Fighting our own congress.... George Miller sell out...

[Anonymous]

Why is it that every time someone has a different opinion and dares to challenge a parent it's called infighting?

This board is being read by plenty of people who need as much insight into these complex issues as possible.

I say let it all hang out.  People can make up their own minds but at least give them something to think about instead of the same ole' propaganda and whitewashing.

Do not excuse the absence of "survivors" as being understandable or at least "helpful" to the fucking cause.

Get your heads out of your ass and demand an explanation from Congressman Miller or tell him to change the name of his bill.

[Anonymous]

The End Institutionalized Abuse Against Parents Act 2008

Now, do you see how fucking ridiculous that is?  

This is about institutionalized CHILD ABUSE.

Show me any parent who was institutionalized in a children's program, and maybe I will change my thinking.

[ZenAgent]

My wife and I aren't typical "program parents" - we didn't place our girl in PV, her biological father did.  My wife had to watch her daughter being restrained in a gang pile-up, then was forbidden any contact with her daughter for having the presence of mind to use her camera during the restraint.  On top of that, the staff went to work on my step daughter, saying her mother asked for her to be restrained.  Luckily, she wouldn't believe that.  PV issued a list of conditions for my wife to follow if contact was to resume, one of them being to say nothing negative about the program, anywhere.  Even after agreeing to the terms, my wife was denied participation because the treatment team "couldn't be sure" she would actually follow the rules.  That is a fine example of program logic.

So, parents are victims of programs, too, as well as grandparents who are definitely left out of the loop.  Everyone involved is victimized, more so for offering resistance or questioning the program.

[TheWho]

George Miller is focusing mainly on the military style boot camps and proposing that they get further regulation.  None of this will make much of a difference to TBS or wilderness programs in the long run.  This bill/Regulation does nothing more than create a new bureaucratic arm of the government, funding for individual states to hire some close supporters' family members who cant get a job in the private sector because of their lack of education or drive, so they put them to work inspecting boarding schools, looking at their record keeping process, number of fire escapes, staff to student ratio,nurses office has its license on the door and is current,  number of chairs in the cafeteria and adequate heating system etc.  Then the director of admissions is typically tapped on the shoulder to take this guy out to the nicest restaurant in town and review their findings, make a cash donation to the guys favorite charity and wait for their license to be renewed for another year.

The problem with regulation is its all paperwork and bs (reviewing regulations) no one will talk to a kid ever!!  What do the kids know? how would you document that?  They are not old enough to sign anything or attest.  Who wants to talk to a bunch of kids bitching about how shitty the food is….would you ever get a positive response?

The only way I see to curb abuse is:
Instead of regulation take the same amount of money and they should hire child advocates who enter a school and audit 10 children at random and talk to the kids (no one else), answer some standard questions and then monitor the responses compared to state averages.  If abuse is suspected then they go back in and pull 25 children and compare it to state responses and so on.  If abuse is found then the child advocate waits for authorities (DSS, police) to show up and the advocate goes home (no interfacing with school officials).

[Anonymous]

I don't think anyone is saying survivors aren't important enough to speak for themselves-- but would you rather having survivors speaking for themselves and simply getting attacked as a bunch of druggies and the legislation going nowhere because no one wants to be seen as "pro-drug" or would you rather have a strategic campaign that lays the groundwork and frames the issue carefully first so that survivors can be heard in a sympathetic, rather than  program-defined light?

"Nothing about us without us" is a wonderful slogan, but it's not always the best way to win in politics.

of course, some people would rather go down idealistically standing on principle and avoiding any dirty political realities and to heck with effectively making change... while others prefer to be pragmatic. it's a constant battle within any movement and well worth thinking about...

what i just hope people avoid is allowing it to divide and conquer...

[Anonymous]

Newton is focusing mainly on the military style boot camps and proposing that they get further regulation.  

Newton?  A little confused, or a Freudian slip?  What are the connections here...Miller....Newton....and you're from Newton....

[TheWho]

Newton is focusing mainly on the military style boot camps and proposing that they get further regulation.  

Newton?  A little confused, or a Freudian slip?  What are the connections here...Miller....Newton....and you're from Newton....

Thanks, not sure, I was eating a fig newton but maybe subconsciously wanted a cold Miller or is that the other way around?

[psy]

Newton is focusing mainly on the military style boot camps and proposing that they get further regulation.  None of this will make much of a difference to TBS or wilderness programs in the long run.  This bill/Regulation does nothing more than create a new bureaucratic arm of the government

No.  That's exactly what it doesn't do.  Read the bill.  All it does it throw money at the problem, trusting in the states.  Arguably, it means more waste in the local government and that's about it.  There is still no federal level investigation / enforcement.  The bill relies on the states to carry this out.  Existing corruption should already show that's a bad idea.  If there was a government agency dedicated to looking over these facilities it might be a little more effective (not that the whole concept of these places isn't still hopelessly misguided, ethically wrong, and destined to failure).

But for once I agree with you.  This legislation is crap.
[/quote]funding for individual states to hire some close supporters' family members who cant get a job in the private sector because of their lack of education or drive, so they put them to work inspecting boarding schools, looking at their record keeping process, number of fire escapes, staff to student ratio,nurses office has its license on the door and is current,  number of chairs in the cafeteria and adequate heating system etc.  Then the director of admissions is typically tapped on the shoulder to take this guy out to the nicest restaurant in town and review their findings, make a cash donation to the guys favorite charity and wait for their license to be renewed for another year.[/quote]
My GOD... You're admitting it functions that way.  What hath the WHO WROUGHT TODAY. MY GOD I think it's an instance of the who telling the brutal, honest truth about the industry...
[/quote]The problem with regulation is its all paperwork and bs (reviewing regulations) no one will talk to a kid ever!!  What do the kids know? how would you document that?  They are not old enough to sign anything or attest.  Who wants to talk to a bunch of kids bitching about how shitty the food is….would you ever get a positive response?[/quote]
And then it's comments like that put you bump you up higher on my shit list, not to mention make me want to tear your head off and ram it up your ass.

Oddly enough, you seem to be asking an interesting question "would you ever get a positive response?"  You ask that as if it's rhetorical and you're expecting the answer to be "no" in almost, if not all cases.  In essence, you're admitting that it is highly unlikely that any of the incarcerated kids think what's happening to them is a good thing, and those who do have a certain eerie religious fervor about their devotion to the school (or eyes that quickly dart in the staff's direction on "difficult" questions).  Ever notice how enthusiastic so many "sucess stories" / testimonials are.

The only way I see to curb abuse is:
Instead of regulation take the same amount of money and they should hire child advocates who enter a school and audit 10 children at random and talk to the kids (no one else), answer some standard questions and then monitor the responses compared to state averages.  If abuse is suspected then they go back in and pull 25 children and compare it to state responses and so on.  If abuse is found then the child advocate waits for authorities (DSS, police) to show up and the advocate goes home (no interfacing with school officials).

[Anonymous]

I don't think anyone is saying survivors aren't important enough to speak for themselves-- but would you rather having survivors speaking for themselves and simply getting attacked as a bunch of druggies and the legislation going nowhere because no one wants to be seen as "pro-drug" or would you rather have a strategic campaign that lays the groundwork and frames the issue carefully first so that survivors can be heard in a sympathetic, rather than  program-defined light?

"Nothing about us without us" is a wonderful slogan, but it's not always the best way to win in politics.

of course, some people would rather go down idealistically standing on principle and avoiding any dirty political realities and to heck with effectively making change... while others prefer to be pragmatic. it's a constant battle within any movement and well worth thinking about...

what i just hope people avoid is allowing it to divide and conquer...

Enough of the bullshit whitewashing (damage control) anon - the fact is that survivors should not have been purposely EXCLUDED to serve the interests of a group of people who think they are somehow more politically savvy than survivors of institutionalized child abuse.

You should be ashamed of yourself of trying to peddle this crap but then again, I would imagine there is great concern that this secret little plan just might backfire.

Tell me something.  Who better to speak about institutionalized child abuse than the children who survived the experience?

Where is the harm in giving equal time to the children who were in these programs?

I am writing to Congressman Miller and telling him in no uncertain terms that as a result of this travesty, he has lost my personal respect and my confidence in my own government.  I don't expect a reply but will exercise my right to an opinion.

I am also writing to the mainstream media (CNN, FOX, MSNBC, NY TIMES, LA TIMES, etc.

I hope others do the same.

Let the media see the dirty truth that suvivors were purposely not invited to testify.  Let them ask the question WHY.  

And let Congressman Miller think about what kind of message he is sending to the TRUE VICTIMS of institutionalized child abuse.

 :flame:

[TheWho]

Newton is focusing mainly on the military style boot camps and proposing that they get further regulation.  None of this will make much of a difference to TBS or wilderness programs in the long run.  This bill/Regulation does nothing more than create a new bureaucratic arm of the government

No.  That's exactly what it doesn't do.  Read the bill.  All it does it throw money at the problem, trusting in the states.  Arguably, it means more waste in the local government and that's about it.  There is still no federal level investigation / enforcement.  The bill relies on the states to carry this out.  Existing corruption should already show that's a bad idea.  If there was a government agency dedicated to looking over these facilities it might be a little more effective (not that the whole concept of these places isn't still hopelessly misguided, ethically wrong, and destined to failure).

But for once I agree with you.  This legislation is crap.

funding for individual states to hire some close supporters' family members who cant get a job in the private sector because of their lack of education or drive, so they put them to work inspecting boarding schools, looking at their record keeping process, number of fire escapes, staff to student ratio,nurses office has its license on the door and is current,  number of chairs in the cafeteria and adequate heating system etc.  Then the director of admissions is typically tapped on the shoulder to take this guy out to the nicest restaurant in town and review their findings, make a cash donation to the guys favorite charity and wait for their license to be renewed for another year.

My GOD... You're admitting it functions that way.  What hath the WHO WROUGHT TODAY. MY GOD I think it's an instance of the who telling the brutal, honest truth about the industry...

The problem with regulation is its all paperwork and bs (reviewing regulations) no one will talk to a kid ever!!  What do the kids know? how would you document that?  They are not old enough to sign anything or attest.  Who wants to talk to a bunch of kids bitching about how shitty the food is….would you ever get a positive response?

And then it's comments like that put you bump you up higher on my shit list, not to mention make me want to tear your head off and ram it up your ass.

Oddly enough, you seem to be asking an interesting question "would you ever get a positive response?"  You ask that as if it's rhetorical and you're expecting the answer to be "no" in almost, if not all cases.  In essence, you're admitting that it is highly unlikely that any of the incarcerated kids think what's happening to them is a good thing, and those who do have a certain eerie religious fervor about their devotion to the school (or eyes that quickly dart in the staff's direction on "difficult" questions).  Ever notice how enthusiastic so many "sucess stories" / testimonials are.

The only way I see to curb abuse is:
Instead of regulation take the same amount of money and they should hire child advocates who enter a school and audit 10 children at random and talk to the kids (no one else), answer some standard questions and then monitor the responses compared to state averages.  If abuse is suspected then they go back in and pull 25 children and compare it to state responses and so on.  If abuse is found then the child advocate waits for authorities (DSS, police) to show up and the advocate goes home (no interfacing with school officials).

You missed the point and the sarcasm...... George Miller doesnt want a bunch of kids complaining and bitching on the 10th....regulation isnt going to do crap to change anything because the regulators wont be talking to the kids either if the bill is passed regulation is ineffective.............. you need independent agencies to go in and speak to the kids themselves...

and yes the kids will bitch about everything from the food to the clothes they are wearing, talk to any high school teacher or kid in high school and ask how they like the food or their classes, homework assignments, dress codes...most of them would rather be someplace else, that is why you need to compare the responses to national averages and listen for signs of abuse.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone else see what is happening here?  The excuse for not including survivors to testify is because they can't be trusted to further the special interests of those who are testifying?

My God.

This is truly unbelievable.

Forget writing to Miller - I am calling his staff and every single member on the committee.

Here's a handy list I found on Google.

http://www.frac.org/pdf/110thHouse_EdLabor.pdf

Anybody else up for the task?

We can NOT let this go without at least registering an opinion.  I am sure these committee members have fax numbers and voice mail boxes.

How dare these people use survivors to further their agenda then not support their right to testify?  I can not wait to see who (besides the parents) will be testifying.  The parents I can at least understand, if they lost children, though I still wouldn't say they are any more important than survivors.  Parents and Survivors would have been the better option.

[Anonymous]

Another twisted irony is that these parents of the children who died have to live with the fact that their child would not have the right to testify to their maltreatment had they survived it.

How's that for the ultimate hypocrisy?

Somebody please tell me this isn't happening.  4 decades of being silenced, then when there is a hearing - what happens?  The door slams in our faces.

[Nihilanthic]

The urge to pack my bags is immense.

The only thing that would be of any use it seems is to warn people about it, tell parents that are willing to listen if their kids are already there, and help everyone GTFO.

Including myself.

We'll see how this plays out... but Im really expecting to spend the 10th playing Episode 2 and Portal, not seeing anything worth seeing on C-Span.

[Pitbull Mom]

I see a lot of rumors about who is and who isn't going to testify. I don't think it's been officially announced that NO survivors are going to testify. Wait and see, don't make up your mind before it even happens. Maybe the survivors who are going to testify are keeping it quiet. Just because I wasn't asked to testify doesn't mean other parents who have had a child die aren't going to. In the meantime, do SOMETHING to have your voice heard.  Looking at the big picture, other than raising awareness, the hearing isn't really going to accomplish all that much. No action is going to be taken directly as a result of the hearing.  The propsed bill isn't going to accomplish a lot either, even it it gets passed, which takes a long time. Regulation isn't going to do much but legitimize the industry. My son died in a fully LICENSED and ACCREDITED facility that had not had complaints of abuse. If the hearing and media coverage just expose abuse and neglect to the general public and mainstream media, then you have a start at real action.  I posted this on another GAO thread, but it bears repeating here, the hearing isn't the only way to be heard, I'm even providing the contact links for you:

Contact the media. Tell them about the hearing in DC. Tell them about the special interest groups. Here is a link to FOX News Affiliates around the country. I am pitching a story to Fox News in Salt Lake City about my son's death, and how the neglect resulting in his death relates to the hearing on Wednesday. Contact your local affiliate and ask them if they are covering the story about the hearing and the abuse in the industry. Give them some statistics. Give them information they can verify independently. Cite well written articles that have previously appeared in the news. it gives more credibility to your story.
http://http://www.fox.com/links/affiliates.htm

Contact CNN  http://http://www.cnn.com/feedback   they have many options for news tips
Contact CSPAN  http://http://www.c-span.org/about/contact.asp?code=About
Contact the Washington Business Journal
 http://http://www.bizjournals.com/washington/contactus/contact_editor.html
Contact the Washington Post http://http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email
Contact your local paper and ask them if they are covering the hearing. Find someone who has previously covered a related story.

Read Deb's post, she has a great idea, at http://http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?t=23447&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30

Make phone calls, write emails, send faxes, get the committe members' names off the website here http://http://edlabor.house.gov/about/members.shtml
Do what Deborah suggests, rent a hotel room or conference room and invite the media. They'll show up. Blow up photos to poster size.  I realize all of this is a lot of work, but bitching and moaning isn't going to accomplish anything unless you have the appropriate forum. If you're not doing SOMETHING, shame on you.

[Joyce Harris]

I decided to ask the GAO investigator if she knows survivors are being excluded from the hearing:  Attached is my email to the investigator.

 

TO: ......... Senior Special Agent
         Government Accountability Office  

 

From:  Joyce Harris

Hello .............,

I gave you my family’s statement regarding our experience at Whitmore Academy in Nephi, Utah – and our experience with Sue Scheff, and her company PURE for the investigation your agency is conducting.

There has been a lot of posting; and discussion on the internet; especially on the discussion forum FORNITS:  about the upcoming hearing that may be taking place on October 10, 2007.

The major  discussion revolves around “THE EXCLUSION OF SURVIVORS OF THESE ABUSIVE FACILITIES FROM THIS HEARING.â€