Split from Court Ruling Thread

[Deborah]

Be as generous with the numbers as you would like, it will still amount to about half of the USDA requirements. Given the level of exertion and austere weather those kids were subjected to they should have been consuming 2800-3000 calories a day, minimum, and offered a variety of foods.
How many didn't eat at all because they talked without permission or got out of formation? How many didn't get to finish their measly portions because trash came by and they had to throw it away or risk further punishment?

From the Utah Regs. Not that programs comply, but this is based on USDA recommendations. Although, not sure what the USDA or any other health org would think about fresh fruit/veggies just twice a week. Utah apparently cut their programs some slack knowing how difficult it is to transport food to the outback.

(7) Each program shall have a written menu describing food supplied to the consumer which shall provide a minimum of 3000 calories per day. There must be fresh fruit and vegetables at least twice a week. Food shall never be withheld from a consumer for any reason. Food may not be withheld as a punishment. If no fire is available, other food of equal caloric value, which does not require cooking shall be available.

(a) The menu shall adjust to provide 30-100 percent increase in minimum dietary needs as energy expenditure such as exercise increases, or climate conditions such as cold weather dictate.
(a) Food shall be from a balance of the food groups.
(b) Forage items shall not be used toward the determination of caloric intake.
(c) There shall be no program fasting for more than 24 hours per expeditionary cycle.
(d) Multiple vitamin supplements shall be offered daily.

From Ga Regs for RTCs
290-2-5-.17 Food Service.
(1) An institution shall provide each child with meals and snacks of serving sizes dependent upon the age of the child based upon nutrition guidelines as established by the United States Department of Agriculture Child Care Food Program.*
(a) Meals and snacks shall be varied daily.*
(b) Additional serving of food shall be offered to children over and above the required daily minimum if not contraindicated by modified diets.*

2. Behavior management shall be limited to the least restrictive appropriate method, as described in the child's service plan pursuant to Rule [.10(b)6] and in accordance with the prohibitions as specified in these rules and regulations.*
(c) The following forms of behavior management shall not be used:*
1. Assignment of excessive or unreasonable work tasks that are not related to the resident's misbehavior;*
2. Denial of meals and hydration;*
3. Denial of sleep;*
4. Denial of shelter, clothing, or essential personal needs;*
5. Denial of essential program services;*
6. Verbal abuse, ridicule, or humiliation;*
7. Manual holds, chemical restraints, or mechanical restraints not used appropriately as emergency safety interventions;*
8. Denial of communication and visits unless restricted in accordance with Rule .10(b)7.; *
9. Corporal punishment; and*
10. Seclusion not used appropriately as an emergency safety intervention. *
~~~

The restriction diet didn't go away, it changed.

August 2006
Based on campers and staff interviews, the camp failed to provide campers with adequate quality of nutrients while participating in the intervention program.  The findings include:  
 
1.  During interview with 20 campers on August 16, 2006, 4 campers (#1,2,3,4) of  20 revealed Ridgecreek conducts Intervention which last around 3-4 days.  In addition, campers #1 and #5 stated the camp will take away parts of the MRE (meals ready to eat) as punishment.  
 
2. During an interview with the Director on August 16, 2006, the Director revealed Ridgecreek did conduct an Intervention Program for Hidden Lake Academy (HLA).  However, the Director further indicated that this program is no longer active and it was discontinued in May of 2006.  In  
addition, the Director revealed that there are no policies in place for the Intervention Program.  
 
3. During an interview with the Director, it was further revealed that the campers who were admitted to the intervention program came from HLA and did not go through the usual admission process.  In addition, when the surveyor requested to review the records of the campers that  
participated in the Intervention Program, the Director stated that no records were kept on these campers.  
 
4. During an interview with the Director on August 29, 2006 via telephone, the Director revealed the camp does not use food as punishment, but sometimes the campers may not like the MRE's and choose not eat the whole meal.  In addition, The Director revealed the camp even supplies  
vegetarian meals when requested.  
 
The surveyor was unable to conduct a record review, due to records not being kept on campers that went through the intervention . ~~

[Deborah]

HLA folks- And I am generally one of you-  just SHUT UP about the restriction diet.  It was WRONG.  It was one of the stupidist ideas that HLA ever had.  Even if you are very liberal with the calories, it does not add up to a suficient ammount.  For those of us that support HLA- we know that a lot of kids were helped and more good than bad was done, but the restrictions meals were a horribly wrong thing to put in place.  It was immoral and unethical.  I remember when HLA finally did away with it, most of us said "It's about damn time".    Just drop the argument.  Admit that there were somethings that should have been different.  You are much more credible if you are willing ackowledge some of the weaknesses, just like the HLA-haters are more credible if they can acknowledge some of the positives.  Something RB has been willing to do when you are not fighting rediculous fights with him.

Every one of you know it was wrong. Did any of you ever lay in bed at night and think, "I should call CPS?" It continued because not one of you stood up and demonstrated the 'care' you profess to have for the kids, and said "NO, this is wrong."
And we're to believe that you all have the kid's best interest at heart. The truth is, the kids are last, behind yourself and your loyalty to HLA in terms of preserving your j-o-b.
Did any of you find it difficult to gain the kids respect due to the abusive methods you had to employ?
How many kids submitted? And how many refused?

[sick of child torture girl]

HLA folks- And I am generally one of you-  just SHUT UP about the restriction diet.  It was WRONG.  It was one of the stupidist ideas that HLA ever had.  Even if you are very liberal with the calories, it does not add up to a suficient ammount.  For those of us that support HLA- we know that a lot of kids were helped and more good than bad was done, but the restrictions meals were a horribly wrong thing to put in place.  It was immoral and unethical.  I remember when HLA finally did away with it, most of us said "It's about damn time".    Just drop the argument.  Admit that there were somethings that should have been different.  You are much more credible if you are willing ackowledge some of the weaknesses, just like the HLA-haters are more credible if they can acknowledge some of the positives.  Something RB has been willing to do when you are not fighting rediculous fights with him.

You know, this isnt a game with supporters vs detracters like a football game .REAL human beings, not pucks or flags, are being kidnapped and tortured.  its not about doing more "good than harm" becasue no one has the right to EVER harm any human being AT ALL. An argument that is essentially "sure i beat one kid to death and drove another to suicide but another one is in college today!" is not acceptable.  Ultimately there are limits on what I as an individual have the right to inflict on another individual. Wether I am kidnapping jews or children for the "greater good" of society- its no about "me" and my ideas for the "greater good" its about the human I am kidnapping.And the ethical limits of what one human can do to another are violated -at the HLA at all these programs. Program supporters are of narcisitic sadists as this concept is something they dont grasp

On another note, I am just repulsed by this ongoing campain to defend child torture I mean not just phsycological torture but starvation. On another thread the who is trying to defend the murder of some kid at lone star expiditions who dropped dead at the age of 15 while being forced to march..its just insane!!!

the only good thing about this is that when SANE people come to these websites they see the inhumanity of these program supporters are as repulsed as I am, as Oz girl is, as EXasted is,as anyone who has never been in 1000 miles radius of a program but has an ounce of compassion or goodness in their bodies

Shame on you who, shh

[Anonymous]

I dont normally post on this board anymore because of the twisting of my posts to suit some of your interests ....again this has happened....I was NOT saying I agreed with this menu, I was NOT saying I believe this was the actual menu, I was NOT saying I thought one way or another on the issue of the diet, I was ONLY pointing out that Robert portrayed his original post about the daily caloric intake so it would seem they got half of what that list actually is. he stated 600-700 calories. I only pointed out that when you go to the website he posted, to do what he said, verify those numbers, they were actually closer to 1,250 calories. Thats double what he had posted. I also went to other websites and looked at what teen caloric intake is considered normal. Depending on age, activity level, the childs body weight at the time, it varied from 1,500 to 2,800. Now, given the current child obesity rate, Im not sure 2,800 calories is a good idea. But, assuming this was the diet, and Robert didnt leave anything out, it does seem to need more calories. But, my point was that Robert exaggerated the numbers to make it look worse than it was. I was NOT stating my opinion about the diet itself in that post. I have to go to work now so I cannot respond to any other posts today, but Im sure Robert will say I am "cowering in fear" by not being here to respond,  his normal reaction.

[Anonymous]

HLA folks- And I am generally one of you-  just SHUT UP about the restriction diet.  It was WRONG.  It was one of the stupidist ideas that HLA ever had.  Even if you are very liberal with the calories, it does not add up to a suficient ammount.  For those of us that support HLA- we know that a lot of kids were helped and more good than bad was done, but the restrictions meals were a horribly wrong thing to put in place.  It was immoral and unethical.  I remember when HLA finally did away with it, most of us said "It's about damn time".    Just drop the argument.  Admit that there were somethings that should have been different.  You are much more credible if you are willing ackowledge some of the weaknesses, just like the HLA-haters are more credible if they can acknowledge some of the positives.  Something RB has been willing to do when you are not fighting rediculous fights with him.

Every one of you know it was wrong. Did any of you ever lay in bed at night and think, "I should call CPS?" It continued because not one of you stood up and demonstrated the 'care' you profess to have for the kids, and said "NO, this is wrong."
And we're to believe that you all have the kid's best interest at heart. The truth is, the kids are last, behind yourself and your loyalty to HLA in terms of preserving your j-o-b.
Did any of you find it difficult to gain the kids respect due to the abusive methods you had to employ?
How many kids submitted? And how many refused?

Truer words were never spoken.

[TheWho]

Sh Wrote:

Im sure Robert will say I am "cowering in fear" by not being here to respond, his normal reaction.

Most readers and anyone who has taken even a psych elective knows this is more a reflection on himself than on anyone else.  This is a typical ploy to direct attention away from ones shortcomings.  If anyone here is in business, think about how many people speak this way, calling someone a coward because they didn’t answer a question.  Most dialog of this level is left in high school.
People on the business level may speak to “Professional courage” when referring to a colleague interacting with their peers on a specific topic, but if someone resorts to name calling most people keep quiet and allow it to continue because they know he/she won’t be promoted which makes their position stronger as they move up the ladder.  (some people even try to get others to resort to name calling in an attempt to make them look bad, Ha,Ha,Ha)
So my advice is to not draw attention to it, it actually strengthens your argument from a readers standpoint

[Anonymous]

Sh Wrote:

Im sure Robert will say I am "cowering in fear" by not being here to respond, his normal reaction.

Most readers and anyone who has taken even a psych elective knows this is more a reflection on himself than on anyone else.  This is a typical ploy to direct attention away from ones shortcomings.  If anyone here is in business, think about how many people speak this way, calling someone a coward because they didn’t answer a question.  Most dialog of this level is left in high school.
People on the business level may speak to “Professional courage” when referring to a colleague interacting with their peers on a specific topic, but if someone resorts to name calling most people keep quiet and allow it to continue because they know he/she won’t be promoted which makes their position stronger as they move up the ladder.  (some people even try to get others to resort to name calling in an attempt to make them look bad, Ha,Ha,Ha)
So my advice is to not draw attention to it, it actually strengthens your argument from a readers standpoint

Wow. Thanks for that psych lesson. Perhaps you should consider employment at HLA as a Peer Group Counselor.

[RobertBruce]

again this has happened....I was NOT saying I agreed with this menu, I was NOT saying I believe this was the actual menu,

Yes you did, here take a look.

I didnt see neglect or abuse or harassment, and I still dont feel that sandwiches, soup, fruit, juice and milk constitute neglect...they were fed and nobody starved to death or were malnourished.

http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?p= ... ruit#83239

The only difference between your menu and mine is you seem to be under the mistaken impression that we were given juice. Even with the juice though you seem to whole heartedly support the diet, your argument being because no one died, it's okay.

Here you offered more support for it, although you were still wrong on some the details.

I had never heard of a child being on restriction for months...thats ridiculous...the longest restriction I heard was a week or two. And it wasnt only cheese sandwiches. And by the way, what kid eats more than 2 boxes of cereal for breakfast? a week of cereal, fruit, sandwiches and juice and water wont kill anybody.

http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?p= ... ruit#82331


You still erronously claimed no child was ever on restriction for more than a week or two, you believed we were given two boxes of cereal when we were actually only given one (except on very very rare occasions) and you believed we were given juice. Again though you voiced your support and your argument that because no one died, it was okay.

I was ONLY pointing out that Robert portrayed his original post about the daily caloric intake so it would seem they got half of what that list actually is. he stated 600-700 calories. I only pointed out that when you go to the website he posted, to do what he said, verify those numbers, they were actually closer to 1,250 calories. Thats double what he had posted

And it's still half of what the minimum requirements are for what these kids need. As to my 600-700 claim, I in no way intended to decieve, I simply made a mistake which I corrected as soon as it was pointed out. These things do happen.

I also went to other websites and looked at what teen caloric intake is considered normal. Depending on age, activity level, the childs body weight at the time, it varied from 1,500 to 2,800.

Please provide the appropriate links then.

But, assuming this was the diet, and Robert didnt leave anything out

I didnt. You yourself acknowledged that twice, minus your mistake concerning juice of course.

it does seem to need more calories

Why the sudden change? You were fine with it before?

But, my point was that Robert exaggerated the numbers to make it look worse than it was.

Not at all, I made a simple mistake which I corrected. I had no need to exagerate anything. The accurate numbers are bad enough as it is. You on the other hand have exagerated some of your claims, pretending we were given Kellogs Rasin Bran, or juice. Seconds even. Such things were unheard of.

I was NOT stating my opinion about the diet itself in that post

No need to, you'd already made your position quite clear. You were fine with the diet, and since no kid died it was fine.

have to go to work now so I cannot respond to any other posts today, but Im sure Robert will say I am "cowering in fear" by not being here to respond, his normal reaction.

Have a good day Sanna, I love you.

[RobertBruce]

Sh Wrote:

Im sure Robert will say I am "cowering in fear" by not being here to respond, his normal reaction.

Most readers and anyone who has taken even a psych elective knows this is more a reflection on himself than on anyone else.  This is a typical ploy to direct attention away from ones shortcomings.  If anyone here is in business, think about how many people speak this way, calling someone a coward because they didn’t answer a question.  Most dialog of this level is left in high school.
People on the business level may speak to “Professional courage” when referring to a colleague interacting with their peers on a specific topic, but if someone resorts to name calling most people keep quiet and allow it to continue because they know he/she won’t be promoted which makes their position stronger as they move up the ladder.  (some people even try to get others to resort to name calling in an attempt to make them look bad, Ha,Ha,Ha)
So my advice is to not draw attention to it, it actually strengthens your argument from a readers standpoint

Ive taken more psych courses then you and I can tell you unanswered questions speaks volumes more than a little name calling.

As does having to make up claims about people in order to deflect from ones own failings and faux paus.

Really though lets keep this in the PM's. This is an important topic were dealing with here and we dont want it to get lost in the usual nonsense.

[RobertBruce]

Keeping the ball rolling our MPD friend had some other questions asked of him that he responded with a "no comment" for. Once again in an effort to inform I'll take it upon myself to answer them as best I can. Once again these are the conditions from several years ago, things may have changed but considering recent reports, I doubt it.

Do Len and Spooner have trouble paying their heating bill?

Doubtful, they are both well established money wise. That however didnt stop them from accepting the wood that came from restriction kids efforts.

Also can you detail what consisted of a typical work assingment?

General upkeep of the school grounds inside and out. On Saturdays the entire population was put to work cleaning the lodge and all the dorms. Work assingments also entailed almost all landscaping work, and any monotonus tasks that could be found. Moving rocks/rail road ties. There were also a great deal of  building projects done around the entire campus.

How about what the menu was like while on restriction?

See previous postings.

What was the menu like while on an intervention?

It vaired. What you have to remember is that interventions were reserved when we really pissed them off. They were generally sprung with any sort of notice or warning. The crime which you committed could sometimes effect your menu, as for some crimes if it was bad enough, they sent you out right away. If it was a intervention that had been planned the menu consisted of typical camping food (freeze dried foods, beans, pasta, et cet.) and water purification tablets. Each kid was also given a large bag of granola to carry as well. The problem that arises comes from as I said you had to have really pissed them off in order to be sent out on an intervention. Because they were so pissed off you werent coming back anytime soon. If it was something they caught you in, say having sex for example, you could expect to be gone for several weeks. If on the other hand they just suspected you having done something, but you hadnt, you were staying out there until you acknowledged your guilt. This presented a problem in that you had a limited amount of food going out, and they werent eager to resupply you. That's where your granola came in, once you were out of regular food that granola had better last, cause you were staying out there until you said what they wanted to hear. For kids who were sent out immediatly after being caught (again someone having sex, runaway et cet) they might end up with only the granola and the purification tablets.

Can you link to the CPS reports that show no abuse was found?

Apparently he cannot. He claims CPS came out to HLA many times and that he saw the reports each time, as of yet however he has provided no reports for us to view.

Does HLA ever hide kids away for visitors?

Quite frequently. This was generally done on days like "ed con" day, where the school would be spruced up from top to bottom and palatable food would be served in the cafeteria. The kids who were deemed..... "unfavorable" were sent away like lepers. There's been mention made of these these kids being allowed to go on fishing trips or play softball, nothing could be further from the truth. Those kids were sent to restrictions until such time as the visitors left.

 

What if the plantiffs focus on claims other than abuse?

Either way theyre screwed.

Did HLA choose to file for licensure on their own or was it forced on them?

Oh undeniably forced. They may try and embrace it now and try and reap the rewards, but they fought it tooth and nail. Swore up and down to the state for years their primary purpose was on education. Advertised quite differently but thats okay. They seem to be putting on a brave face about the whole thing but they are furious that not only did a group of "disgruntled ex students, parents and employees" get the better of them and force this on them, but now theyve got to implement all sorts of changes theyd rather not. Hold on a little longer kids, that license is coming soon!

[Function Junction]

I thought I'd take a break from my "real life" and check in.  I need to compliment most of the people posting.  It's nice to see people can disagree (pretty strongly at times), but stay away from cursing and name-calling that always shows lack of confidence and/or substantial information.

On the reports of mistreatment by staff.  I'm sorry, but after reading reports of "killer black mold", suspicions or "reports from a very good source" of Dr. Buccelatto having employees as sex slaves/involuntary partners, defaming of others who write contradictory opinions or testimonials, it's hard for me to know if the reports of mistreatment are true or how much is true.
For the record, I don't endorse any form of mistreatment.
It's really a shame that there are some respectable people possibly stating some truth, but the believability is damaged by those that can't seem to stay away from half-truths, delete posts that are more pro-HLA or challenge negative reports (this is a regular occurrence), and/or try their best to malign someone who is challenging their opinion/report.

I still have a great deal of difficulty believing any possible mistreatment was endorsed by the HLA administration in addition to the person who possibly did it.  A poster said they recalled an incident where kids were forced to "wade into the middle of the lake for the purpose of doing some exercise", and "don't recall any disciplinary action being taken against the individual for this event".  I need to interject that I appreciated the demeanor with which they stated this.  It would be hard to recall an employee disciplinary measure because it wouldn't be seen.  Disciplining an employee who is doing something against the beliefs of a company is a private matter.  Because others don't see the discipline doesn't mean it doesn't happen, and very few employees are going to come out of that kind of meeting and tell others.  I don't doubt there have been problems within HLA.  There isn't anyone or any organization that is perfect.  However, whether or not HLA crossed the line without making voluntary changes (firings, changes in protocol, etc), has yet to be fully established.

Here are some of the problems I've noticed with Fornits:
1.  Posts from pro-HLA people are deleted, modified without permission, or not posted.  Hopefully this won’t be one of them.  It’s happened to me before.  Others have said the same.

2.  Supposition is seen as fact.  There is a belief that someone can say anything negative or defamatory, and innocence needs to be proven.  The biggest issue of this involves the allegations of abuse.  For example, RB asked me to cite reports from CPS that denied finding any signs of abuse on campus.  This is not the job of someone who is casting doubt on guilt.  It is the responsibility of someone who is alleging very serious allegations.  If someone says I robbed a bank, it's not my job to prove my innocence, it's up to the other side to prove my guilt.  However, it's a good Fornits technique to try and get the other side to prove innocence, because the person accusing can simply sit back and allege anything they want.  It also leaves others believing the person is guilty if they don't find "the right" evidence.

RB, I not only address you on these posts; I also address others.  If you aren't arguing there were CPS findings of abuse on campus, I leave my response for others who have claimed abuse happening on campus.  If you are having a hard time or don't have the motivation to find positive reports of abuse from CPS, it's going to be hard to convince me abusive behavior was endorsed by HLA.  That is why I'm telling you "time is ticking".  I'm not here to dismiss the truth, just lies and distortion.  I should be one of the people you try to convince.  It's easy to preach to the choir.  So please investigate this or have someone else do this for you.  Yes, there were multiple reports made to CPS.  However, this is something that happens at nearly every center that offers psychological counseling in the nation.  The fact that CPS can receive a report of abuse 24 hours per day/365 days per year and HLA hasn't had one positive report of abuse in 13 years really casts doubt on the allegations of abuse.  To put this in perspective, there have been approximately 4,562 days and 109, 500 hours (based on 12.5 years) in which a report of abuse could have been made or found by to be true by CPS.  However, this hasn’t happened.  RB, you said you were abused.  You should at least know the outcome of a report I’m assuming you made to CPS.  If you didn’t place a report, why?  How many of the others claiming abuse on this site made a report to CPS?  A positive report of abuse would certainly sway me to believe it happened on campus.

I noticed people started arguing the calorie content of the meals for those on restrictions.  This is assuming the diet being reported is true.  Once again, things on Fornits have been so distorted in the past, it’s hard to know when something is true or not.  RB, you told me your real name was Robert Bruce.  I found out this was a lie.  You could have just told me you didn’t want this revealed.  This is what I mean.  When you lie or tell a half-truth, you destroy credibility.

3.  If don’t have anything to say or don’t like what is posted, slander or curse out the person.  There are several people who tried to challenge the negative perspectives in the past, but won’t return to Fornits simply because they don’t believe they are going to be heard.  This leaves Fornits to be predominantly dominated by people who are opposed to HLA.  The longer someone stays on this site, the more skewed and unobjective their perspective becomes.  RB said he didn’t see a student spitting in the face of their counselor a negative thing.  I think this gives perspective on why others with alternative opinions are treated so poorly without regret.

4.  Half-truths are pervasive.  For example, RB and company usually leaves out the full details.  The latest one was RB quoting a partial page (pg.15) on the latest ruling from the court.  Rather than reference the stated fact the court was denying the accusation of unjust enrichment, he focused on the word “unjust enrichment” and the number of times it was mentioned.  If I didn’t have that document, I’d be left to think it was mentioned several times because there was truth to the allegation.  Another one is to say kids were left on restriction for “months at a time”.  What is left out is the fact a kid can be placed on a 3, 4, 5, & 7-day restriction.  This means a kid received several restrictions in a row, not a counselor signed off on a restriction to last for months.

Here is what I believe:
1.  People should be heard without being slandered or cursed.  This can often become verbal or emotional abuse to some.
2.  If you are accusing someone of something very serious, it’s not up to the accused to prove their innocence.  It’s not up to someone who casts doubt on the issue of abuse to find a CPS report that doesn’t find abuse.
3.  Any mistreatment towards another person is wrong.
4.  HLA is not perfect.  There isn’t a person or organization that is.
5.  The stronger the truth is pursued, the more likely one is to find it.  This comes from my Christian faith.
6.  You shouldn’t hate or judge the inherent goodness or badness of a person, but you can judge their actions and/or character.  Once again, this comes from my Christian faith.
7.  I make mistakes (sometimes several) and will correct myself when I find it to be true.

As far as what I believe about HLA, I think I’ve stated it pretty clearly.  I’m open to considering the other side, but am waiting to hear convincing evidence that the other opinion is true from a credible person.  I’m really doubting the possibility of finding this on Fornits.  It’s really a shame.

Good night!   ::kiss::
209

[Lacey]

I posted this a couple days ago in the 4th page of the restrictions thread to address you posts, and I'll post it here again now, as I don't think you saw it in that thread.

But first, to address your question why I didn't file a lawsuit or anything against HLA, or contact CPS. Sure, CPS is open to be contacted all the time, but how were we to contact them?? The only phones in the dorms were in a locked room that staff had the key to. There was no internet, no private mail, nothing. Please explain to me how we were supposed to report HLA. And even after we left, to file a personal injury lawsuit or something... (If I'm not mistaken) the statute of limitations on that kind of lawsuit is 2 years after your 18th birthday (essentialy your 20th bday.) Most of us did not even want to THINK the name HLA and were just so relieved to be out, that we just wanted to move on. Why, once I had finally rid my life of HLA, would I voluntarily bring them back in? I just wanted to go to college, and forget it ever happened.

And I'm not sure who you want as a more RELIABLE source... I am an ex student. Was there for 23 months. Deborah is a parent of an ex student, Robert Bruce was a student.... Who else is more reliable to prove abuse, than the ones who were abused or the people closest to them in their lives? Who would you more likely believe... The people who desperately need to disprove these alligations for the sole survival of their way of life, or the people who are WILLINGLY reliving these things to try and help currently enrolled students to have a better quality of life at this school?? Because I'm pretty sure that one side of this argument has a MUCH better reason to lie. And before you pull the money from the lawsuit card as a reason for us to lie, I am not involved in the lawsuit, and will gain nothing from the outcome.

So please, FJ, where is my motivation to lie here? Why would I waste my time, when I work full time and have a new son, to come onto this site and stir up BS?

So heres my response from "Restrictions" thread...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
I simply cannot believe the ignorance of some of the people posting on this site. The blatant LIES!!! Saying we're hiding behind anonimity making bogus claims. PM me, I'll tell you exactly who I am, when I was there are every bit of TRUTH about my 23 month stay at this "wonderful, caring" TBS.

Here is the TRUTH about my stay at HLA. Function Junction, you are SORELY mistaken and your posts are dripping with lies.

We WERE made to pick up feces with our bare hands. Work gloves were never provided, nor encouraged to parents to be provided.

People were on restrictions for MONTHS at a time.

We did monotonous, pointless work assignments DAILY. Yes, we chopped wood, but in my 23 months at that school, NEVER was it delivered to "poor helpless elderly people." It was stacked in rows underneath the deck of the lodge for staff to use whenever they wanted. Never were we given gloves of any kind or safety equipment (saftey goggles or otherwise), and after 2 hours or so of chopping wood our hands were BLOODY. Another one of my favorites was moving a 15 ft high pile of wood and brush about 20 feet away and then back again just to have some physical work for us. Picking up acorns out of staff's yards was another good one. How about moving rocks from one point in the stream (in bare feet in VERY cold weather) to another point for some more restrictions fun. The list goes on, but I'm sure you get the point. (At least the sensible ones here do.)

We DID to PT in Lower Left that was filled with backed up sewage and goose feces. Not just push ups, but front-back-go's. Anyone who attended that school and did PT with Rob Hyde knows what those are. For those who dont... Front back goes are an aerobic excercise that include push ups (FRONT), flutter kicks (BACK), and high knee running (GO'S). Rob stood, walking back and forth like a drill sargent yelling out FRONT! We'd hit the ground doing push ups... BACK! We'd scramble to a laying down position, hands under our butts, legs out straight at a 45 degree angle, kicking back and forth.... GO! Jump up and run in place, knees must come to a 90 degree angle in front of the body. This went on for nearly an HOUR sometimes!! All the while in shit ridden grass! And that was just ONE excersize. How can ANYONE say this is not wrong and demoralizing!

And about graduation speeches (I know thats from another thread, but I'm just addressing all the bullshit in one post).Yeah, I'm sure to most people, our graduation speeches sounded like the tale of a wonderful and educational 2 years, filled with caring individuals and life improving activities. However... Our speeches were written months in advance. Once a week in Reals, for about the last 4-5 weeks, we would read our speeches to our counselers and Peer Group members. In that time, we were to "revise" any area of the speech that our counselor deemed to be not fitting. You think those were OUR words??? That was 2 years of brainwashed, coached BULLSHIT that we spewed out. And sure, you can say, why didn't someone just get up there at tell the truth?? Well, after every aspect of our life being controlled and moderated, and being punished ANY time we tried to tell the truth (whether through letter of phone call) why would we!? Especially when we were on the BRINK of escape! Why jeopordize our chances of graduating!!?? Do you know how many of my friends there (including myself) actually had nightmares that on the day of our graduation, something was going to come up and we weren't going to get to leave? That was our BIGGEST fear.

Thats why, after so long, after the first few months of trying to tell the truth, and trying to fight back, you just give up. The 13 hour restriction days just get too long... The PT just gets too hard. The constantly being told your a LIAR, a MANIPULATOR, that your DESTROYING YOUR FAMILY... It just gets to be too much. Getting used to the shit that goes on there and just becoming a PRODUCT of HLA is ten times easier than continuing to try and fight back.

And its not just us giving up. The parents want to believe their doing the right thing. They dont WANT to believe you. They want to believe the counselor who tell them that this is just something that every new student does through, and that we'll "adjust" to being there. We'll stop lying, stop manipulating, stop trying to get them to pull us. And by golly, we eventually do just give up.

So how DARE you people sit here and tell me, and others like me that that 2 years wasnt abusive, wasnt degrading... You didn't go through what we did.

WE ARE NOT LIARS. No matter how many times we have been told that AT hla, and even here after. I KNOW WHAT HAPPENED, I KNOW WHAT WE WENT THROUGH.

Go to any HLA Alumni group (excluding the on on HLA's site where they delete posts), and you will SEE FOR YOURSELF our opinions and memories from that time.

Function Junction, The Who, and all you other people advocating for HLA... I sure hope all your lying and deception is worth it... Because there is justice in this world, and I assure you, it will find you someday.

[Anonymous]

Note to Function Junction: Parents and/or former students did call CPS regarding abuses at HLA. Because HLA is NOT licensed by the state of Georgia, CPS cannot legally go onto HLA's property without first obtaining a warrant through their legal department. (Thank God that will change!) It's not an easy process. Most parents and/or former students were so appalled and disgusted with the state of Georgia's inability to protect children and the amount of red tape one would have to go through to get CPS into HLA that they just gave up.

Oh, and here are some lovely statistics about the fine state of Georgia with regarding to "Georgia's Children":

http://www.gov.state.ga.us/summit_fl/statistics.shtml
Statistics about Georgia's Children

    * Georgia received 101,563 reports of child abuse last year (PSDS CY04)
    * 30,951 of those were substantiated as victims of child abuse (PSDS CY04)
    * About 85% of those children were victims of severe neglect
    * About 11% were physically abused
    * About 5% were sexually abused - that is about 2411 children sexually abused in CY04

    * 15,119 children were in care as of December 2005
    * 30% of those children have been in foster care more than 24 months
    * 50% of those children were African American
    * 41% of those children were less than 6 years old
    * 67% were younger than 12
    * About 2,237 of those children were staying with relatives
    * About 8,386 were staying in foster homes
    * About 1,561 were in group homes
    * About 974 were housed in institutions
    * Approximately 8% of the children discharged will re-enter foster care within 1 year
    * Foster parents are reimbursed according to the age of the child: birth to 5, $13.75; 6-12, $15.50; 13 and above, $17.75. The rate is higher for children needing medical care or a higher level of supervision. Medical treatment and clothing costs are covered by the agency.

    * Georgia 's 200 group homes are paid for about 68% of their costs (GAHSC 2005)
    * Georgia 's 4,174 foster parents are paid for about 67% of their costs (USDA 2004)
    * Those 4,174 families save the state approximately $34 million per year

    Georgia ranks 39 out of 50 states in overall child well being (Kids Count, Family Connections).

    The long-term cost of failing to meet this need appropriately raises the stakes for system improvement. A paper published by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention in July 2001 reports that a substantial body of research shows that:

    * Maltreated children are significantly more likely than non-maltreated children to become involved in delinquent or criminal behavior.
    * The prevalence of childhood abuse or neglect among delinquent and criminal populations is substantially greater than that in the general population.
    * Delinquent youth with a history of abuse and neglect are at higher risk of continuing their delinquent behavior than delinquents without such a history.

[RobertBruce]

You seem to be making a sincere effort to carry on a legitimate conversation, so for the moment I'll do the same.

A poster said they recalled an incident where kids were forced to "wade into the middle of the lake for the purpose of doing some exercise", and "don't recall any disciplinary action being taken against the individual for this event". I need to interject that I appreciated the demeanor with which they stated this. It would be hard to recall an employee disciplinary measure because it wouldn't be seen.

Do you recall the event in question occuring? Do you recall ever hearing about it?

The biggest issue of this involves the allegations of abuse. For example, RB asked me to cite reports from CPS that denied finding any signs of abuse on campus. This is not the job of someone who is casting doubt on guilt.

Here's the problem with that, I have never made nor seen a claim made by any anti-hla poster which states "CPS came in and found all sorts of abuse going on." As I mentioned before the only time that I know of any sort of CPS type agency coming in was when DEFACS came in a few months ago, and I only know about that from Cates' letter. I have no idea what the original claim was, nor do I know what the outcome of the investigation was. Since that is the case it is you who brought up the matter to begin with, it is your claim, it is yours to back up. You claimed CPS had been in several times and never found evidence of abuse. You didnt make this claim to refute someone else, you decided to do so on your own. I'm waiting to see now if you can back up that claim. If you cannot simply let me know and we'll move on.

RB, I not only address you on these posts; I also address others. If you aren't arguing there were CPS findings of abuse on campus, I leave my response for others who have claimed abuse happening on campus. If you are having a hard time or don't have the motivation to find positive reports of abuse from CPS, it's going to be hard to convince me abusive behavior was endorsed by HLA.

Again it was your claim, not a rebuttal to anyone elses. As to other evidence clearly there is too much testimony for you to simply discount. We can't all be lying can we?

I'm not here to dismiss the truth, just lies and distortion.

Then get specific. If there's a clear example of something you believe to be a lie then let us know, we'll address it and either offer up evidence or we wont. Gneralizations amount to nothing.

I should be one of the people you try to convince. It's easy to preach to the choir

I'm not interested in trying to convince you. Youve clearly spent more time at HLA then I ever did, yet you are still somehow oblivious to the truth. Either by choice or simple naivity I do not know.

Yes, there were multiple reports made to CPS.

Then provide them, I know of none save the one.

The fact that CPS can receive a report of abuse 24 hours per day/365 days per year and HLA hasn't had one positive report of abuse in 13 years really casts doubt on the allegations of abuse

Not really, kids arent exactly given access to phones are they? Outside communication isnt unrestricted is it? There's a reason you all do this and this is it. One more reason why HLA being forced to become licensed is such a great thing. Now will kids not only be able to communicate freely with the outside world without being monitored or censored, but there will be a state rep on hand to hear such reports from kids when they actually occur.

RB, you said you were abused. You should at least know the outcome of a report I’m assuming you made to CPS.

I never made one.

If you didn’t place a report, why?

A few reasons, when I got out I was so relived to finally be away from that God awful place I didnt want to have to even think about what went on there. No different then most rape victims not reporting their attacks. They just dont want to have to think about it. The other big reason was alot of time had passed since some of the incidents, some over a year prior. How would I have proven a physical abuse claim from a year prior? Again this is why HLA doesnt allow kids access to phones. That way they cant report things when they occur. This is also the same reason so many kids arent sent out on interventions right after getting into fist fights with staff.

How many of the others claiming abuse on this site made a report to CPS?

Youll have to ask them.

A positive report of abuse would certainly sway me to believe it happened on campus.

Why would it? Youve seen it with your own eyes for years yet you never believed it before. Why would a piece of paper suddenly change your mind?

I noticed people started arguing the calorie content of the meals for those on restrictions. This is assuming the diet being reported is true. Once again, things on Fornits have been so distorted in the past, it’s hard to know when something is true or not.

You already know its true, you were there. If that wasnt enough though youve got Susie Gray corroborating the diet, and another pro HLA staff member saying it was abusive. Really no way around that one.

RB, you told me your real name was Robert Bruce. I found out this was a lie.

No, I told you my real name was Robert. It is, despite whatever misinformation your coworkers have given you.

3. If don’t have anything to say or don’t like what is posted, slander or curse out the person. There are several people who tried to challenge the negative perspectives in the past, but won’t return to Fornits simply because they don’t believe they are going to be heard. This leaves Fornits to be predominantly dominated by people who are opposed to HLA. The longer someone stays on this site, the more skewed and unobjective their perspective becomes. RB said he didn’t see a student spitting in the face of their counselor a negative thing. I think this gives perspective on why others with alternative opinions are treated so poorly without regret.

As opposed to how welcoming the HLA board is to dissenting opinions? And no I didnt view that particular counselor being spit at as a negative, I personally punched him in the face and laughed when he teared up. He deserved it. Also perhaps you should take a closer look at that link I gave you before. Those are all your coworkers, and possibly you on occasion, attacking us trying to manipulate, being abusive. Cant forget about the antics of ol Bullfrog either. Please dont lay down the "holier than thou" card. It just doesnt play.

4. Half-truths are pervasive. For example, RB and company usually leaves out the full details. The latest one was RB quoting a partial page (pg.15) on the latest ruling from the court. Rather than reference the stated fact the court was denying the accusation of unjust enrichment, he focused on the word “unjust enrichment” and the number of times it was mentioned. If I didn’t have that document, I’d be left to think it was mentioned several times because there was truth to the allegation.

Youre mistaken, I left nothing out, nor did I mention how many times something was stated. That was all you.

Another one is to say kids were left on restriction for “months at a time”. What is left out is the fact a kid can be placed on a 3, 4, 5, & 7-day restriction. This means a kid received several restrictions in a row, not a counselor signed off on a restriction to last for months.

What difference does it make whether or not the kid was on multiple back to back restrictions or one long one? The fact remains the same he was on restriction for months at a time. Everything else is just splitting hairs. Not to mention the fact that kids were left on restriction a great deal longer than 7 days for a single infraction. If the kid in question refused to acknowledge guilt of the crime he would be left on there until he did. So now who's telling half truths?

5. The stronger the truth is pursued, the more likely one is to find it. This comes from my Christian faith.
6. You shouldn’t hate or judge the inherent goodness or badness of a person, but you can judge their actions and/or character. Once again, this comes from my Christian faith.

I do not believe a person can dismiss the truth about HLA and turn a blind eye toward it yet call themselves Christian. Sorry its just my opinion.

[Troll Control]

As a former HLA staff member (counseling staff) I can say with certainty that the "restrictions diet" did indeed exist and was comprised of the items listed by RB.  Several other staff members (including Chris Allen, who was pretty high on the food chain) have stated it outright on this board and concur with RB's assessment that it was comprised of what he enumerated and that it was WRONG and UNETHICAL.  Your claims, FJ, don't pass the smell test, as this issue has been admitted many times before by several staffers and even Suzanne Gray, a nearly blind HLA supporter, who again verified that there was a "restrictions diet" that she saw administered to children first hand.  Sorry, FJ, but your claims don't jive with reality.

I personally have seen incidents of staff-on-child abuse on several occasions and reported it up the chain where it was propmtly buried and I was told I didn't "understand the program and how it works."  

I have made several reports to ORS and CPS and finally, after several YEARS of dogged persistence those claims, and those of others, those reports were properly investigated at HLA (came in with a warrant) and at Ridge Creek (normal ORS investigation) and the result is that HLA was found to be acting outside the law and is now forced into being licensed and Ridge Creek was cited for thirty some odd violations INCLUDING taking HLA "restrictions kids" without paperwork and providing them with INADEQUATE NUTRITION, amongst other neglectful/abusive/illegal acts.

So, FJ, huff and puff all you want, but ORS' violations sheet from RC is as long as your arm and documented fact.  HLA was found to be providing services ILLEGALLY and will now have to be licensed as a result.  And here you are wanting readers to believe this happened in a VACUUM.  You're a dissembler and a prevaricator - that's not namecalling, it's an objective, professional assessment of your nonsense and lies.  The preponderance of evidence contraindicates the whimsical nonsense you are posting here - it's fact and it's public record

Go peddle that garbage elsewhere.  

How does lying and manipulating to protect known child abusers square with being a "Christian," I wonder?  I suppose it's just dandy with you in your materialist quest to earn money from childrens' suffering, but you also will be judged in this life and the next.  Good luck with that.  Bring an asbestos suit!  You're going to need it...