. I just don't know what it means. How does that work?

About the lies, well there were some friggin' whoppers in this thread earlier. Remember the dope dealing friend who turned out to be a myspace 'friend' and local rock star? The rumors about heroin? Oh yeah, there was the standard deception that there were all these random people who all knew all the hard facts about everybdy involved and they were all posting from the only library in the Detroit area served by a private ISP? There was more. You can go back and look if you want to.

I guarantee you guys are not getting the whole or accurate story. How do I know that? I'm 40. I have kids, teenagers, a grown one and of course all their friends and all their drama-even baby mama drama once in awhile. You guys are at war and the truth is always the first casualty. WWASP is just the war profiteer in all this. The sooner ya'll wise up to that, the better for everyone.

Don't laugh when you leave this courtroom, thinking you have beat the system because you have looked these things up yourself. We are going to get you down the road.
http://proliberty.com/observer/20020101.htm' target='_new'>Washington Superior CourtJudge Rebecca Baker