Author Topic: TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC  (Read 7977 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC
« Reply #15 on: June 25, 2006, 10:27:00 PM »
Mr./Miss CAPS brought it up. Let that person explain the accusation. Sounds all nasty, anyway.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC
« Reply #16 on: June 25, 2006, 10:29:00 PM »
Quote
On 2006-06-25 19:27:00, Anonymous wrote:

"Mr./Miss CAPS brought it up. Let that person explain the accusation.

I'm sure they will when they see it.  I'm not stopping them.


Quote
Sounds all nasty, anyway."


It is.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC
« Reply #17 on: June 25, 2006, 11:17:00 PM »
On CAICA's litigation page Isabelle has the "Litchfield vs ISAC" case listed. So, it certainly does not appear that ISAC is friendly with WWASP.  THE MAN is suing ISAC for Christ's sake!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC
« Reply #18 on: June 25, 2006, 11:35:00 PM »
What the hell does Carey Bock have to do with ISAC or TAUSA?  Carey was part of that Trekkers group, some of whom were also supportive of PURE.

There was a several months long bashing fest on Fornits that got pretty heated with both sides making allegations.

Unfortunately, what could and should have been resolved with far less hurling of vile, ugly name-calling and threats, turned into a fucking mess.

WWASPS and PURE are competitors, that's the bottom line.  WWASPS parents refer to WWASPS, PURE refers to NON-WWASPS programs, but Scheff was a long time referrer to WWASPS, even after she started her own company PURE.  That's my understanding of it, anyway, my apologies if not completely accurate.

Do a WWF search. It's all there for posterity, and I suppose, to keep the record straight as to the he/said/she/said debaccle.

My experience is many people moved on from the WWASPS debate once they figured out who was really benefiting.

It simply wasn't worth it.  Other programs (and deaths) were being ignored (HLA, CEDU, Skyline Journey, Red Rock where Katie Lank, died, etc.

 :smokin:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC
« Reply #19 on: June 25, 2006, 11:40:00 PM »
Sorry if I didn't make this clear - the bashing fest had to do with Bock, the Trekkers and PURE.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC
« Reply #20 on: June 25, 2006, 11:54:00 PM »
Bottom line: Why does Izzy at CAICA support Sue Scheff/PURE who is supportive of the Sudweeks at Whitmore Academy who are facing a criminal child abuse trial?

Sounds like CAICA is supporting an abusive facility if you ask me.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC
« Reply #21 on: June 25, 2006, 11:54:00 PM »
Quote

On 2006-06-25 20:35:00, Anonymous wrote:

"What the hell does Carey Bock have to do with ISAC or TAUSA?  Carey was part of that Trekkers group, some of whom were also supportive of PURE.



There was a several months long bashing fest on Fornits that got pretty heated with both sides making allegations.



Unfortunately, what could and should have been resolved with far less hurling of vile, ugly name-calling and threats, turned into a fucking mess.



WWASPS and PURE are competitors, that's the bottom line.  WWASPS parents refer to WWASPS, PURE refers to NON-WWASPS programs, but Scheff was a long time referrer to WWASPS, even after she started her own company PURE.  That's my understanding of it, anyway, my apologies if not completely accurate.



Do a WWF search. It's all there for posterity, and I suppose, to keep the record straight as to the he/said/she/said debaccle.



My experience is many people moved on from the WWASPS debate once they figured out who was really benefiting.



It simply wasn't worth it.  Other programs (and deaths) were being ignored (HLA, CEDU, Skyline Journey, Red Rock where Katie Lank, died, etc.



 ::bangin::
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC
« Reply #22 on: June 25, 2006, 11:57:00 PM »
Quote
On 2006-06-25 20:54:00, Anonymous wrote:

"Bottom line: Why does Izzy at CAICA support Sue Scheff/PURE who is supportive of the Sudweeks at Whitmore Academy who are facing a criminal child abuse trial?



Sounds like CAICA is supporting an abusive facility if you ask me."


Totally sucks, if ya ask me!

 ::puke::
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC
« Reply #23 on: June 26, 2006, 12:03:00 AM »
Some people might be wise to tell their "friend" HEY, I'm not posting THAT, you post it!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC
« Reply #24 on: June 26, 2006, 12:05:00 AM »
Quote
On 2006-06-25 20:54:00, Anonymous wrote:

"Bottom line: Why does Izzy at CAICA support Sue Scheff/PURE who is supportive of the Sudweeks at Whitmore Academy who are facing a criminal child abuse trial?



Sounds like CAICA is supporting an abusive facility if you ask me."


Okay, this is a fair question. What is the basis of this relationship between CAICA and PURE? Maybe then you can figure out why she won't support the Whitmore parents and especially their children?

 :???:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Joyce Harris

  • Posts: 516
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC
« Reply #25 on: June 26, 2006, 12:24:00 AM »
I have no idea what the relationship is between Scheff and Isabelle at CAICA.
I do know that Scheff was very displeased with the Statement we made to ISAC, because we stated our displeasure with Scheff's/PURE referral to the abusive Whitmore Academy.
Isabelle had published the ISAC Statement on CAICA. I would ASSUME that Sue Scheff was not pleased about having the ISAC Statement published on CAICA.
You would have to ask Isabelle and Sue Scheff if this has anything to do with CAICA not having Whitmore on the CAICA "watchlist" or with Isabelle not supporting the Whitmore parents and children.
Again, I DID NOT request that Isabelle remove Whitmore Academy from her website.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC
« Reply #26 on: June 26, 2006, 12:33:00 AM »
Quote
On 2006-06-25 21:24:00, Joyce Harris wrote:

"I have no idea what the relationship is between Scheff and Isabelle at CAICA.

I do know that Scheff was very displeased with the Statement we made to ISAC, because we stated our displeasure with Scheff's/PURE referral to the abusive Whitmore Academy.

Isabelle had published the ISAC Statement on CAICA. I would ASSUME that Sue Scheff was not pleased about having the ISAC Statement published on CAICA.

You would have to ask Isabelle and Sue Scheff if this has anything to do with CAICA not having Whitmore on the CAICA "watchlist" or with Isabelle not supporting the Whitmore parents and children.

Again, I DID NOT request that Isabelle remove Whitmore Academy from her website.

"


Perhaps Isabelle should revisit this issue? Second thought, why is it even an issue?  The state of Utah brought charges against Whitmore.
Doesn't matter how she feels about PURE, she needs to stand behind her personal statement of why she founded CAICA .. something about being the most accurate.  

No issue that I can see.  There is a trial forthcoming.  Other advocacy groups will be monitoring it, I'm sure.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC
« Reply #27 on: June 26, 2006, 12:43:00 AM »
Izzy's statements should be interesting IF or WHEN Sue Scheff is deposed in EITHER the Whitmore criminal or civil case. Sue Scheff's close connection to each of the children in both cases MAY be of interest to all parties, since she is directly responsible for the enrollment of most, if not ALL the children.
Based on Sue Scheff's depositions in the WWASP vs PURE case, things could get interesting, IF she is deposed in EITHER case. Not saying she will be; but she appears to be a major player.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC
« Reply #28 on: June 26, 2006, 12:58:00 AM »
Quote
On 2006-06-25 21:43:00, Anonymous wrote:

"Izzy's statements should be interesting IF or WHEN Sue Scheff is deposed in EITHER the Whitmore criminal or civil case. Sue Scheff's close connection to each of the children in both cases MAY be of interest to all parties, since she is directly responsible for the enrollment of most, if not ALL the children.

Based on Sue Scheff's depositions in the WWASP vs PURE case, things could get interesting, IF she is deposed in EITHER case. Not saying she will be; but she appears to be a major player."


 :eek:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
TEEN ADVOCATES USA / ISAC
« Reply #29 on: June 26, 2006, 01:10:00 AM »
Scheff's WWASP Deposition is riddled with LIES:
Said she had a degree---LIE
Said she had attorney and psychologists on PURE Staff---well, attorneys/psychologists DID have offices in the SAME building with her!  ha!
Said she had experience in the MEDICAL FIELD---she answered the phone at some medical establishment, or some such nonsense.
Can use the "Search WWF" and read it.
So new depositions from this lady could be something else; if Scheff is called to give any depositions.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »