Lone Star Expeditions

[TheWho]

Oz Girl wrote:

…….. What i said was that some kids probably do exaggerate symptoms because they are desperately miserable. The focus of the on the ground staff who are often young and clueless on catching kids out or seeing how far they can push them as opposed to helping them. So the miserable deteriorate and the ill dont get help………….

I think what you pointed out is key and points to a training issue.  If they could get more mature and better trained personnel I think it would go a long way in preventing incidences like Ian’s.

perhaps if the wilderness industry took only kids who volunteered, was non profit and employed professionals who did not view emotional pain or substance abuse as moral failure the wilderness side of this industry would do some good. Afterall some troubled kids do want help. But i cant think of any sane person who wants to be uncomforable, exhausted and isolated from any comforts in a bid to "get better"

This would be nice, but I fear very expensive.  If it could be subsidized by the state and get medical insurance buy-in to help offset some of the costs it may work.  It would be great to see a pilot program along this line.

[Deborah]

Who wrote:

I am sure many changes have taken place to their process fairly quickly once they determined the root cause of Ians death, whether it was attributed to the heat, stopping of medication, lack of training, preexisting condition or a combination of all of them.

Ian endured enough disrespect while he was living, don't further disrepect him by minimizing what happened to him at Skyline Journey. Did you not bother to read the article, or are you intentionally misleading the readers? The root cause of Ian's death is known, no one stopped his meds- you've confused his case with Matthew's, 'lack of training' wasn't an issue- just 'bad' training, and there was no preexisiting condition except that he was grossly obese. She was hiking him in temps that exceeded the state maximum and Ian had no water.

Here's the changes that occured.
Hale walked, in exchange for her testimony against SJ- which amounted to a carefully choreographed defense of SJ and herself.
Skyline Journey's license was ultimately revoked.
They opened a wilderness program for young adults called Distant Drums.
When the heat subsided they started taking teens again.
Utah lowered the maximum temperature to 90*.
Ian, Matthew, Michelle, Aaron, Gina, and others have been guinea pigs for this industry. An industry in which philosphy over-rides common sense.

Kids have been dying from exposure to the elements, illegal restraints, medical neglect, preventable accidents, and the "faker excuse" in programs since the industry's inception. They're still dying from those things. What has changed?

Damned ironic that this industry imposes such harsh 'consequences' on the kids, claiming it's the only way to teach/change them, but experience none themselves. At best a slap on the hand, a little negative media, the minor inconvenience of moving and changing their name.

[TheWho]

Deborah wrote:

Ian endured enough disrespect while he was living, don't further disrepect him

I have not disrespected any of the children.  Deborah, of all people to say this!!  You go out of your way to post these young peoples names on the internet who are innocent and are only trying to help kids who are disadvantaged, at-risk and are working for low pay to gain experience.  If you read back, you have disrespected more people here than anyone.  You ridicule their backgrounds, the education they receive, post their photos.  How  would you like someone to post your kids picture on the internet and poke fun at his education and the career he has choosen?
You have very little respect for anyone, Deborah.

[Oz girl]

I think what you pointed out is key and points to a training issue.  If they could get more mature and better trained personnel I think it would go a long way in preventing incidences like Ian’s.

The staff are deliberately trained to think this way. Because the whole point is "healing" through pain and hardship. Look at the kind of shit they were actually willing to broadcast on brat camp. A kid had an athsma attack and was also beside herself with homesickness and qweeping copiously for her mother. This was not helping the asthma. Because the attack was not bad enough for her to be hospitalised as she claimed the staff gloated about how they were right all along and she was a liar. Because they were busy radioing base camp to prove that it was untrue that she normally was rushed to hospital as she claimed, it did not occur to any of them to comfort her which even though this is one of the first things you are supposed to do to calm and stabilize the person having the attack.
http://www.nationalasthma.org.au/html/e ... /index.asp
 
i wonder if the cameras would have kept rolling if her lips began to go blue? if she had collapsed? Perhaps if she had stopped breathing all together?
How could anyone want this for their kid? If this is what makes it to camera it is little wonder that some kids actually do die. The thing that would be laughable if it was not tragic is that everytime this happens the response is always both cruel and idiotic.

 Firstly there is this sense of oops we should prolly look at tightening the rule as if it were some kind of annoying bank error.
 Second there is a defense of the incompotence. He was a difficult kid... most of our kids fake..... or the latest less mean spirited -well he was a really fun guy so we thought he was just doing for shits and giggles.....
never once is the overall ridiculous philosophy of hardship and deprivation challenged. Never do they get to thinking about the  inherent dangers of sending uncooperative kids into the wilderness to have nature provide penalty for misdeeds. Never is the morality of making kids cry on a regular basis considered.

 There is also no financial sense in getting beter trained on the ground staff because no well educated graduate from an appropriate field is going to work for such shitty wages! Any company's no 1 responsibility is to the shareholders. If salaries go up then so does the already astronomical price. As it is the market is relatively limited even with all of the loans they have.
As i read this i realise how cold it sounds. But these kids are a commodity to aspen and its imatators. I just dont understand how you cant see this. Particularly if you work in marketing.

[Troll Control]

geez, this guy is a fucking idiot with no moral compass.  it's a shame you ever reproduced, who.  your kid is now stuck with a lifetime of an uncaring, disconnected weirdo of a father.  as you were told before by someone with common sense:  SHAME ON YOU, WHO!  you are a shameful individual that promotes businesses that harm children for profit.  you are the lowest form of human being that exists.  at least deborah sticks up for the KIDS, and that's what matters.  fuck the staff if they can't take it.  it's their fault and their employers' fault for hiring unqualified, uneducated hacks, not deborah's for POINTING IT OUT.

[Deborah]

perhaps if the wilderness industry took only kids who volunteered, was non profit and employed professionals who did not view emotional pain or substance abuse as moral failure the wilderness side of this industry would do some good. Afterall some troubled kids do want help. But i cant think of any sane person who wants to be uncomforable, exhausted and isolated from any comforts in a bid to "get better"

Who wrote:

This would be nice, but I fear very expensive.  If it could be subsidized by the state and get medical insurance buy-in to help offset some of the costs it may work.  It would be great to see a pilot program along this line.

Sh0uld the kids suffer because it's cost prohibitive to do it 'better'?
Our tax dollars sh0uld not subsidize programs that are not evidence-based, if they sh0uld subsidize any programs. Insurance already pays for programs, as does federal/local tax dollars via school districts, and low interest 'education' loans. That's enough 'subsidy' for an industry that hasn't even proven efficacy.

[Oz girl]

Actually I was thinking more of short term, usually run by charity outward bound type programs. there are a few of them here. i dont want to sing their praises because I have never observed them closely enough to be sure that they are kosher but i do have an open mind toward them at this stage. The jury is still out on their actual effectiveness but both of them are being studied for outcomes
 here is what i do know about the 2 i have looked at extensively

-They usually go for about a week or 2. Sometimes there are a few weekends devoted to practicing bush skills before embarking
-the kids always go voluntarily and are usually economically disadvantged or having minor criminal issues. If a kid has a drug issue he may be unable to go if the drug taking hs been severe enough to make him physically unfit for trekking. This is reviewed once the kid has a better hold on the habit.
-The idea is team work and achivement and the exercises are specifically geared around this.
-the "therapy" is in achieving actual goals. there is no sitting around telling the group what you did wrong or impact letters or any of that humiliating shit.
-The philosophy is not one of tough love. in the case of the 2 where i have spoken to the staff they both sounded like they thought i was crazy when I asked about whether kids unable to make a fire have to eat cold etc.

http://www.operationflinders.org/index.php
www.jss.org.au/media/docs/EvaluationWTP.doc

[TheWho]

geez, this guy is a fucking idiot with no moral compass. it's a shame you ever reproduced, who. your kid is now stuck with a lifetime of an uncaring, disconnected weirdo of a father. as you were told before by someone with common sense: SHAME ON YOU, WHO! you are a shameful individual that promotes businesses that harm children for profit. you are the lowest form of human being that exists. at least deborah sticks up for the KIDS, and that's what matters. fuck the staff if they can't take it. it's their fault and their employers' fault for hiring unqualified, uneducated hacks, not deborah's for POINTING IT OUT.

This is exactly the mentality I am talking about.  No one can see past their own hatred.  What you are dong is abusive and wrong.

If your child always wanted to design cars and had a passion for it and worked his butt off to become an engineer at Ford Motor Company and there are a group of people that feel the cars should have twice as many air bags than they presently do,  preventing countless deaths we could ridicule your son and paste pictures of him all over the internet for being part of such a corrupt industry?  Point at his hobbies of model building and laugh.  Would this be right?  Could we say “screw the staff they can take it, its their fault and their employers for hiring them”

We could all justify abusing your son because he chose to be part of a corrupt industry that when it turned out he didn’t quit his job right away and continues to be part of the industry we could harass him with emails and phones calls….

[Oz girl]

This is exactly the mentality I am talking about.  No one can see past their own hatred.  What you are dong is abusive and wrong.

If your child always wanted to design cars and had a passion for it and worked his butt off to become an engineer at Ford Motor Company and there are a group of people that feel the cars should have twice as many air bags than they presently do,  preventing countless deaths we could ridicule your son and paste pictures of him all over the internet for being part of such a corrupt industry?  Point at his hobbies of model building and laugh.  Would this be right?  Could we say “screw the staff they can take it, its their fault and their employers for hiring them”

We could all justify abusing your son because he chose to be part of a corrupt industry that when it turned out he didn’t quit his job right away and continues to be part of the industry we could harass him with emails and phones calls….

 :roll: Who are you kidding. these people advertise on the net their name, face and distinct lack of qualification. If there is a discussion of the unethical practices of the company they work for and they advertise as being a part of this then they will be a part of the criticism.

lets use another analogy
If your son had always wanted to jail and bully those smaller and weaker than he and worked his butt off by passionately being a sports fan and getting a passing grade in yr 12 (or failing that a GED ::roflmao:: ) just so that he could work for an organisation which Americas favourite TV asshole recommended and you felt that such an industry was inherently corrupt and his lack of education illustrated its corruption would it be ok to point this out on a forum?

We could all justify questioning both the wider industry and your sons role in it? We could all wonder why his online CV talked about his love of sport but NOT his SPECIFIC QUALIFICATION?

[TheWho]

Oz Girl wrote:

Who are you kidding. these people advertise on the net their name, face and distinct lack of qualification. If there is a discussion of the unethical practices of the company they work for and they advertise as being a part of this then they will be a part of the criticism.

Not to post their pictures and names, you are wrong, Oz Girl.

Do you really believe when people ask what they do they respond “I work for a corrupt organization with unethical practices”?  These are your views not theirs.  You are part of a group that disagrees with their industry, they see it as helping kids.  When the school ask if they can post their names and pictures with a brief description on their web page they say sure.  But it isn’t right to take their photos and post them on forums and ridicule what they do.
When you hand your credit card to a waitress there is an implied trust.  Sure she could give your Credit number to the buss boy if he asks for it, she wouldn’t be stealing right?  But it is unethical.

If you asked these people if you could use their photo that would be a different story.

[RobertBruce]

They put it on a public website, they wanted the whole world to know they work for this place. They chose to be associated with the good and the bad that comes with it.

If it were a situation were we paparazi like pictures of these people then I could understand, but they did this to themselves.

[Troll Control]

The Who said:

"We could all justify abusing your son..."

You have.  And you continue to do so several times a day, every day.  Nice.  You're a reall winner, Who.

[TheWho]

They put it on a public website, they wanted the whole world to know they work for this place. They chose to be associated with the good and the bad that comes with it.

If it were a situation were we paparazi like pictures of these people then I could understand, but they did this to themselves.

So in the example above.  You wouldnt mind your child being treated like this, if they worked for Ford?

[Troll Control]

What the hell does Ford have to do with children being abused and neglected, day in and day out, in Aspen Education Group  programs?  Kids are dying left and right in just this one AEG program and all you can say is "What about the Ford example?"  

You are one detached, deluded, self-involved asshole.  You will justify or try to explain away anything, even if it means disrespecting the dead and their grieving families.  

You really n3ed to take a look at yourself and get some help, you sanctimonious son of a bitch..

[RobertBruce]

If Ford was actually knowingly building unsafe cars and passing them off as being safe, then no I wouldnt have a problem with it at all. In fact I'd probably question why he chose to work for such an irrespondsible company in the first place.