Author Topic: Same old  (Read 1265 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ajax13

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1615
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Same old
« on: January 10, 2008, 02:48:22 PM »
This little anecdote was posted earlier, but I'll repeat it since it relates to the current round of anonymous AARColytes posting on this forum.  AARColytes have used a number of methods to try to discredit anyone who tries to reveal the true nature of AARC.  Frequently they point to AARC's endorsement from politicians and police officials.  In essence they're using a creepy form of intimidation: "Who's going to believe you when we have the government and the police backing us?"  Another method is a standard in-house AARC method, wherein a group hurls insults and inditements at an individual, regardless of any basis in fact, in an effort to overwhelm any dissenting thought.  Another method employed by AARC is outright lying.
Early in my Special Lady Friend's time in AARC, she was assaulted by two sisters in their host home.  One sister was an oldcomer, the other still a sib, awaiting her turn as a client like so many other sibs.
These two assaulted my Special Lady Friend, biting her on the face in the course of the attack.  In order to head off any response from SLF's family, AARC informed her mother that SLF was self-mutillating and was suicidal.  The Wiz then said that for SLF's safety, she should not see her family.  The Wiz also told SLF's mother that SLF was probably going to claim she was being hurt, but it was just a cry for attention.  In a brief encounter, SLF whispered to her mother that she indeed was being harmed.  SLF's mother informed the Wiz, and it was off to Zero Club for SLF.  The veracity of this story was confirmed later when the sib who had assaulted SLF eventually became a client.  She was to be sent with SLF as a newcomer, but was overcome with fear and refused to go.  She then acknowledged to staff that she and her sister had indeed assaulted SLF and she was terrified of retribution.  
At no time during her stay in AARC did SLF see a psychiatrist or any other mental health professional.  This in spite of the Wiz claiming that she was suicidal.
In order to cover up the physical evidence of the assault, a story was concocted by AARC wherein SLF's injuries were passed off as self-inflicted.
SLF was also sexually abused by a male oldcomer.  AARC had a shortage of female oldcomers, so not to be dissuaded, AARC sent SLF to a male oldcomer's host home.  This assault was also denied by AARC.  However, the male oldcomer admitted to the assault prior to entering phase 4.  
AARC staff take great pains to avoid police involvement in any situation occurring in the host homes, as it would draw attention to the fact that they are dangerous and unregulated.  In order to keep a lid on the disgraceful goings-on, the victims are villified and the perpetrators go unpunished.
So anonymous AARColytes, when I state that your lives are worthless, it comes from the bottom of my heart.  If a little encouragement from me helps any of you to do the honorable thing, you're welcome.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
"AARC will go on serving youth and families as long as it will be needed, if it keeps open to God for inspiration" Dr. F. Dean Vause Executive Director


MR. NELSON: Mr. Speaker, AADAC has been involved with
assistance in developing the program of the Alberta Adolescent
Recovery Centre since its inception originally as Kids of the
Canadian West."
Alberta Hansard, March 24, 1992

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Same old
« Reply #1 on: January 11, 2008, 01:40:49 AM »
Quote
AARC staff take great pains to avoid police involvement in any situation occurring in the host homes, as it would draw attention to the fact that they are dangerous and unregulated.


Not only that, what parent is going to report anything that happens in their OWN private, UNLICENSED home?

Not only would they (as the adult and homeowner) be responsible, but their client-child would suffer reprecussions, perhaps being set back, and that would extend their time (and money) invested in the program.

There is simply no way to safeguard this situation. It IS dangerous.

The whole host home/clients guarding clients scenario, because it is unregulated and unreported is bound to have serious problems.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »