List of Known Abusive Programs

[Anonymous]

So your saying that we should all know videogame sense?  That "got owned" means they shut them down????

[Anonymous]

This is a great list and needs to be posted where parents can find it.  It'd be even better if the parents could click on the school name and read about the complaints and abuses related to that school.

It'd be a lot of work, but I think it would pay off substantially.  I know that some of these schools are suffering from reduced enrollment right now which could be indicative of the word getting out on them.

[Deborah]

http://www.isaccorp.org/watchlist.asp
http://www.caica.org/newsinfo.htm
http://www.heal-online.org/childtortureusa.htm#flor9
http://kathymoya.com/FICA/deaths.htm

A few others. Then there is
http://nospank.net/
http://www.teenadvocatesusa.org/

Have I forgotten anyone?

[Anonymous]

Very excellent.  And the ones that don't have a link?

[Anonymous]

So your saying that we should all know videogame sense?  That "got owned" means they shut them down?

Got owned: idiom.  From the internet slang language l33t (pronounced "Leet", from "elite").  To be totally and utterly defeated by another.  Implies a particularly humiliating or ignominious defeat.  In l33t, "owned" is frequently spelled "pwned."  See also: l33t.

No, really.  See also: l33t

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L33t_programming_language

"Got owned" has long migrated outside l33t and into common online usage.

A lot of people would have understood it from context, but it's no sin to have something go over your head and have to ask.

If you're old enough not to understand "got owned" without asking someone what it means, you're old enough to know better than to whine like you just did.

The language changed and the universe didn't send you a memo.  Wah.  Grow up.

Julie

[Lacey]

The only thing that concerns me is that I went to two of the places on that list, HLA and New Haven RTC, and while I absolutely agree with HLA's name on that list, New Haven was an extremely positive experience for me and all the other girls I still keep in contact with via a MySpace Alum group...

I definitely support making information available on abusive or controversial schools, however isn't there a point when its taken too far?? When a good school that has something to offer parents and children is cast into an abusive list just because a few kids had a bad experience or didnt want to get sent away. I know PLENTLY of kids who would say anything about a school and its staff to try and get pulled or manipulate their way out of where they dont want to be. Is this taken into consideration?? How are these "lists" compiled?

Just another point of view.

[Anonymous]

Doesn't New Haven practice behavior mod? Were you there willingly? Just because you may not have been chemically or physically restrained doesn't mean you weren't emotionally abused or that your rights weren't violated.

Glad to hear you support making info available on abusive schools. And I agree with you that there IS a point at which it's taken too far. If the "school" uses behavior mod techniques and holds students captive against their will, then it belongs on this list. That pretty much rules out every "school" to which Ed-Conmen refer parents.

There are plenty of schools that do not belong on the list. They include public schools and most private schools that students attend to get an education, not for "emotional growth." You can recognize them by the fact that students come and go and their human and civil rights are respected.

[Anonymous]

I know PLENTLY of kids who would say anything about a school and its staff to try and get pulled or manipulate their way out of where they dont want to be. Is this taken into consideration?? How are these "lists" compiled?

The fact that you used the word "manipulate" tells me you absorbed a little too much re-programming during the course of your so-called therapy. Only you and a qualified psychologist or psychiatrist can determine if that was mostly from HLA or New Haven, or both. Either way, it seems to me like you might benefit from some therapy. If your parents have any money left, ask them if they will support some real therapy this time, not the behavior mod b.s. you have already been through.

[Anonymous]

I was programmed to throw up every time I hear the M word. Man, mani, manip

Nausea...

[Lacey]

Are you kidding me??

Manipulate is still a real word, and a real thing that kids do.

Before you jump on me thinking I'm pro-programs, I'm not. Check the HLA thread and see my posts there.

HOWEVER. When a child sits there and tells a parent to just give up on them, quit fucking with their life and let them make their own choices, and its the same child whose making the CHOICE to run away, slice up their arms and be in a relationship with an EXTREMELY physically abusive boyfriend, dont you think that MAYBE their decision making abilities should be taken away?? Until they have the self respect and a sense of worth to do the right things by their own life? You sit there and ask me if I was there against my will. Absolutely. In a heart beat I would have walked right out of those places and walked right back into the EXTREMELY dangerous situations in which I put myself.

Now, I certainly believe that if all this bullshit can be avoided and that a parent can reach their own solution by their child, then the child needs to be the one to choose to make different decisions in their own life. That is and was the only way that my life changed, when I made the simple decision that I was worth more than the fucking disaster I'd turned my life into. And that happened many years after I left these programs, and involved no kind of therapy, meds, or behavior mods or whatever you call it. But. In the years I was institutionalized, at least I can say I wasn't hurting myself like I did at home.

So where do you draw the line? When is a child hurting themselves so badly that they in turn should have their rights (the right to hurt themselves) taken away?

[Anonymous]

I would draw the line for a teen in the same place I'd draw the line for an adult. Institutionalizing someone against their will is an extreme step that should only be taken if the person is in imminent danger of seriously injuring or killing themselves or another, or if the person is in that kind of imminent danger from another person (like an abusive parent, boyfriend, etc.).

There ARE people in that situation, and maybe you were once one of those people. But such institutionallization should be carefully supervised, monitored, regulated and be of the shortest possible duration. Besides obvious concerns about abuse -- which I believe is not very common in quality treatment facilities that employ caring professionals -- the major concern is that the patient needs treatment, and treatment cannot be successful until the patient is stabilized and willing to receive help.

Institutionalization is unfortunate, but can be an effective way to stabilize someone who is at extreme risk of harm. As soon as the patient is stabilized, coercive intervention should be terminated so that real  therapy and healing can begin. For many people, I don't believe that starts until some time AFTER they leave their last 'program.' I concede the possibility that some programs may offer genuine therapy, but I think that is pretty rare and it is unlikely in a place that uses behavior mod techniques (points & levels).

[Lacey]

I would draw the line for a teen in the same place I'd draw the line for an adult. Institutionalizing someone against their will is an extreme step that should only be taken if the person is in imminent danger of seriously injuring or killing themselves or another, or if the person is in that kind of imminent danger from another person (like an abusive parent, boyfriend, etc.).

There ARE people in that situation, and maybe you were once one of those people. But such institutionallization should be carefully supervised, monitored, regulated and be of the shortest possible duration. Besides obvious concerns about abuse -- which I believe is not very common in quality treatment facilities that employ caring professionals -- the major concern is that the patient needs treatment, and treatment cannot be successful until the patient is stabilized and willing to receive help.

Institutionalization is unfortunate, but can be an effective way to stabilize someone who is at extreme risk of harm. As soon as the patient is stabilized, coercive intervention should be terminated so that real  therapy and healing can begin. For many people, I don't believe that starts until some time AFTER they leave their last 'program.' I concede the possibility that some programs may offer genuine therapy, but I think that is pretty rare and it is unlikely in a place that uses behavior mod techniques (points & levels).

I completely agree. But the people who blatently condemn schools for the fact that they are labeled as an RTC or TBS, are throwing the baby out with the bath water. What about the schools that CAN do good, and just because a few overly zealous and idealistic fruitcakes think that all children are innocent and just need a hug and some understanding and real "therapy", doesnt mean its true. Bull. Some kids need serious consequenses in their lives to understand the severity of the choices their making. And in my life, those serious consequenses were being sent away and having my rights restrained for a while until I understood the importance of my own self respect and self worth.

[Anonymous]

Shut up, cunt.

[Anonymous]

I'm glad to hear you got something out of it and are content with yourself as you are today. I seriously mean that.

I wish there were real research results and real statistics on this industry, because it's quite possible that you might be the exception rather than the rule. Despite the claims of program administrators or EdCons, there is no real data on how effective or ineffective these program are. There have been no peer-reviewed published studies that follow the progress of RTC/TBS program attendees after they leave the program.

I suspect that some young people derive benefit from some programs, just as we know that some are harmed by some programs. There is no real data on that (the harm) either, but there is some anecdotal evidence -- for example, suicides or other deaths that have occurred in programs or shortly afterward. I doubt there's much debate that a kid who committed suicide did not derive much benefit from the program!

Even the anecdotal evidence from the ST site suggests that there are some kids who go back to "undesirable behaviors" even (or especially) after a long stay at a TBS. Those kids and their parents deserve better than that.

 [/b]

[Anonymous]

Maybe the kid would have committed suicide a lot sooner without the program. Maybe the program was worth it for the chance that it might help.  Lots of cancer treatments don't save one's life, but the person still goes through the treatment.