Author Topic: Program taunts/threatens survivors (Read 3542 times)

Anonymous · « **on:** August 09, 2008, 05:09:39 PM »

If this aint the biggest pile of HORSE and BULLSHIT mixed together, what is?

From the PFC "Our Critics" page, LOL... jumpin through some hoops there are ya PFC? HUH?

*******************************

Response to Our Critics

Copyright © 2008 Pathway Family Center. All rights reserved. Privacy Statement. Back to top.
We are glad you are interested in Pathway Family Center regarding your child’s substance abuse issues. The singular goal of Pathway is to provide young people with the means to end their dependence on drugs and alcohol and transition to a productive life. We are confident that we can free your child of their substance abuse issues, as we have done for so many young people.
As you learn more about Pathway, you may come upon negative information from a small group of people. They falsely claim that Pathway engages in inappropriate and abusive treatment programs and provide other false, misleading and/or incomplete information. To our knowledge, none of these people are Pathway graduates or parents of graduates. Our attempts to have a dialogue with these people have not been successful. If you have any questions regarding our program, please ask one of our representatives. We can also place you into contact with several of our graduates and/or graduate parents.
Some have suggested that Pathway take legal action against these individuals. In this electronic age, however, it is unclear whether we could effectively prevent the dissemination of this information. We also understand that legal action can be very expensive. We prefer to dedicate our resources to the care of our patients. The following information provides additional information regarding our program and success rates.
Pathway Family Center has provided high-quality adolescent substance abuse treatment since 1993. Our program is based on the medical model of addiction as well as the 12 steps of Alcoholic's Anonymous. We use a combination of cognitive, behavioral and psychodynamic therapy, which involves to some extent the patient’s entire family. Our success is attributed to our well-rounded approach and our team of experts, consisting of Masters level therapists, psychologists, psychiatrists and medical doctors.
In 2001, Dr. John Franklin of the University of Detroit Mercy College of Education and Human Services, conducted an independent study of outcomes for Pathway patients. From a response of approximately 51 percent of all program participants, the survey found that 98 percent of those patients did not return to their prior drug severity and 82 percent remained clean and sober three years after treatment. Dr. Franklin, stated, “I have worked in the addiction field for almost 27 years and I have not seen any program with outcome percentages this high.”
The Pathway program meets the stringent accreditation requirements of the Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities (CARF) and licensing agencies in Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana. In more than 15 years of operation, there has never been a lawsuit filed against Pathway for any reason, including the alleged mistreatment of a patient.

We hope this information is helpful and encourage you to address any concerns you may have with one of our representatives. We look forward to helping your child.

psy · « **Reply #1 on:** August 09, 2008, 05:28:01 PM »

Quote from: "The Critic"

If this aint the biggest pile of HORSE and BULLSHIT mixed together, what is?

From the PFC "Our Critics" page, LOL... jumpin through some hoops there are ya PFC? HUH?

*******************************

Response to Our Critics

Copyright © 2008 Pathway Family Center. All rights reserved. Privacy Statement. Back to top.
We are glad you are interested in Pathway Family Center regarding your child’s substance abuse issues. The singular goal of Pathway is to provide young people with the means to end their dependence on drugs and alcohol and transition to a productive life. We are confident that we can free your child of their substance abuse issues, as we have done for so many young people.
As you learn more about Pathway, you may come upon negative information from a small group of people. They falsely claim that Pathway engages in inappropriate and abusive treatment programs and provide other false, misleading and/or incomplete information. To our knowledge, none of these people are Pathway graduates or parents of graduates.

Discrediting the critics, claiming they have no first hand knowledge. Similar to blaming everything on a single disgruntled person. Effective tactic.

Quote

Our attempts to have a dialogue with these people have not been successful.

If by "dialogue" they mean stealing signs, calling the cops, sending moles out, and otherwise harassing people expressing their first amendment rights to protest, i'm not entirely surprised they haven't been successful.

Quote

If you have any questions regarding our program, please ask one of our representatives.

Here they're gathering evidence of harm. Brace yourself for a lolsuit.

Quote

We can also place you into contact with several of our graduates and/or graduate parents.

Yeah. Cherry picked ones who i'm sure will sign irrelevant declarations proclaiming the wonderful benefits of the saviour program.

Quote

Some have suggested that Pathway take legal action against these individuals. In this electronic age, however, it is unclear whether we could effectively prevent the dissemination of this information.

Not friggin likely, no. But I wouldn't entirely exclude the possibility that they could try something like that if they became desperate enough.

Quote

We also understand that legal action can be very expensive.

HE he he... Maybe they've taken some advice from a certain other program. LOL. Maybe they're realizing slapp suits can backfire.

As for the rest, it's your typical bunch of program bullshit propaganda.

Anonymous · « **Reply #2 on:** August 09, 2008, 05:41:13 PM »

Well golly,they also seem to have forgotten to mention that they are :BASED ON THE STRAIGHT MODEL.

psy · « **Reply #3 on:** August 09, 2008, 05:56:40 PM »

Quote from: "Douche McGurgle"

Well golly,they also seem to have forgotten to mention that they are :BASED ON THE STRAIGHT MODEL.

You expect them to admit that? They don't like to talk about that, and given a court situation, expect them to deny it too. Expect anything. Never underestimate just how low they would go. Expect them to deny the most obvious.

Oh. But I forgot to mention: truth wins out eventually, so don't worry too much and just keep fighting.

Anonymous · « **Reply #4 on:** August 09, 2008, 08:47:50 PM »

Seems to me that by mentioning legal action that they have discussed it at some point but realized that they are simply straight never ever closed eventhough on paper it "sort- of- looks- like- it -but -when- you- piece- it -together -very- carefully- it -never- ended-at-all". Line up all the manuals, rules, people, it's the program 100% hands down. Keep in mind that at any given PFC location there are only 3 or 4 newcomers, (don't quote verbatim on that, but there was 4 at Milford 3 weeks ago) so whatever... ALL the 5 criteria are there, steps according to the program, not AA like they say, FIRST PHASE, DIME THERAPY, you name it, it's all still there. They even go as far as doing exactly what they did when it was called straight inc and opened up a shop before they were licensed.

Now, before all you programmies out there get your undies all bunched up yer cracks, lol, um, Terri Nissley did say that we could visit Indianapolis if we wanted to, but that is not where we want to visit. We want to visit the Milford location since it is considered to be a LOCKED FACILITY and the deed to the property was acquired from the straight foundation. So, in other words, we are not being difficult about it, SHE is. If there's nothing to hide, let us in now regardless of the location.

Gee, why did they recently hand paint a white line at the end of the 6070 Branch Hill Guinea Pike driveway? Why did they put up PRIVATE PROPERTY signs at each corner? LOL You know, paint aint very tall, HAHAHA. It smears, fades, and looks really tacky done by hand with a cheap spray paint can, LOL. Was that line surveyed? DOUBT IT!

Pretty soon, they will have to post a 5th phaser at the end of the driveway to act as security or something. At what point will they realize there's a DAMN good reason why people come from all over the country to protest their methods? Do they really want to take legal action? Do they want to tell the court the WHOLE truth and nothin but the truth?

"Um, yer honor, we uh, well, we abused kids for a really long time until recently, but really, you know we have been abusing them even today just not as much as before. It is what they need to get off drugs. If they don't get our help they will die, go to jail or get put into an institution. These WACKOS over there who protest our place were in a different program"

O B J E C T I O N!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

plaintiff is being IRRATIONAL, The program is the modality used by an entity while attempting to get a person to choose life without drugs. PFC never stopped treating kids with the straight inc treatment method, are working with the DFAF and the CADC's throughout the country, and they have connections with the White House, ONDCP, etc (Judge interrupts) SUSTAINED!!!!

You see, the only reason they haven't got in trouble for abuse is because the people they abuse cannot contact the outside world and the agencies that license the place don't take 3rd party complaints. The other people are emotionally extorted into believing it's saving their life and their parents are happy with them and well, it's unlikely once the wash cycle gets that far that they will come out complaining about it. At least right away.

The Critic

psy · « **Reply #5 on:** August 09, 2008, 09:29:52 PM »

Quote from: "The Critic"

Do they really want to take legal action? Do they want to tell the court the WHOLE truth and nothin but the truth?

This is not legal advise and I am not a lawyer:

Aha. Now there is where the problem is. They can pick and choose what they sue you for, and hence pick and choose what is admissable in court. For example...

Out of three statements in this photo here (abuse, fraud, and khk tortured me)... which one do you think they would sue you for if they wanted to avoid the issue of abuse or the origins of thier program? "Fraud", of course. They will claim that fraud is an accusation of criminal conduct, and defamatory on it's face as KHK has not been found guilty of fraud.

Of course if they do that, you can argue that you meant that KHK is a fraud (of a treatment centre).. i.e. KHK is a fake. An imposter! Etc. Now that, is opinion (cannot be proven false). And you can tack on, that even if you meant that they had engaged in fraud, "fraud" has been found to be opinion by various courts. (Friedman v. Boston Broadcasters Inc. 402 Mass. 376, 379-80 (1988), Orr. v. Argus-Press Co., 586 F.2d 1108 (6th Cir 1978)). You can then argue that your statements concern a matter of public interest (protects you), and that KHK is a public figure (collect their press releases and such for this) and as such, even if the statements are legally false, they must prove "actual malice", which means that you meant knew the statements were false and said them in order to injure them (almost impossible to prove). They also have to prove that the exact statement outlined in their complaint, in that instance, caused them harm. If they can't prove damages, malice, falsity, etc... any of these things, they lose... but...

What you can't do is try and bring in stuff not related to what is in their complaint (i.e. bring up "abuse" when the complaint is about "fraud"). This means that although you might have wanted to turn their complaint on their heads and bring forth evidence/testimony to support your opinion that they abuse kids, you wouldn't be able to unless they addressed it in their complaint and mentioned your allegations of "abuse" specifically. Even if they did... You'll learn the fun of the heresay rule, which basically states that anything you heard said about what happened at KHK is inadmissible (unless you use the state of mind exception, arguing that it's not for heresay purposes (to prove truth or falisity) and since it's a defamation cause of action and the plaintiff is a public figure, whether you believed the statements to be true is what matters (defense against malice), and as such falls within the state of mind exception to the heresay rule.) You would have to find people that are willing to testify as to what KHK did to them if you wanted to show truth... and KHK would have people on the defense as well who wouldn't see their treatment as abuse (since it's an opinion). All in all, it's easier to just say "abuse is an opinion" (lots of cases supporting this), raise every defense except truth, get it chucked out of court, and get back to protesting, hopefully sticking the program with your legal bills in the process (if you're in a wonderful state like California that allows that).

If you expect to prove abuse in the courts... Good luck! It's much easier, and effective, to do what you're doing and share your experiences and opinions with the press and the public.

psy · « **Reply #6 on:** August 09, 2008, 09:37:21 PM »

Quote from: "The Critic"

Why did they put up PRIVATE PROPERTY signs at each corner?

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice:

Because they might try and claim that you trespassed (complicated, but there is a legal reason why such a thing is important ("wrongful conduct")). Don't put perjury past them. ALWAYS have a camera rolling and multiple witnesses. I can't stress that enough.

They might not even call the cops over the fictional trespassing and the first allegation you hear that somebody trespassed would be in a lawsuit. They'll attempt to paint that as wrongful conduct and sue you, in combination with the "save your kid" and "pull them now" signs for intentional interference with economic relations (requires "wrongful conduct", which is not the same as illegal).

The gist of their complaint could be something like this: Crazy druggie protesters have been defaming us, encouraging parents to "pull their kids" and engaging in other wrongful conduct which has required us to call the cops multiple times (but they probably won't state what the cops did or did not do). This wrongful conduct has caused extreme stress to the staff and students here and has caused families to pull their kids resulting in financial loss. etc...

Be careful. The first parent you convince to pull their kid establishes loss. If they can get the parent to testify/submit a statement in support of their complaint as to why he/she pulled their kid (otherwise it's heresay) and that parent says it was based on your statement or from talking to you, make sure you can back up every statement that that parent heard from you on which he/she made the decision to withdrawal the kid.

That being said. Don't let any of this frighten you. Legal "consequences" ain't shit compared to the "consequences" dealt out by a program. There is due process on the outside world. Ya ain't got shit to fear if you're telling the truth or expressing your opinion. They might sue you, but a loss of such a suit would still be devastating to them.

Info in anti-slapp legislature in states across the US here:
http://casp.net/statutes/menstate.html

Anonymous · « **Reply #7 on:** August 09, 2008, 11:36:00 PM »

Ah, yes, the good ol tortamatic trick, LOL... no torts here, keep moving keep moving... neeeeext!

Would fraud be like when you claim $7500 in "Client Housing" expenses in 2005 but then in 2006 you claim $105,000 for the same category? I mean, an outpatient treatment program that has $105,000 worth of client housing expenses? Hmmmmmmmmm.... LOL I LOL'd cuz I talked to Terri about that and she was UM UM UM about it, like that Amway scam trial she lost a while back. WOOPS. Sorry, but I think that client housing claims are a bit ridiculous. Also, when you order a form 990 from PFC they refuse to oblige, eventhough the IRS rules specifically state that a non-profit org must present this form to a requestor in a timely manner. HMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Yeah, I think fraud is a safe and good term for a sign. LIARS CHEATERS, yep... those too. Oh, and let's not forget that one "alleged" THIEF they got workin for em.

Now, if all else fails in the tax department, there's that FALSE ADVERTISING that they had to correct earlier this year. Funny how short their memories are about that issue. HMMMM!

The WHACKO comment, remember? That is a potentially actionable LIBEL statement, BTW. But, whatever... time is running out on that avenue and really, it doesn't solve the problem of running a program that keeps kids on first phase for 5 damn months. That's abuse, plain and simple.

psy · « **Reply #8 on:** August 10, 2008, 12:09:05 AM »

Quote from: "The Critic"

The WHACKO comment, remember? That is a potentially actionable LIBEL statement, BTW.

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice:

Not if you can't prove it false (try... it's not easy, is it. That's why it's an opinion).

psy · « **Reply #9 on:** August 10, 2008, 12:13:13 AM »

Quote from: "The Critic"

running a program that keeps kids on first phase for 5 damn months. That's abuse, plain and simple.

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice:

And that is an evaluative opinion. (stating a conclusion along with the basis on which you arrived at it... which a reader is free to agree or disagree with)

Anonymous · « **Reply #10 on:** August 10, 2008, 02:03:47 AM »

Has anyone tried to sue pathway?

RTP2003 · « **Reply #11 on:** August 11, 2008, 10:47:02 AM »

Obviously, the protests have been effective, to some degree or another.....why else would they bother to respond with the statement they made in the "press release" (read:propaganda)? Good work, keep up the pressure.......

Bandit73 · « **Reply #12 on:** August 11, 2008, 12:46:08 PM »

So the programmies lied outright.

They claim none of the protesters were graduates or parents of graduates. That is an outright lie. I am a witness to that lie.

Anonymous · « **Reply #13 on:** August 22, 2008, 05:06:40 PM »

.

Quote from: "SDD"

Has anyone tried to sue pathway?

Has anyone recently tried to sue Pathways or Kids Helping Kids recently? How would they be brought on? Child abuse? Illegal foster homes? What has been tried? I'm trying to get as much information regarding lawsuits and these programs as I can. I am reading a lot of lets get a lawsuit posts, but I am curious how many lawsuits there have actually been. Especially with regards to KHK/PFC. Thanks for any information!!

Anonymous · « **Reply #14 on:** August 23, 2008, 11:13:46 AM »

The only lawsuits I've heard of involve PFC suing delinquent account holders. You know, like when the parent finds out the truth about this place and stops paying the bill before the contract is over. Other than that, check out the clerk's office of the courts in the counties in which PFC operates to see what cases may have occured. You should be able to do that online, or through a phone call/fax or something like that. gOod luck

Fornits
Fornits Home for Wayward Web Fora
An open discussion about the troubled parent industry