The Who

[Troll Control]

Hey, Who, did you catch this?

http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=20401

Your pipe dream of unregulated provision of mental health/behavioral health care has taken a severe blow to the head...

And you called us all crazy and "not credible."  Just goes to show your poor judgement and perception of events.

Score one for the good guys.

[TheWho]

Hey, Who, did you catch this?

http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=20401

Your pipe dream of unregulated provision of mental health/behavioral health care has taken a severe blow to the head...

And you called us all crazy and "not credible."  Just goes to show your poor judgement and perception of events.

Score one for the good guys.

I think you should reread the posts, I am not for unregulated provision of mental health/behavioral health care , you have your threads crossed again.

[Troll Control]

No, you've said all along that the industry does not need, and should fight against, regulation.

You also have said on numerous occasions that the information I posted about HLA was untrue and that I was I liar ('to float my ego').

Now you stand corrected.

You also stand corrected that facilities using the moniker 'TBS' are, in fact, Residential Treatment Centers subject to the laws and regulations governing such facilities, as I have contended from the beginning.

[Deborah]

They fear that this would cause the regulators to impose rules on them that would gut the effectiveness of their programs by watering down the intensity

I have no doubt that your assessment as to how the programers feel about why they should be entitiled to self regulate, the problem however lies in the above statement. To date there is no effectiveness of their programs, thus they have nothing to lose.

Why would regulators disallow any humane method or technique? Any evidence-based philosophy? What do you mean by 'intensity'?
The industry needs a good 'gutting'. It's rotten at the core. If they can't provide humane 'treatment' and accomplish results in less than a month, without terrorizing kids, they should be shut down and exposed for the frauds they are.

[TheWho]

No, you've said all along that the industry does not need, and should fight against, regulation.
.

No I havent.  I asked the question:  Why should they seek regulation?  What motivates them?  If they are not motivated by fines why should they seek regulation?

Would you go get a drivers license if you were not requuired to?  I think I am a pretty good driver why do I need to go get one and pay them money?

The law needs teeth!!  thats my point, DJ

[Oz girl]

What is the therapeudic benefit of strip searching ALL kids including those who have never taken drugs as ASR has a tradition of doing?

What is the therapeudic benefit of friendship bans?

What about workshops which have kids curled up in the foetal position crying? ASR again.

How does banning certain books help a kid to grow emotionally?

Why is emotional growth more important that intellectual growth anyway?

How can anything be therapeudic if the patient is not a willing participant?

How does physical restraint as shown to the world on Brat Camp (afterall Aspen are the industry leaders) fit in with medical principal "above all else do no harm"

Cat got your tounge who?

[Dr Fucktard]

Quiet, you.

[Troll Control]

Those who run the program believe strongly in what they are doing. Still, they are aware of the 'fringe' status of their methods. They feel that the regulators (and probably the general public) would 'misunderstand' what they are doing and consider it to be too harsh (abusive). They fear that this would cause the regulators to impose rules on them that would gut the effectiveness of their programs by watering down the intensity. This thinking is consistent with coercive persuasion. There is an in-group vs everyone outside mentality. A sort of group paranoia. The group doesn't think they should have to hide anything. They think they must hide everything, to protect the in-group. To be effective, they must work in secret.

Well said. This is exactly how it was at Straight. "Confidentiality" was strictly enforced.
"No talking behind backs" & "What you see here, do here, and say here remains here" or something like that...
Creepy!

I agree to this assessment in certain cases.  However, I have first-hand experience that suggests more insidious motivation on the part of program owners.

I have been told, point blank, face to face, by the owner of a 'program' that he knows full well that the data do not support the assertion that TBS is effective.  However, he told me it was not results that mattered, but rather perception of results and plausible deniability when things go wrong.

Some are misguided sycophants of dead programs of the past, and others are greedy hucksters out to make as much money as possible as quickly as possible, before regulations or lawsuits arise.

[Troll Control]

Not to get too far off topic, but I have been following the news stories about the two boys rescued from that man in Missouri. I couldn't help but notice that the counselors have advised both sets of parents not to ask the boys any direct questions about what happened them while they were held captive. These experts feel that the boys must decide for themselves when they feel safe enough to discuss it and deal with the issues. To force the boys to answer questions or confront would be traumatic and harmful to them.

This strategy is in keeping with everything I've read about people having and respecting healthy boundaries. It is also in keeping with what I know about modern psychotherapy.

Progams, on the other hand, hold the belief that their subjects must be impelled (forced) to confess and be confronted with their past abuses in a group setting. Programs state the teens cannot deal with their issues until they are brought into the open and confronted head on. This belief is the exact opposite of the the advise being given to these parents.

I think this illustrates how far away programs are from meanstream psychology which unlike programs, has advanced a great deal over the past 30 years.

AA, this is bang-on.  Great example, too.  Forced confession is extremely dangerous and outside the realm of therapy, period.  It should never happen!

[Deborah]

No, you've said all along that the industry does not need, and should fight against, regulation.
.

No I havent.  I asked the question:  Why should they seek regulation?  What motivates them?  If they are not motivated by fines why should they seek regulation?
Would you go get a drivers license if you were not requuired to?  I think I am a pretty good driver why do I need to go get one and pay them money?
The law needs teeth!!  thats my point, DJ

The law 'has teeth'. This is our third attempt. HLA has hookwinked the state on the previous two attempts by claiming that HLA provided no 'therapy'.
It can take a while for the truth to come to light.

Using your analogy... HLA told regulators they didn't need a 'DL', cause they didn't own a vehicle and therefore don't drive.
The standard MO in the industry.
They teach how to avoid regulation at their NATSAP club meetings.
Look at Woodside Trails Wilderness... shutdown by the state... reopens as Eagle Pines Academy.... a 'Private Boarding School'  :roll:
Or how bout that Bobbi Trott Christensen... same deal... Camp O'Neil shutdown after multiple deaths... forbidden from operating in Ca... solution, move across state lines and open as Crater Lake School.
Two of NATSAPs finest.

Well... were. It's been reported that Christensen is closing.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/155 ... sed02.html
And Eagle Pines is no longer listed as a member of NATSAP, and still fighting the state re: their investigation.   :cry2:

[Troll Control]

Yeah, Deb, this is precisely why this industry needs a good gutting, as you said before.  It's rotten to the core and can't be 'fixed.'

Hey...  How about we start a program to 'fix' programs?

Oh, wait a sec.  We already have.  HLA was the first to be 'fixed.'  Why haven't we gotten paid for our services?!

[TheWho]

No, you've said all along that the industry does not need, and should fight against, regulation.
.

No I havent.  I asked the question:  Why should they seek regulation?  What motivates them?  If they are not motivated by fines why should they seek regulation?
Would you go get a drivers license if you were not requuired to?  I think I am a pretty good driver why do I need to go get one and pay them money?
The law needs teeth!!  thats my point, DJ

The law 'has teeth'. This is our third attempt. HLA has hookwinked the state on the previous two attempts by claiming that HLA provided no 'therapy'.
It can take a while for the truth to come to light.

Using your analogy... HLA told regulators they didn't need a 'DL', cause they didn't own a vehicle and therefore don't drive.
The standard MO in the industry.
They teach how to avoid regulation at their NATSAP club meetings.
Look at Woodside Trails Wilderness... shutdown by the state... reopens as Eagle Pines Academy.... a 'Private Boarding School'  :roll:
Or how bout that Bobbi Trott Christensen... same deal... Camp O'Neil shutdown after multiple deaths... forbidden from operating in Ca... solution, move across state lines and open as Crater Lake School.
Two of NATSAPs finest.

Well... were. It's been reported that Christensen is closing.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/155 ... sed02.html
And Eagle Pines is no longer listed as a member of NATSAP, and still fighting the state re: their investigation.   :cry2:

I agree that isnt right.  I dont advocate teaching people to avoid the law, that would be criminal.

[Dr Fucktard]

Regulation only serves to interfere with truly effective treatment for drug addiction. For fuck's sake, you can't have these little fuckers running rampant and trying to manipulate their parent$ all the time; got to keep 'em in line somehow....  :evil:

[ZenAgent]

Those who run the program believe strongly in what they are doing. Still, they are aware of the 'fringe' status of their methods. They feel that the regulators (and probably the general public) would 'misunderstand' what they are doing and consider it to be too harsh (abusive). They fear that this would cause the regulators to impose rules on them that would gut the effectiveness of their programs by watering down the intensity. This thinking is consistent with coercive persuasion. There is an in-group vs everyone outside mentality. A sort of group paranoia. The group doesn't think they should have to hide anything. They think they must hide everything, to protect the in-group. To be effective, they must work in secret.

I have to keep coming back to this, because it fits Peninsula Village so well.  The PV counselor who posted details of her job on MySpace told of a mother and father at odds over their daughter's placement.  Dad "got it", mom didn't, she thought it too harsh.  She then said "We know their kids better than they do,"  

This from a person with no children.  When she does have her child, she'll understand why parents took great offense to that remark.

[AtomicAnt]

Those who run the program believe strongly in what they are doing. Still, they are aware of the 'fringe' status of their methods. They feel that the regulators (and probably the general public) would 'misunderstand' what they are doing and consider it to be too harsh (abusive). They fear that this would cause the regulators to impose rules on them that would gut the effectiveness of their programs by watering down the intensity. This thinking is consistent with coercive persuasion. There is an in-group vs everyone outside mentality. A sort of group paranoia. The group doesn't think they should have to hide anything. They think they must hide everything, to protect the in-group. To be effective, they must work in secret.

I have to keep coming back to this, because it fits Peninsula Village so well.  The PV counselor who posted details of her job on MySpace told of a mother and father at odds over their daughter's placement.  Dad "got it", mom didn't, she thought it too harsh.  She then said "We know their kids better than they do,"  

This from a person with no children.  When she does have her child, she'll understand why parents took great offense to that remark.

Now change 'parents' to 'regulators.' The point I was trying to make is that the programs fear the regulators would judge their methods to be too harsh and they would react like the counselor you wrote about. They believe they know better than the regulators. Wasn't there a post linking to an article that reinforced this? (The school was in trouble for breaking a girl's arm and the director basically took the above stand.) I don't have time to find it.

The programs believe in what they are doing. They believe it is necessary to be 'harsh' in order to be effective. Program operators, talk show hosts, lawmakers, parents and others who buy into this fallacious belief are what keeps these programs in business.

The most effective way to fight programs is to steer the culture  away from this self-righteous, angry, tough-love is a must, mindset. Unfortunately, the media (talk shows, etc) are feeding this mindset.