Early withdrawal

[Anonymous]

The education the kids recieve in this program is unaccredited you fool. I fell for that one too.
Yale, Harvard, Stanford.Indeappolis (sp) etc.

NO NO No ! You have been readign th glossy brochures or listening to the Teen help liars.

[TheWho]

On 2005-12-12 17:41:00, Anonymous wrote:

"



The education the kids recieve in this program is unaccredited you fool. I fell for that one too.

Yale, Harvard, Stanford.Indeappolis (sp) etc.



NO NO No ! You have been readign th glossy brochures or listening to the Teen help liars.



"

Depends on how well you do and when and how long you spend in the program.  If you are in an unaccredited program during Senior year it could be a problem.  If you do well on SATs it really doesnt matter.  Accreditation is great to have but if they are not it doesnt mean you are not learning anything.  If your desk are not a certain number of inchs apart or you dont have a copy of Tom Sawyer in the school library you cant get accredited.  If you are in a program Freshman year and return to your own High school you may be a little ahead in some subjects and a little behind in others but your diploma will not be affected.
These are details you need to think thru prior to starting, unaccredited isnt the end of the world.

[Anonymous]

doublespeak is all you are.

[Nihilanthic]

On 2005-12-12 18:52:00, Anonymous wrote:

"

On 2005-12-12 17:41:00, Anonymous wrote:


"





The education the kids recieve in this program is unaccredited you fool. I fell for that one too.


Yale, Harvard, Stanford.Indeappolis (sp) etc.





NO NO No ! You have been readign th glossy brochures or listening to the Teen help liars.





"

Depends on how well you do and when and how long you spend in the program.  If you are in an unaccredited program during Senior year it could be a problem.  If you do well on SATs it really doesnt matter.  Accreditation is great to have but if they are not it doesnt mean you are not learning anything.  If your desk are not a certain number of inchs apart or you dont have a copy of Tom Sawyer in the school library you cant get accredited.  If you are in a program Freshman year and return to your own High school you may be a little ahead in some subjects and a little behind in others but your diploma will not be affected.

These are details you need to think thru prior to starting, unaccredited isnt the end of the world."

I think the biggest problem people have with program education is that the only thing a program teaches is submission and obedience, and the academics is self taught from a book under duress, and you re-take the same test until you at least score a "B" on it.

Thats not a really good way to learn anything.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
--Bruce Lee

[TheWho]

On 2005-12-12 20:07:00, Nihilanthic wrote:

"

On 2005-12-12 18:52:00, Anonymous wrote:


"

On 2005-12-12 17:41:00, Anonymous wrote:



"







The education the kids recieve in this program is unaccredited you fool. I fell for that one too.



Yale, Harvard, Stanford.Indeappolis (sp) etc.







NO NO No ! You have been readign th glossy brochures or listening to the Teen help liars.







"

Depends on how well you do and when and how long you spend in the program.  If you are in an unaccredited program during Senior year it could be a problem.  If you do well on SATs it really doesnt matter.  Accreditation is great to have but if they are not it doesnt mean you are not learning anything.  If your desk are not a certain number of inchs apart or you dont have a copy of Tom Sawyer in the school library you cant get accredited.  If you are in a program Freshman year and return to your own High school you may be a little ahead in some subjects and a little behind in others but your diploma will not be affected.


These are details you need to think thru prior to starting, unaccredited isnt the end of the world."

I think the biggest problem people have with program education is that the only thing a program teaches is submission and obedience, and the academics is self taught from a book under duress, and you re-take the same test until you at least score a "B" on it.



Thats not a really good way to learn anything.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
--Bruce Lee

"

I agree, but I am sure activity like that is few and far between.  Any program which advocates complete self teaching will eventually find itself reevaluating its academic portion of the program or slowly lose clientele.  Both of which are self correcting.

[Nihilanthic]

You have proof of that? What parents dont know or dont care about doesnt hurt the program.

I'd love some evidence to back up that claim.

Homeschool is self regulating. The school board is not going to have illiterate useless people living in their homes forever if they don't have a working education policy.

--Sisterbluerose

[Anonymous]

On 2005-12-13 02:59:00, Nihilanthic wrote:

"You have proof of that? What parents dont know or dont care about doesnt hurt the program.



I'd love some evidence to back up that claim.

Homeschool is self regulating. The school board is not going to have illiterate useless people living in their homes forever if they don't have a working education policy.

--Sisterbluerose

"

And do you have proof that it happens the way you describe?? PROOF... not just "Sally told me so it must so"

I'm sure some abuse takes place, to what extent I have no idea.  But I really find it amazing that if someone says they were abused, you accept it without question.  But if someone says that the program saved their life, you dismiss it as being nothing more than them being brain-washed.

Both offer the same amount of "proof" - just what they say.  Just as you can find many that will say they were abused, you can find many that say they were helped.  To unilaterally believe only one side, the side that you want to believe, simply shows your bias.  It is not a convincing argument and it does not "prove" anything.

[Nihilanthic]

:roll:

Wheres the proof that they aren't telling the truth, and your claims ARE true?

The "proof" for reasonable suspicion should be apparent: consistency. They all say the same things happen, theyve all said them for decades. People seperated by time and distance all saying the same thing cant be lying without some sort of conspiracy.

Unless you want me to think theyre all either programmed to lie a certain way or theres a conspiracy, Id say there a perponderance of evidence that something is going on, and mere suspicion of it would be enough for me to

1. not send a child there

2. suggest to anyone wanting to put a child in such a place to not do so

3. to remove a kid from there because... they totally restrict information and tell the parent BEFORE the child is even in the program he will lie to get out, thus making it impossible to know whats going on because the program is in total control of communication, and even tries to keep the parents from the child until the parent goes through a seminar in many cases, or that the chld must "earn" the right to contact their parents.

#3 DEFINITELY besmirks me as "covering your ass before you even do anything" and is wrong, period, anyway! Furthermore, cutting off communication and requiring conformity and obedience before talking to your own parents is unbeliveably coersive and cruel.

But hey, totally breaking their will (which at least some WWASPS owners/adminstrators have said themselves) must be okay to some people.

The greater the ignorance the greater the dogmatism.


--William Osler

[Anonymous]

On 2005-12-12 17:41:00, Anonymous wrote:

"



The education the kids recieve in this program is unaccredited you fool. I fell for that one too.

Yale, Harvard, Stanford.Indeappolis (sp) etc.



NO NO No ! You have been readign th glossy brochures or listening to the Teen help liars.



"

No, Silly, I spoke to Northwest Association of Schools and Colleges---the accrediting body.

[TheWho]

Furthermore, cutting off communication and requiring conformity and obedience before talking to your own parents is unbeliveably coersive and cruel.

I agree, if someone cuts off my leg that is cruel also, but who says this occurs? 10 people, 100 people, all the people.  I know this not to be true of the people I have spoken to, so it sounds like someone made it up becuse they were mad at the school.

mere suspicion of it would be enough for me to
1. not send a child there
2. suggest to anyone wanting to put a child in such a place to not do so

3. to remove a kid from there because... .

Sure, but if one person tells you they were abused and 10 others say they are doing well and you hear their before and after stories and you have a child in crisis, what would you do? Especially if the kid who is bashing the school never graduated or moved on with his life and seems to be lieing and maybe programmed by others to say stuff like that.  I would go with the story from the kids who are level headed and doing well.   I think anyone would.

It is a fact, not all schools have the kids teach themselves.  Now maybe its 10% or maybe its 90% , I dont know I havent seen them all.  My gut feel is that most schools try to provide the highest education they can afford.

[Anonymous]

Niles, you are arguing with the same program troll who has been here for a long time. Can't you tell by their writing? This is the same troll that shifts the argument, and manages to drag out important threads to over 30-40 pages. I think it's their tactic of simply disrupting this forum and try to place doubt in the minds of those who are on the fence(havent been to a program). Why waste your time?

[TheWho]

I think that person is saying stuff that makes some sense to some people.  I think the guy is a troll but he says stuff that makes you think about stuff, what the fuck, let them post

[Anonymous]

Yeah I suppose, but it just seems weird to me when an argument moves from reality based, completely into the realm of the hypothetical.

[Anonymous]

On 2005-12-13 07:02:00, Nihilanthic wrote:

" :roll:



Wheres the proof that they aren't telling the truth, and your claims ARE true?



The "proof" for reasonable suspicion should be apparent: consistency. They all say the same things happen, theyve all said them for decades. People seperated by time and distance all saying the same thing cant be lying without some sort of conspiracy.



Unless you want me to think theyre all either programmed to lie a certain way or theres a conspiracy, Id say there a perponderance of evidence that something is going on, and mere suspicion of it would be enough for me to



1. not send a child there



2. suggest to anyone wanting to put a child in such a place to not do so



3. to remove a kid from there because... they totally restrict information and tell the parent BEFORE the child is even in the program he will lie to get out, thus making it impossible to know whats going on because the program is in total control of communication, and even tries to keep the parents from the child until the parent goes through a seminar in many cases, or that the chld must "earn" the right to contact their parents.



#3 DEFINITELY besmirks me as "covering your ass before you even do anything" and is wrong, period, anyway! Furthermore, cutting off communication and requiring conformity and obedience before talking to your own parents is unbeliveably coersive and cruel.



But hey, totally breaking their will (which at least some WWASPS owners/adminstrators have said themselves) must be okay to some people.

The greater the ignorance the greater the dogmatism.


--William Osler

"

PROOF for REASONABLE SUSPICION?!?!?!  So now you are saying this is a suspicion, not the truth?

I have not made any claims.  In fact, I stated that I felt that some abuse probably did occur.  I was simply pointing out that your had no more "proof" than the other side.  

Yes, you claim LOTS of people over a period of time and space have made the same claims.  Well, LOTS of people over a periods of time and space have also said they were helped tremendously as well.  But you discount them because they do not agree with you.  You dismiss them as being "programmed".  You offer no more proof than anyone else.

But ok - how about something more productive.  Let's just put aside the fact that your argument/proof is faulty.  Let's take it as a given that these places are hell-holes of abuse.  

Now, let's also agree that there are a hell of a lot of teenagers that are out of control/on the wrong path/etc.  We have all encountered them - whether they are drugged out, violent, sexually wild, whatever.  What do you do to help them?  What do you do to help them become responsible people?  What do you do to protect others, and themselves, from their actions?

Seems like THAT is the real problem - no one seems to have a way to help these kids. Seems most just want to sit back and bitch about the things that people are doing to try to help them.

[Anonymous]

What do you do to help them? What do you do to help them become responsible people? What do you do to protect others, and themselves, from their actions?

Don't send them to a WWASP/PROVO type program!

Those questions are easily answered by a real and responsible parent who takes their job seriously. But, this is not a parenting advice forum, it's to discuss the bad programs, which we do. Then we get people like you coming through saying it's up to us to solve all the parents problems to prevent more kids from getting abused? Get fucking real.

Nobody here is saying they are some awesome parent or anything and have all the anwwers. All we are doing here is pointing out the bad programs, out of the thousands that are out there. There is no motive to lie once you are out of the program. Especially years and years after the fact. On the other hand, the program DOES have a HUGE incentive (about 100 million reasons per year) to keep the lie going. To keep the criticism at a minimum by discrediting witnesses. By spending unheard of sums on lawyers to file suit against survivors and defend against rightful claims of abuse. To be the largest political donor to the GOP in the state of Utah. Why would a self help program have to be THE largest political donor in the state if it was legit?