The Who

[Anonymous]

:blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:
 :blabla:   :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:  :blabla:  :guesswho:

[Che Gookin]

bidding is still open.. you can always try that.

[Anonymous]

So you never answered the question... What are your requirements for a Residental Supervisor?
...

Huh?  I'm sorry.  You're like Dubya Bush and need information delivered as simply as possible.
LCSW for the Residential Supervisor.  It's the standard for many licensed programs.  Don't you agree?  Or would you rather have the supervisor of the laymen be a layman as well?

and why do you not want to employ people without a GED?
...

Come again?  Why do I not want to employ people...without a GED?  Dude.  How long have you been that high?  You must be sucking that glass dick again.  Go ahead and hire staff lacking even GEDs. Hire staff with GEDs and make it clear to the parents that they pulled their kids out of public schools to be treated by people who didn't make it through public schools. I know some folks get GED's because of extraordinary circumstances, but for the money you're asking for some parents are going to want experience AND an educational background in treating adolescents.  You know people will balk if they discover the staff spending the most time with their kids don't have bachelor degrees.  They'll take their money elsewhere if they find out staff don't even have GEDs regardless of your whining defense of their questionable skill sets.

Get away from your keyboard and back to those Cheesy Poofs.  Busy your hands elsewhere.  I'm more interested in these links being posted by the guest.  Family Light looks like a grand deception.  Figures you're involved.  This Tommy Croke guy has all the earmarks of a true buttplug.

[Anonymous]

Uh Hum  

"Cherry Gulch"
Database

Unh-uh. No, no, no.  A place called "Cherry Gulch" for 10-14 year old boys offering "A wide variety of activities and learning experiences" delivered by "Mr. Robert", "Mr. Steve", "Mr. Wayne", and "Elmo the canine therapist"?  It sounds like a pedophile paradise sponsored by NAMBLA.  If you can't see that your son's junk will be liberally fondled by "Mr. Wayne" and his pals, you should not have been allowed to reproduce. I don't want to think about what Elmo the canine therapist's functions. I'll bet Elmo's credentials are more legit than those of Mr. Robert, Mr. Steve, or Mr. Wayne.  And Elmo only licks his own balls.

[Anonymous]

Asshole!  Read what this asshole says about the assholes you serve.  You might want to troll this guy from now on.  He hates you.  http://www.familylight.com/link3/3.03/3 ... arket.html

Family Light

Aspen/CRC Marketing


We are very concerned about the aggressive marketing conducted by the Aspen Education Group.  Too often we hear of clinicians advising parents that sending their child to a therapeutic program away from home is only a good idea if it is an Aspen program.  Clinicians who give that advice are falling victim to this aggressive marketing.   Many Aspen programs are good programs, but people who speak as if they are the only good programs are at best misinformed.  Aspen is very generous with perks for their loyal referral sources.  We are not suggesting anything as black and white unethical as cash  payments. In a future revision of this page, we will include more detail on how this process actually works.

An example of aggressive marketing that applies to individuals searching on the Internet (as opposed to potential referral sources) is http://www.teenboardingschools.com/ .  The website http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/r ... chools.com checked on March 6, 2008, indicates that http://www.teenboardingschools.com/ is a domain owned by "Aspen Education Group, 17777 Center Court Drive, Suite 300,Cerritos, CA 90703, US."  Until we called attention to this on the listserv for the IECA, this website gave the appearance of being a neutral search website for parents seeking resources on the web. (We have edited this page on March 15, 2008, as we note that the CRC logo was then added to this website, acknowledging who is behind it and no longer totally concealing the conflict of interest).  We also believe that if CRC/Aspen really wanted people to know that this website is a marketing arm of the Aspen programs, it would put the Aspen and CRC logos at the top and bottom of every page and turn it into a link to the the web sites of those companies.

Until that correction was made,  that website appeared to direct users only to Aspen facilities while concealing that Aspen, CRC Health, or Bain Capital had anything to do with it.  Articles, such as the one at http://www.teenboardingschools.com/bootcamps.htm entitled "Boot Camps Don't Work" did not disclose that it was posted on the web site of a company that does not operate boot camps but does operate many programs considered by people to be competitors to boot camps.  We at FamilyLightsm agree with what the article says, but we are concerned about the value system of a business that would run this kind of self serving web site without disclosing their financial interest in the guidance offered.

We repeat for emphasis that the correction occurred only after FamilyLightsm  discovered the existence of this website and circulated the information throughout IECA.  The acknowledgment of ownership appears only on the home page, so far as we are aware.  If Aspen/CRC really wanted people to see it, we suspect it would be on every page.

When you get a recommendation suggesting that only Aspen programs should be considered, you need to challenge at once the competence and/or the ethics of the person making that recommendation.  If the recommendation is for a specific program, the recommendation might be solid, based on solid reasons why that particular Aspen program is right for your situation.  However we see no reason why a competent and ethical referring professional would claim that Aspen programs in general are so superior to all others in general,  that only Aspen programs are appropriate for consideration, but we do hear of people making that claim. If you hear that from  a person recommending programs, you need to ask that person two questions immediately, then be skeptical regarding any advice and direction from that person. The two questions are: (1) What comparable non-Aspen programs have you actually investigated? and (2) What favors, travel, perks, educational benefits and other items of value has the Aspen/CRC organization provided you?  Then find a second opinion, if not a replacement for the person who gave you that advice. .

FamilyLightsm sometimes recommends some Aspen programs to some families.  We are not stating that there is no quality here.  There are also some Aspen programs to which we will not refer.  We are not alleging actual bribery or cash payoffs. But we are concerned that people are choosing Aspen facilities due to manipulation of referral sources and manipulation of families searching on the web.    We think it is a shame that this company, that does offer a great deal of quality, damages its credibility with the behavior of its marketing divisions. (Web marketing and personal marketing to referral sources are handled by different divisions).

Remember, an Aspen/CRC  program might still be right for you or your child. Do not exclude consideration of Aspen/CRC  program just because of what we say here.  But make sure you base your decision on information from sources that can evaluate the benefits and shortcomings of both Aspen/CRC and non-Aspen/CRC programs and will do so objectively.

Also, remember that the problem is with marketing efforts at the corporate level. At most Aspen facilities, the admission people tell a straight story.   Beware of unscrupulous Aspen marketers posing as parents of former Aspen/CRC patients on the internet.  They will claim an Aspen/CRC program saved their child's life and attempt to steer you directly to Aspen/CRC referral websites.  Ask anyone endorsing Aspen/CRC exclusively to recommend a similar program not affiliated with Aspen/CRC or Bain Capital.  An Aspen marketer will claim no knowledge of other programs or will harshly criticize Aspen competitors.  If the individual is vague about their experience with an Aspen/CRC program and will only say it was a success, keep asking for specific aspects of their program experience.  Press for details and if the "parent" becomes evasive or combative, be skeptical of their endorsement.

Last revised August 15, 2008

[TheWho]

Great find…. They go on to say:

Remember, an Aspen/CRC  program might still be right for you or your child. Do not exclude consideration of Aspen/CRC  program just because of what we say here.  But make sure you base your decision on information from sources that can evaluate the benefits and shortcomings of both Aspen/CRC and non-Aspen/CRC programs and will do so objectively.  
Also, remember that the problem is with marketing efforts at the corporate level. At most Aspen facilities, the admission people tell a straght story.

“Family Light” provides an excellent service.

I also would like to add to this that it is always a good idea to trust your instincts as parents.  There are many different types of programs out there and not all of them will be a good fit for every child.  What I suggest is to ask to speak to a few of the parents who had children attend the program.  Of course they will be parents of kids who were successful, but this will give you an opportunity to speak parent to parent with concerns unique to parents.  I found this very helpful myself.  You may also want to visit the campus and speak to the admissions people and a few of the children who are attending.



...

[Froderik]

Unh-uh. No, no, no.  A place called "Cherry Gulch" for 10-14 year old boys offering "A wide variety of activities and learning experiences" delivered by "Mr. Robert", "Mr. Steve", "Mr. Wayne", and "Elmo the canine therapist"?  It sounds like a pedophile paradise sponsored by NAMBLA.  If you can't see that your son's junk will be liberally fondled by "Mr. Wayne" and his pals, you should not have been allowed to reproduce. I don't want to think about what Elmo the canine therapist's functions. I'll bet Elmo's credentials are more legit than those of Mr. Robert, Mr. Steve, or Mr. Wayne.  And Elmo only licks his own balls.

   

[TheWho]

I don't want to think about what Elmo the canine therapist's functions.

I couldnt take it anymore so I called and they told me he conducted mostly "Roll" playing.



...

[Guest]

Asshole!  Read what this asshole says about the assholes you serve.  You might want to troll this guy from now on.  He hates you.  http://www.familylight.com/link3/3.03/3 ... arket.html

Family Light

Aspen/CRC Marketing


We are very concerned about the aggressive marketing conducted by the Aspen Education Group.  Too often we hear of clinicians advising parents that sending their child to a therapeutic program away from home is only a good idea if it is an Aspen program.  Clinicians who give that advice are falling victim to this aggressive marketing.   Many Aspen programs are good programs, but people who speak as if they are the only good programs are at best misinformed.  Aspen is very generous with perks for their loyal referral sources.  We are not suggesting anything as black and white unethical as cash  payments. In a future revision of this page, we will include more detail on how this process actually works.

An example of aggressive marketing that applies to individuals searching on the Internet (as opposed to potential referral sources) is http://www.teenboardingschools.com/ .  The website http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/r ... chools.com checked on March 6, 2008, indicates that http://www.teenboardingschools.com/ is a domain owned by "Aspen Education Group, 17777 Center Court Drive, Suite 300,Cerritos, CA 90703, US."  Until we called attention to this on the listserv for the IECA, this website gave the appearance of being a neutral search website for parents seeking resources on the web. (We have edited this page on March 15, 2008, as we note that the CRC logo was then added to this website, acknowledging who is behind it and no longer totally concealing the conflict of interest).  We also believe that if CRC/Aspen really wanted people to know that this website is a marketing arm of the Aspen programs, it would put the Aspen and CRC logos at the top and bottom of every page and turn it into a link to the the web sites of those companies.

Until that correction was made,  that website appeared to direct users only to Aspen facilities while concealing that Aspen, CRC Health, or Bain Capital had anything to do with it.  Articles, such as the one at http://www.teenboardingschools.com/bootcamps.htm entitled "Boot Camps Don't Work" did not disclose that it was posted on the web site of a company that does not operate boot camps but does operate many programs considered by people to be competitors to boot camps.  We at FamilyLightsm agree with what the article says, but we are concerned about the value system of a business that would run this kind of self serving web site without disclosing their financial interest in the guidance offered.

We repeat for emphasis that the correction occurred only after FamilyLightsm  discovered the existence of this website and circulated the information throughout IECA.  The acknowledgment of ownership appears only on the home page, so far as we are aware.  If Aspen/CRC really wanted people to see it, we suspect it would be on every page.

When you get a recommendation suggesting that only Aspen programs should be considered, you need to challenge at once the competence and/or the ethics of the person making that recommendation.  If the recommendation is for a specific program, the recommendation might be solid, based on solid reasons why that particular Aspen program is right for your situation.  However we see no reason why a competent and ethical referring professional would claim that Aspen programs in general are so superior to all others in general,  that only Aspen programs are appropriate for consideration, but we do hear of people making that claim. If you hear that from  a person recommending programs, you need to ask that person two questions immediately, then be skeptical regarding any advice and direction from that person. The two questions are: (1) What comparable non-Aspen programs have you actually investigated? and (2) What favors, travel, perks, educational benefits and other items of value has the Aspen/CRC organization provided you?  Then find a second opinion, if not a replacement for the person who gave you that advice. .

FamilyLightsm sometimes recommends some Aspen programs to some families.  We are not stating that there is no quality here.  There are also some Aspen programs to which we will not refer.  We are not alleging actual bribery or cash payoffs. But we are concerned that people are choosing Aspen facilities due to manipulation of referral sources and manipulation of families searching on the web.    We think it is a shame that this company, that does offer a great deal of quality, damages its credibility with the behavior of its marketing divisions. (Web marketing and personal marketing to referral sources are handled by different divisions).

Remember, an Aspen/CRC  program might still be right for you or your child. Do not exclude consideration of Aspen/CRC  program just because of what we say here.  But make sure you base your decision on information from sources that can evaluate the benefits and shortcomings of both Aspen/CRC and non-Aspen/CRC programs and will do so objectively.

Also, remember that the problem is with marketing efforts at the corporate level. At most Aspen facilities, the admission people tell a straight story.   Beware of unscrupulous Aspen marketers posing as parents of former Aspen/CRC patients on the internet.  They will claim an Aspen/CRC program saved their child's life and attempt to steer you directly to Aspen/CRC referral websites.  Ask anyone endorsing Aspen/CRC exclusively to recommend a similar program not affiliated with Aspen/CRC or Bain Capital.  An Aspen marketer will claim no knowledge of other programs or will harshly criticize Aspen competitors.  If the individual is vague about their experience with an Aspen/CRC program and will only say it was a success, keep asking for specific aspects of their program experience.  Press for details and if the "parent" becomes evasive or combative, be skeptical of their endorsement.

Last revised August 15, 2008

GREAT FIND. Who, what is your name? When was your kid at an aspen rendition center(s)? In what rendition center(s) was she?

[Anonymous]

Asshole!  Read what this asshole says about the assholes you serve.  You might want to troll this guy from now on.  He hates you.  http://www.familylight.com/link3/3.03/3 ... arket.html

Family Light

Aspen/CRC Marketing


We are very concerned about the aggressive marketing conducted by the Aspen Education Group.  Too often we hear of clinicians advising parents that sending their child to a therapeutic program away from home is only a good idea if it is an Aspen program.  Clinicians who give that advice are falling victim to this aggressive marketing.   Many Aspen programs are good programs, but people who speak as if they are the only good programs are at best misinformed.  Aspen is very generous with perks for their loyal referral sources.  We are not suggesting anything as black and white unethical as cash  payments. In a future revision of this page, we will include more detail on how this process actually works.

An example of aggressive marketing that applies to individuals searching on the Internet (as opposed to potential referral sources) is http://www.teenboardingschools.com/ .  The website http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/r ... chools.com checked on March 6, 2008, indicates that http://www.teenboardingschools.com/ is a domain owned by "Aspen Education Group, 17777 Center Court Drive, Suite 300,Cerritos, CA 90703, US."  Until we called attention to this on the listserv for the IECA, this website gave the appearance of being a neutral search website for parents seeking resources on the web. (We have edited this page on March 15, 2008, as we note that the CRC logo was then added to this website, acknowledging who is behind it and no longer totally concealing the conflict of interest).  We also believe that if CRC/Aspen really wanted people to know that this website is a marketing arm of the Aspen programs, it would put the Aspen and CRC logos at the top and bottom of every page and turn it into a link to the the web sites of those companies.

Until that correction was made,  that website appeared to direct users only to Aspen facilities while concealing that Aspen, CRC Health, or Bain Capital had anything to do with it.  Articles, such as the one at http://www.teenboardingschools.com/bootcamps.htm entitled "Boot Camps Don't Work" did not disclose that it was posted on the web site of a company that does not operate boot camps but does operate many programs considered by people to be competitors to boot camps.  We at FamilyLightsm agree with what the article says, but we are concerned about the value system of a business that would run this kind of self serving web site without disclosing their financial interest in the guidance offered.

We repeat for emphasis that the correction occurred only after FamilyLightsm  discovered the existence of this website and circulated the information throughout IECA.  The acknowledgment of ownership appears only on the home page, so far as we are aware.  If Aspen/CRC really wanted people to see it, we suspect it would be on every page.

When you get a recommendation suggesting that only Aspen programs should be considered, you need to challenge at once the competence and/or the ethics of the person making that recommendation.  If the recommendation is for a specific program, the recommendation might be solid, based on solid reasons why that particular Aspen program is right for your situation.  However we see no reason why a competent and ethical referring professional would claim that Aspen programs in general are so superior to all others in general,  that only Aspen programs are appropriate for consideration, but we do hear of people making that claim. If you hear that from  a person recommending programs, you need to ask that person two questions immediately, then be skeptical regarding any advice and direction from that person. The two questions are: (1) What comparable non-Aspen programs have you actually investigated? and (2) What favors, travel, perks, educational benefits and other items of value has the Aspen/CRC organization provided you?  Then find a second opinion, if not a replacement for the person who gave you that advice. .

FamilyLightsm sometimes recommends some Aspen programs to some families.  We are not stating that there is no quality here.  There are also some Aspen programs to which we will not refer.  We are not alleging actual bribery or cash payoffs. But we are concerned that people are choosing Aspen facilities due to manipulation of referral sources and manipulation of families searching on the web.    We think it is a shame that this company, that does offer a great deal of quality, damages its credibility with the behavior of its marketing divisions. (Web marketing and personal marketing to referral sources are handled by different divisions).

Remember, an Aspen/CRC  program might still be right for you or your child. Do not exclude consideration of Aspen/CRC  program just because of what we say here.  But make sure you base your decision on information from sources that can evaluate the benefits and shortcomings of both Aspen/CRC and non-Aspen/CRC programs and will do so objectively.

Also, remember that the problem is with marketing efforts at the corporate level. At most Aspen facilities, the admission people tell a straight story.   Beware of unscrupulous Aspen marketers posing as parents of former Aspen/CRC patients on the internet.  They will claim an Aspen/CRC program saved their child's life and attempt to steer you directly to Aspen/CRC referral websites.  Ask anyone endorsing Aspen/CRC exclusively to recommend a similar program not affiliated with Aspen/CRC or Bain Capital.  An Aspen marketer will claim no knowledge of other programs or will harshly criticize Aspen competitors.  If the individual is vague about their experience with an Aspen/CRC program and will only say it was a success, keep asking for specific aspects of their program experience.  Press for details and if the "parent" becomes evasive or combative, be skeptical of their endorsement.

Last revised August 15, 2008

GREAT FIND. Who, what is your name? When was your kid at an aspen rendition center(s)? In what rendition center(s) was she?

Good luck getting an answer.  There's a ton of shit over in the Aspen forum.  This one is a particularly enlightening thread.  A bit long but if you're interested in either Aspen programs or info on Who from his own mouth, it's worth it.
  viewtopic.php?f=48&t=15260

[TheWho]

I always suggest to the readers to read the link to “All” articles when they are provided here.  Many articles’ wording is changed or anti program paragraphs are "seeded in" to deceive the readers. Many articles are altered to remove any wording which may favor the program.  In the case of the above cut and paste much of the dialog doesn’t exist in the original from  “Family Light”.

As an example this paragraph was not part of the “Family light” article:

“Beware of unscrupulous Aspen marketers posing as parents of former Aspen/CRC patients on the internet. They will claim an Aspen/CRC program saved their child's life and attempt to steer you directly to Aspen/CRC referral websites. Ask anyone endorsing Aspen/CRC exclusively to recommend a similar program not affiliated with Aspen/CRC or Bain Capital. An Aspen marketer will claim no knowledge of other programs or will harshly criticize Aspen competitors. If the individual is vague about their experience with an Aspen/CRC program and will only say it was a success, keep asking for specific aspects of their program experience. Press for details and if the "parent" becomes evasive or combative, be skeptical of their endorsement.”

These are tricks that are constantly being played on parents and new readers (here on fornits) to try to deceive them into believing that programs are abusive, ineffective or to show them in a negative light.  I have spent a lot of my time exposing false or fabricated information  which is posted here.  Some of the information is legitimate but Just beware what you read here and try to read the original when you can.



...

[Anonymous]

This is a post TheWho said he finds funny, and continuously brings up in order to make fun of. Call me crazy, I don't find a post describing physical, sexual and emotional abuse to be funny.

http://fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=21209

Pardon my blunt language and longwindness:

In a world after 9/11, to whom do I talk to about this matter? My mother and step-father will not admit to the criminal and Satanic mistake they made with these Mormon-Republican devils. Oh, before you think I'm a Liberal Democrat wacko, I'm not. I'm a Catholic Republican and I would never do this to anyTHING alive. How can anybody ever be convinced a Nazi/Soviet style concentration camp is the answer for petty teen behavior? Furthermore, these parents, the Baby Boomers, who all boozed it up in Studio 54 and fucked each other silly at college orgies of the Animal House magnitude, has the hypocritical gaul to PUNISH their own FLESH AND BLOOD for the very same actions? Speaking as somebody who can't recover no matter what I've tried in life, the children today are the same children we've always been. We're children, being wild after World War II. How dare the parents think they are better than us when they acted just as us! Who the fuck do they think they are, passing judgement against us? As Americans, we're entitled to DUE PROCESS OF LAW, and are innocent till proven guilty. Judges are either appointed by politicans elected by the people, in a Right granted by God via the Declaration of Independece, Articles of Conferderation and the Constitution, or are elected directly by the people thereof, in the same manner of dictation via the Three Founding Documents. Ergo, only God Himself can send us to these places under American Law. Yet, our parents decided to send to these places for "help". What kind of help did I get? NONE! I'll explain in detail.

After being led to a trip to LA for no reason at all (and I packed movies and video games for the trip), I was tackled in the LA airport where the movie The Net has a scene of Sandra Bullock eating pizza, waiting for her plane. To this day, I can't go near LAX, nor watch that scene in The Net for occurance of a mental breakdown. Similarly, I can't watch the Disney movie Heavyweights at all, nor Girl Interrupted. Those if I got treatment like in Girl Interrupted, I doubt I would've become a confused, hateful, sex-crazed maniac. Anyways, as I said, I was led to LA for no reason some time between Fed. 29, 1996 and Mar. 14, 1996. In was the Friday following the 29th, I remember that much.

Recently beforehand, I had decided to dropout of high school. A friend of mine was in home schooling and was only 15 and in college, so I was considering it. I also applied at over 50+ places for a job earlier in January, and was eagerly awaiting word from them. Furthermore, I was an aspiring author, and my mentor, who died shortly after my return in 1998, was coaching me on becoming a professional author for writing computer articles. I was also working on home anime movie efforts with another friend of mine, who was an anime freak. No doubt we would've started a dot-com and bailed at the last minute. Lastly, I had an approved internship awaiting at Westwood Studios, the makers of Command & Conquer game series, plus numerous contacts throughout Hollywood and TV stations. Tru Hawkings of AM 720 KDWN Las Vegas and his fellow DJs were a big help for me. To this day, my mother assumed I was a "troubled" teen because I sought to jumpstart my life by leaving conventional high school and wanted to get home schooling.

Well, thanks to missing those two years of my life (16, 17), I never finished high school, I can't concentrate at college (since 1998 and counting), I can't hold a job of any kind, and due to my inability to lose weight, I can't join the Military (hey, not a pretty alternative, but better than being penniless, which I am now). Other problems I have deal with me, time stopped on March 16, 1996, when the bastards caught me. Everything since then is amnesia. I wake up screaming every night, in a cold sweat. I have nothing but nightmares of that place, and fear sleep in the night, though that's a bit strange, considering they made us "sleep" with the lights on. Anyways, it's sad that Clayton Bowman, a fellow they made me go through one of their "seminars" with, was wasted away into skeleton and now lives in a mental institution forever, since 1998. He left right after I did.

I got lucky.

When I left on January 16, 1998, my 18th birthday, I informed the director, that fucking Mormon bastard Brain Vaifanua, that my family is full of Free Masons and Mafia. He chuckled at first till I saw written proof that the the Samoan Government had learned of my existence and I was freed via that. I don't know about the Mafia part (how much power did they have after Gotti went to jail), but the Free Mason paid off. I was free. Poor Clayton didn't leave till a little bit after me. The few times I did get to see him afterwards, he was gone. Far out. I mean it. He was also scarred, as am I, with ringworms and other ailments. My mother, after my return, couldn't figure out why I couldn't work, wouldn't do my school work, smoked heavily, didn't show up to anything, refused to talk to anybody associated with WWASP programs, and went into sex and drugs like a man posessed. Because I was. You would be, too, if you went thru just one day of what I went through for 22 months. 22 long months. Sadly, all of the evidence I'm aware of my stay has been destroyed. A common pratice, I've heard. But every year that has passed since March 16, 1996, I want to die a little more. I'm called a bum by my friends, but I've not shared my experiences with them. As already stated, my parents turn away, refusing to acknowledge anything about it. My mother's given me over $50,000+ to shut up about it and not go to court. I still refused. She gave me a house in Pahrump, NV, worth $210,000, and I've still thinking of causing a stink. You see, I can't comprehend anything. Quickly, and unfortunately, I have to use those "seminar" "skills" to turn bad situations around in my favor because why I do or say I am wholly unaware of. Like I said, I don't remember ANYTHING from January 16, 1998 till a few hours ago, if that. Oh, I know 9/11 happened that that we're fighting Gulf War II in Iraq, and that I've had sex and did drugs and such, only because people and pictures exist of me doing as such. No actualy recollection exists in my head about it. None.

Example, a Japanese girl who lives in Green Valley, NV, named Yuko, claims I fathered her child, and that we were lovers in 1999. Huh? I set up an extract of money from my trust for her but I don't know her. Strange, huh?

So onward I march.

After getting kidnapped a second time from my own house on March 16, I was dragged to LA again, and watched by this bastard asshole name Atwood. They had their fucking poser son with them, too, and he followed me everywhere, the fuck! They tried to feed me food, but I resisted. They let me have full control of the TV, and even let me wear a fannel the next day. Well, I should've known that allowing me to watch all of the HBO I want would've made me stay up late, and too tired to kick the screen out of a 2nd story window in the hotel they took me to. I even mouthed "Help me," to a babe and her boyfriend. They took a concerned look but didn't do anything. I should've woken up early, and jumped the window. I would've landed on some banana trees in Inglewood, but nevertheless, it's LA, and I can disappear in 10 sec. if given the chance. Also, if I caused a noise in the yard, the cops would've come, and I'd be better off that way.

But no, I watched dirty movies on HBO and then With Honors and Miracle on 34th Street the next morning. To this day, I can't watch those movies alone. Nor can I watch Frasier, which is the sitcom I was watching that night.

You know, the first time I was in LAX I should've let the LAX PD arrest "Terry" and those fuckers for trying to kidnap me. I should've. The Devil was in me. Today? Forget it. I'll fight to the death for my FREEDOM. Yeah, I did fight back then. Strangely, in 10th grade, I had an IQ of 210 according to the tests. My IQ today? 82.

My mom tried to apologize, and something should've tipped me off when my grandparents didn't expect us in LA. They always know when we're coming over. Strange, huh?

As I sat on the plane, Samoans asked if I was playing volleyball. I told them I didn't know shit. I saw some other kids who were dressed the same. I should've organized a rebellion or something. (I almost had a revolution at the cult compound I was at in Dec. '97.) Nothing tipped me off. When we got to Hawaii, some New Zealander fucker gave me a lecture on what a New Zealander is. Whatever, asshole. Then he asked what I was in for. In for? WTF? I said I don't know, writing a novel? They all laughed. Then forced back on the plance to Samoa. Now, if I had known that if I caused a problem in Hawaii or American Samoa, that the PD would've came, I could've done as such. But those fuckers lie at every chance. EVERY CHANCE. To this day, I hope Hawaii and Samoa burns in a volcanic death.

I'm going to skip some details, but here's a list of shit that I had happened to me:

No food.
Sexual abused in everyway.
Repeat beatings.
No water.
No bathroom.
No bedding.
Little items I had were stolen, like my sweaty hat and shoes.
My Bible ripped and wrecked.
What little food I got, stolen from me.
Forced to drink cum, piss, eat shit.
Duct-taped from head to toe for no reason.
No toilet paper.
Had rocks and items thrown at me.
Locked in a hot, wooden box.
Forced to eat paper.
Forced to be naked for a week.
Thrown into the ocean during a typhoon.
Kicked down a hill and had logs thrown on me.
Had a chair slammed into my gut.
Obtained more skin diseases than a POW in Vietnam.
Forced to carry "sandbags" of rocks up and down hills.
Lived in the jungle called Le Tiera.
Screamed at and clubbed during seminars.
Had other "students" "enforce" "rules" on me for no reason.

I'm sure there's more if I went into it day by day. Which I can. In the end, a Christmas arguement broke out between the staff and me. I had the whole "beach" I was in ready to fight back. I had stored over the 22 months, bags, clubs, wood, rocks, homemade slings, homemade spears, shanks from toothbrushes, waterhoses for whips, seashells for spikes in the clubs, nails and screws I found, random kitchen and computer parts for weaponary. Toxic chemicals made from shampoo, toothpaste and sea creatures and plants, and bars of soap for use in socks. A boiling point came when they wanted us to do "choose" from dancing like a bunch of jigaboos and coons and just staying on the "beach" and doing nothing. I chose nothing. The lady in charge comes over and argues with me. She then lays "consequences" on me. Just for disagreeing? Um, hello, we're Americans, we disagree on EVERYTHING! After everybody was forced out, she said I don't get a consequence if I fuck her. Honestly, what the Hell, right? I was there for 20 months by then without pussy or a woman, and I was forced to do gross shit that nobody would do outside of a Dutch porn room, so I did it fast and went about my business. Shows you what kind of "professionals" they hire, huh? The only two good people there were Saliva the Ape and Mr. Tau. They were fired for actually rehabilitating us! Why? Because they had degrees from college and knew how to handle us! WOW! And they were fired. The rest of the fucks were just that, fucks. So anyways, after I did my male deed with a her, I just walked out of the "schoolhouse" alone. I was about to scream, "REVOLUTION!" when I noticed all of weaponary was being taken. I didn't say anything. The "staff" wanted to know who's stuff it was. Nobody talked. Loyality. We were threatened with more of that "consequences" non-sense when I saw the Samoan I just boinked talk to the "staff" in Samoan and the situation was over. She just winked at me and left. I was allowed free reign on that "beach" as long as I stayed around. Just as long as I didn't leave. I don't know if I was a good lay, or they knew that we could take 'em. Or if we failed, we'd have one Hell of a bad story for ACLU to pursue in International Court. Either way, I was free. In a strange way, my "freedom" was kept in a 1984ish way, like in the end of the book, where they let Winston do anything he wants. Only difference is I was aware of it, he wasn't. I also had to boink that fat Samoan staff lady sometimes up to five times a day. Look, physically I enjoyed it, but seriously, if I was living in the States according to my original plan, I'd never boink that!

So comes the last weeks, when I was doing whatever. One staff member tried to "consequence" me the day before I left. Finally, he let up, because the directors told him to. Why? Don't know. He got in trouble, I was "free" to go fuck off as along as I stayed on the "beach". In the end, I was playing video games on the computers they had.

When my time came to leave, I told the guys, "Look, I don't when I'll be going," and I got pulled out of the hut and forced to pack up my stuff and be "upstairs" in five minutes. Those last few weeks and dashing off felt great after 20 months of torture and no food, no freedom. Not even allowed to talk. Look, bluntly, getting ugly pussy helped just as much. It was needed. But for people like Clayton Bowman, Fred McCandles, David Takken, Matt Sunkel, Dustin Hobbs, TJ Bentley, Tommy George, Mike Renick, Chris Sutton (who's dad is Ken Kay's lawyer BTW), Nick Gallagher, Chris Landry (who's dead), Taylor Milan, and others . . . it's didn't help them. They became worse. They became worse.

I'm not against youth teen programs.

I'm against youth teen programs that are ran like a Nazi concentration camp.

Go for it on anybody who wants to sue 'em for pass laws against 'em. I'm all for it. If I could, I'd start one that only takes 20 people and have them work at a computer Internet cafe and attend Church every Sunday. That'd be effective. Not this "though love" bullshit.

TheWho posted this on Tuesday Oct 7 , just two days ago.

http://fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php? ... 51#p316451

Ha,Ha,Ha you have been here for awhile!! Remember that guy who claimed he was duct taped from head to toe and then carried down to the ocean during a monsoon and thrown in!!!  Talk about trying to get attention.  Looking back now I think if he toned his story down a little and told us he was forced to carry wood around or study for hours on end he would have got a few people to believe him.  But I do think that is the overall classic fabricated story I have heard here.



...

Posted yesterday,
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=25894&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=135#p316543

Look , I laughed at some of the stories which I beleive not to be true.

[TheWho]

Ha,Ha,Ha  another trick they use is to try to cover themselves with long articles when their lies are exposed.  Ya gatta love this place.....

I always suggest to the readers to read the link to “All” articles when they are provided here.  Many articles’ wording is changed or anti program paragraphs are "seeded in" to deceive the readers. Many articles are altered to remove any wording which may favor the program.  In the case of the above cut and paste much of the dialog doesn’t exist in the original from  “Family Light”.

As an example this paragraph was not part of the “Family light” article:

“Beware of unscrupulous Aspen marketers posing as parents of former Aspen/CRC patients on the internet. They will claim an Aspen/CRC program saved their child's life and attempt to steer you directly to Aspen/CRC referral websites. Ask anyone endorsing Aspen/CRC exclusively to recommend a similar program not affiliated with Aspen/CRC or Bain Capital. An Aspen marketer will claim no knowledge of other programs or will harshly criticize Aspen competitors. If the individual is vague about their experience with an Aspen/CRC program and will only say it was a success, keep asking for specific aspects of their program experience. Press for details and if the "parent" becomes evasive or combative, be skeptical of their endorsement.”

These are tricks that are constantly being played on parents and new readers (here on fornits) to try to deceive them into believing that programs are abusive, ineffective or to show them in a negative light.  I have spent a lot of my time exposing false or fabricated information  which is posted here.  Some of the information is legitimate but Just beware what you read here and try to read the original when you can.

[Froderik]

Ha,Ha,Ha  another trick they use is to try to cover themselves with long articles when their lies are exposed.  Ya gatta love this place.....

I always suggest to the readers to read the link to “All” articles when they are provided here.  Many articles’ wording is changed or anti program paragraphs are "seeded in" to deceive the readers. Many articles are altered to remove any wording which may favor the program.  In the case of the above cut and paste much of the dialog doesn’t exist in the original from  “Family Light”.

As an example this paragraph was not part of the “Family light” article:

“Beware of unscrupulous Aspen marketers posing as parents of former Aspen/CRC patients on the internet. They will claim an Aspen/CRC program saved their child's life and attempt to steer you directly to Aspen/CRC referral websites. Ask anyone endorsing Aspen/CRC exclusively to recommend a similar program not affiliated with Aspen/CRC or Bain Capital. An Aspen marketer will claim no knowledge of other programs or will harshly criticize Aspen competitors. If the individual is vague about their experience with an Aspen/CRC program and will only say it was a success, keep asking for specific aspects of their program experience. Press for details and if the "parent" becomes evasive or combative, be skeptical of their endorsement.”

These are tricks that are constantly being played on parents and new readers (here on fornits) to try to deceive them into believing that programs are abusive, ineffective or to show them in a negative light.  I have spent a lot of my time exposing false or fabricated information  which is posted here.  Some of the information is legitimate but Just beware what you read here and try to read the original when you can.

LIES ^^^

[Anonymous]

Ha,Ha,Ha  another trick they use is to try to cover themselves with long articles when their lies are exposed.  Ya gatta love this place.....

I always suggest to the readers to read the link to “All” articles when they are provided here.  Many articles’ wording is changed or anti program paragraphs are "seeded in" to deceive the readers. Many articles are altered to remove any wording which may favor the program.  In the case of the above cut and paste much of the dialog doesn’t exist in the original from  “Family Light”.

As an example this paragraph was not part of the “Family light” article:

“Beware of unscrupulous Aspen marketers posing as parents of former Aspen/CRC patients on the internet. They will claim an Aspen/CRC program saved their child's life and attempt to steer you directly to Aspen/CRC referral websites. Ask anyone endorsing Aspen/CRC exclusively to recommend a similar program not affiliated with Aspen/CRC or Bain Capital. An Aspen marketer will claim no knowledge of other programs or will harshly criticize Aspen competitors. If the individual is vague about their experience with an Aspen/CRC program and will only say it was a success, keep asking for specific aspects of their program experience. Press for details and if the "parent" becomes evasive or combative, be skeptical of their endorsement.”


These are tricks that are constantly being played on parents and new readers (here on fornits) to try to deceive them into believing that programs are abusive, ineffective or to show them in a negative light.  I have spent a lot of my time exposing false or fabricated information  which is posted here.  Some of the information is legitimate but Just beware what you read here and try to read the original when you can.

Whenever dealing with this "industry" make sure to screen save everything they put on the web. They've no problem lying through their teeth regarding it.