Keep on Trukkin'

[Anonymous]

You're nothing but a modern day snake oil salesman's PR guy.  Newton and Vause are nothing but con men who have harmed thousands of kids over the years.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

[Anonymous]

  We have ajax13 openly diagnosing people with mental illnesses on line with no apparent credentials to speak of and at the same time telling others that their education is lacking.

I think the salient point and large difference is that, and pay attention here, Ajax is not in the position of having control over kids lives.  Ajax is not claiming to be able to *treat* anything or anyone.  Ajax is not charging thousands parents of dollars for his *expertise* and *education*.  Ajax is giving opinions and stating sources facts.  Vause is exposing countless kids to the sort of *treatment* he learned at the hands of Miller Newton.

[TheWho]

but when it comes to defining qualifications for the job we are looking at some past experience in a facility and graduate work or a teaching background of some type (or better).  I think the strength is within the past experience and graduate work.

Depends on where they got their past experience.  In this case, Vause got if from Newton and his KIDS programs.   Newton was shut down or run out of every state he tried to set up shop in for abusing kids, refusing to follow even the most fundamental regulations and in general being a complete fraud and abusive liar.  How exactly is Vause's tutelage under Newton valuable to the kids Vause is now verbally vomiting all over? 

Many people take their experiences and improve upon them.  If this guy newton was running an abusive program that doesn’t necessarily mean the people around him would duplicate that model, especially in light of its outcome.  The present program may follow more closely with regulations.  But, aside from that, reading thru this thread I don’t think this problem Ajax has is with AARC or its effectiveness.

What I think is confusing is if the program is indeed abusive or ineffective why focus on one persons degree and where he got it from?  Why try to diagnose him with a mental illnesses and poke fun at his family members.  This type of response is usually due to a personal problem, not with the effectiveness of the program or how qualified Vause may be to lead AARC.  The apparent attacks on this mans family indicates that ajax has a personal issue with Vause and is merely trying to smear the school as a way to vent his anger.

Take a second read through and I think you will see what I mean.



...

[Anonymous]

Many people take their experiences and improve upon them. 

But that's not what happened here.

If this guy newton was running an abusive program that doesn’t necessarily mean the people around him would duplicate that model, especially in light of its outcome.  The present program may follow more closely with regulations.

But it doesn't.

 

But, aside from that, reading thru this thread I don’t think this problem Ajax has is with AARC or its effectiveness.

The problem IS with AARC and its ineffectiveness.

What I think is confusing is if the program is indeed abusive or ineffective why focus on one persons degree and where he got it from?

Because, as with any cult, the devoted followers are fond of claiming all kinds of wild and untrue things about their beloved guru.  Ajax is merely pointing out the falsehoods.

Why try to diagnose him with a mental illnesses and poke fun at his family members.

Because it's fun.  There are people here who spent quite a bit of time with Vause and I'm sure there's a measure of satisfaction to finally be able to speak out and speak freely and, quite frankly, speak to him as he spoke to so many of them.  Doesn't make the content of WHAT they're saying any less valuable.

This type of response is usually due to a personal problem, not with the effectiveness of the program or how qualified Vause may be to lead AARC. 

Yes, many have a personal problem with how Vause treated his charges.  Doesn't make the content of WHAT they're saying any less valuable.

The apparent attacks on this mans family indicates that ajax has a personal issue with Vause and is merely trying to smear the school as a way to vent his anger.

Well, yes.  YOU would see it like that.

Take a second read through and I think you will see what I mean.

I don't.

[TheWho]

The problem IS with AARC and its ineffectiveness.

You are mistaken, it seems apparent that ajax13 has a personal axe to grind.  It is clear by the following statements:
ajax13 wrote:
Judge Crook-Stanhope is morbidly obese, which begs the question as to her judgement when it comes to addicitions, what with her having sent the odd child to AARC, where her husband was a  board member and the only doctor inmates could see while illegally incaracerated therein.
Physician, heal thy fat wife.....

….Vause is a sociopath…..……


If a program is ineffective or is abusive then there is no need to make fun of people or tryto diagnose them with a mental illness of some type to get this point across and we all know this.

Just to put this in perspective........ if you are talking to someone who just came out of Walmart and they are ranting and raving over how fat the cashier was or how the manager was a sociopath we all know this doesnt reflect on the quality of the products that he purchased there.
The issue is personal



...

[Anonymous]

You are mistaken, it seems apparent that ajax13 has a personal axe to grind.

If a program is ineffective or is abusive then there is no need to make fun of people or tryto diagnose them with a mental illness of some type to get this point across and we all know this.

Just to put this in perspective........ if you are talking to someone who just came out of Walmart and they are ranting and raving over how fat the cashier was or how the manager was a sociopath we all know this doesnt reflect on the quality of the products that he purchased there.
The issue is personal

Of course it is!  It's very personal to those who were abused or love someone that was abused by those sick fucks.  Doesn't make the content of WHAT they're saying any less valuable.

[Anonymous]

  We have ajax13 openly diagnosing people with mental illnesses on line with no apparent credentials to speak of and at the same time telling others that their education is lacking.

I think the salient point and large difference is that, and pay attention here, Ajax is not in the position of having control over kids lives.  Ajax is not claiming to be able to *treat* anything or anyone.  Ajax is not charging thousands parents of dollars for his *expertise* and *education*.  Ajax is giving opinions and stating sources facts.  Vause is exposing countless kids to the sort of *treatment* he learned at the hands of Miller Newton.

Bears repeating.

[TheWho]

You are mistaken, it seems apparent that ajax13 has a personal axe to grind.

If a program is ineffective or is abusive then there is no need to make fun of people or tryto diagnose them with a mental illness of some type to get this point across and we all know this.

Just to put this in perspective........ if you are talking to someone who just came out of Walmart and they are ranting and raving over how fat the cashier was or how the manager was a sociopath we all know this doesnt reflect on the quality of the products that he purchased there.
The issue is personal

Of course it is!  It's very personal to those who were abused or love someone that was abused by those sick fucks.  Doesn't make the content of WHAT they're saying any less valuable.

Thank you, there are many here that cannot distinguish the two.  If AARC was indeed the issue then their processes or model would be the focus of the attack not how much a board member weighs or trying to diagnose people with mental illnesses.

I can recall many seminars and LGAT’s that I have attended and came away disliking the instructor because of their political views or the way they treated people but it wasn’t a reflection on the effectiveness of the seminar.  The two are separate and that is the point I am trying to make.  The fact that AARC is 85% effective doesn’t have anything to do with the weight of the wife of a board member.



...

[Anonymous]

Thank you, there are many here that cannot distinguish the two.  If AARC was indeed the issue then their processes or model would be the focus of the attack not how much a board member weighs or trying to diagnose people with mental illnesses.

You mis-state and twist words again.  But we've all come to expect that from you. 

The fact that AARC is 85% effective

[Citation needed]

[TheWho]

Thank you, there are many here that cannot distinguish the two.  If AARC was indeed the issue then their processes or model would be the focus of the attack not how much a board member weighs or trying to diagnose people with mental illnesses.

You mis-state and twist words again.  But we've all come to expect that from you. 

The fact that AARC is 85% effective

[Citation needed]

http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=mupl6jk8740c2s70klsjfrum10&topic=25565.msg311401;topicseen#msg311401
Mr. Speaker, in 2005 an evaluation of the AARC program was
conducted by a noted addiction program evaluation authority, Dr. Michael Patton, PhD. He studied and interviewed 100 consecutive cases and found that 85 per cent of the graduates were still clean and sober after five years.



...

[ajax13]

Since the AARC study was done, in 2003, on one hundred sequential graduates from 1998 to 2003, it is patently false to claim that 85% were clean and sober after five years, since most had been out of AARC less than five years, and some less than one years.  Thanks again Who.  Great work.

[Anonymous]

Did they include clients who didn't complete the program?  What were all the parameters?  This study was done over a period of how many years and they only SURVEYED 100?

Something smells.

[ajax13]

As I have said repeatedly, AARC does not give verifiable figures for drop-out rates.  However, they have run at a capacity of 30 to 36 inmates since at least 1998.  Thus, in five years there should have been 150 to 180 grads.  Where are those missing AARCies?

[TheWho]

Mr. Speaker, in 2005 an evaluation of the AARC program was
conducted by a noted addiction program evaluation authority, Dr. Michael Patton, PhD. He studied and interviewed 100 consecutive cases and found that 85 per cent of the graduates were still clean and sober after five years.

[TheWho]

Thus, in five years there should have been 150 to 180 grads.  Where are those missing AARCies

Its called a sample plan.  They dont test everyone, just like they dont "crash test" every car.  A sample of a 100 is a very hefty sample if there were only 180 grads.  Thats over a 50% sampled.