Waiting On a Friendly

[TheWho]

Where does the provision of treatment by amateurs, such as the entire saff of AARC, fit into this picture?  As far as I know, AARC is located in a major metropolitan centre and purports to provide long-term treatment to chemically addicted youth and their family.  Why are amateurs like the Wiz, and his entire clinical and peer staff, providing treatment to anyone?

I think what the guest was saying is if a professional is not utilized or needed in a full time capacity and/or since they are in close proximity to many professionals then there is no reason to have them on staff.

[psy]

Bullshit~  No one has ever mentioned the words "get honest" to me in the real world, business world, or elsewhere.  That is cultspeak that I haven't heard since being blasted and spat upon in my own group.  Those who continue to speak such jargon are still under the influence (or not too far from the influence) of the greed based mind control cults that took the lives of so many and ruined the lives of so many others.

One reason I can't stand Dr. Phool.  He's a fake doctor, uses cultspeak, has his own series of LGAT seminars (based off LifeSpring) and refers to programs.  The four are most definitely interrelated as far as i'm concerned.  Too many coincidences.  Whenever I hear somebody use a phrase like that (which is not often, but unfortunately becoming more common), I always make sure to ask where they heard it from.

The other day I was watching "Dexter", second season (during which he admits to being an addict (to killing people.. lol) and goes to a rehab... but then he really gets into it and starts using language like "in my head".  GAAAH!  In the end, of course, he's still killing people (including his sponsor... lol), and the steppery didn't seem to do him all that much good other than to convince him that he was powerless over his "addiction", that it was natural, and that he should just continue killing people.  I can't figure out whether the director is supporting or making fun of stepcraft, as it's often a bit hard to tell.  One thing is for sure, though: the industry is growing, as is it's influence on society, however indirect.

[psy]

I think what the guest was saying is if a professional is not utilized or needed in a full time capacity and/or since they are in close proximity to many professionals then there is no reason to have them on staff.

I think the whole debate as to whether or not qualifications is relevant is a red herring... chaff.  Hypothetically, even if the place were staffed with qualified shrinks, if they didn't change their practices all it would do is change the place from a nonprofessional therapy cult that abuses kids to a regular plain old therapy cult that abuses kids.

The ultimate issue with me is that "treating" people against their will is inherantly not actually "treatment", rather re-education.  Professional or not, the thing with programs is that you don't progress until you confess to whatever they said you did, accept the program, praise the program, push the program on your peers, etc...  In soviet russia, you don't leave interrogation until you confess, and you won't leave prison unless you cooperate (includes snitching on others, etc...)  Treatment is a voluntary process.  What goes on in programs isn't, and as such inherently abusive as it violates a person's free will (this includes the right to make a mess out of your own life, so long as you do not infringe on the liberties of others).

If you love and care for a person you respect their human right to self determination... guiding them and getting them to respect you rather than coercing them into a course of action that ultimately you can't control and will backfire.  Pressure is met with resistance.  Instead, convince a person to change course (and respect their decision not to take your advice). It may not be easy, but it is the only way that will work in the long run.

[TheWho]

Not being specific to AARC, because I know very little about it.  I agree with the whole treating vs. re-education.  But there isn’t much choice if the kids are under age.  There are very few kids who know enough to seek out help on their own.  I have known children who are aware/mature enough to get themselves home from school and be trusted in an empty house for the afternoon at age 10.  There are other kids who couldn’t be trusted for a minute by themselves at age 18.  So each child is different.
On the other end if the parents decide not to parent their kids and refuse to get them  help when they need it they can be liable for any and all damage that child does until the child reaches 18/21 regardless of if they care about them or not.  So it is not just the parents who care about their kids who place them in programs, there is also a motivation for parents who could care less what their kids do to place them.
If a child is not attending school and is passed out in the driveway every morning when you wake up, hasn’t responded to local services then a parent needs to do something and get the child help whether the child feels he/she needs it or not.  It wouldn’t be responsible parenting to just drag the kid off the driveway and onto the lawn so you can back the car out to go to work.

[ajax13]

If you know very little about AARC, then why are you posting time and again to share your conjecture and speculation?  
As to what is responsible, is it more responsible to turn the child over to quacks?  Is it correct then, that desperate people should be able to do whatever they choose, from forcing the child to undergo an exorcism to castration?  Anything goe if you say you're desperate?  Isn't that the philsophy of a criminal?

[TheWho]

If you know very little about AARC, then why are you posting time and again to share your conjecture and speculation?  
As to what is responsible, is it more responsible to turn the child over to quacks?  Is it correct then, that desperate people should be able to do whatever they choose, from forcing the child to undergo an exorcism to castration?  Anything goe if you say you're desperate?  Isn't that the philsophy of a criminal?

The same reason you are!!  If you knew more than me you wouldnt be asking so many questions.  I am here to learn and contribute.

It is responsible to get help for your child whether your child recognizes they need help or not.  To castrate them, no.  I am sure some contries and religions do that but this is not something I agree with or would do.

[ajax13]

So castration is out, but quackery is okay?  You've avoided directly addressing my question.  You don't pose questions Who, you offer either your opinion, your speculation, or occasionally a manipulation of vague information already presented.  I live with someone whom I believe to have been harmed by AARC, whether anyone else agrees with this or not.  I also believe that her sibilings, some of whom are my friends, were also harmed by AARC.  I live in the city in which AARC operates, and I think that it's a criminal organization, regardless of what anyone else thinks, so I have made efforts to draw attention to the issues related to AARC that I believe make it a dangerous and unlawful organization.  It's my community.  So, again, what are you doing, Who?

[TheWho]

So castration is out, but quackery is okay?

Quackery is a derogatory term used to describe unscientific medical practices.  Unscientific medical practices are okay as long as they are safe.  I drink Green tea to reduce my chances of cancer but there are no scientific studies that show there is a direct correlation.  Some people throw salt over the left shoulder after they spill it... no harm done.

You've avoided directly addressing my question.

I don’t believe I have but I do know that you have,  I watched you for days avoiding answering any questions from others.  Myself included.
 

You don't pose questions Who,

Sure I do, maybe not lately.
 

you offer either your opinion, your speculation,

I do, yes
 

or occasionally a manipulation of vague information already presented.

I believe that part has been already taken by you.  You are mistaken.
 

I live with someone whom I believe to have been harmed by AARC,whether anyone else agrees with this or not. I also believe that her sibilings, some of whom are my friends, were also harmed by AARC.

You believe, but are not totally sure.  I don’t think others are either based on posts I have read here.  You shouldn’t attack someone unless you are sure of what happened and get some sort of official documentation of the incidence so that the stories are captured and do not change over time or details lost.  Maybe local sheriff office.

I live in the city in which AARC operates, and I think that it's a criminal organization, regardless of what anyone else thinks, so I have made efforts to draw attention to the issues related to AARC that I believe make it a dangerous and unlawful organization. It's my community. So, again, what are you doing, Who?

I understand standing up for your community.  But the problems usually spread beyond the town or cities boarders and many others like myself tend to get involved.  We had a similar problem here in the East.  We had a guy here a year or two ago (Lawrence Summers, you probably remember)) who basically said that men were smarter than woman in science and he was the head of Harvard University.  The phrase went something like this “the possibility that many factors outside of socialization could explain why there were more men than women in high-end science and engineering positions. He suggested one such possible reason could be men's higher variance in relevant innate abilities or innate preference....”.  He wasn’t fired but he was attacked from people like yourself as well as outside the Boston/Cambridge area.  So proximity to AARC doesn’t necessarily mean direct or indirect involvement in local issues.  If AARC is a problem then it is everyones issue.




...
]

[ajax13]

Your explanation of quackery had nothing whatsoever to do with what I said, and it's incorrect.  Quackery is a form of fraud, and as such is illegal on those grounds alone, regardless of medical malpractise laws.  But nice effort at derailing the thread.   Why would you tell me to contact the local Sheriff's office?  We don't have such a thing where I live.  The Sheriff here handles property seizures and the like.  If you weren't so massively ignorant of the subject at hand, you would know that.  Now which problem spread to you from AARC that required your involvement?   And beyond undermining the threads in this forum, since you admittedly know almost nothing about AARC, what are you doing about this problem?  
I think what the guest was saying is if a professional is not utilized or needed in a full time capacity and/or since they are in close proximity to many professionals then there is no reason to have them on staff.[/quote]I didn't attack Lawerence Summers.  Beyond that, I'm not sure what your comment "people like yourself" means.  If you were saying that they were like me because they attacked Mr. Summers, then your statement was entirely incorrect.  As is so often the case, what you post has nothing to do with the topic of the thread.

[psy]

So, again, what are you doing, Who?

He's leading you around in circles attempting to tire you out.  Even if you win an argument with him, he'll raise the same one in a page or two (knowing that most casual readers won't bother to look back).

My advice is to completely ignore him (click on his username and add him as a "foe").  If you do that, he goes away.  Or you can categorize your responses to his most common arguments into a faq and simply post a link to the appropriate answer in each of your responses (so you don't have to repeat yourself).

Look, Who.  I've talked to AARC survivors, and frankly, based on what they've told me, it's one of the worst places i've heard of.  Maybe you should do a little reserach on who you are defending before you decide (in boredom, I suppose) to give AARC some pro-bono propaganda services.

[ajax13]

Where does the provision of treatment by amateurs, such as the entire saff of AARC, fit into this picture?  As far as I know, AARC is located in a major metropolitan centre and purports to provide long-term treatment to chemically addicted youth and their family.  Why are amateurs like the Wiz, and his entire clinical and peer staff, providing treatment to anyone?

I think what the guest was saying is if a professional is not utilized or needed in a full time capacity and/or since they are in close proximity to many professionals then there is no reason to have them on staff.

Sorry, who was it that determined that professionals were not needed to render treatment in AARC?  AARC purports to offer long-term treatment to adolescents suffering from chemical dependency and their families.  That sounds like medical treatment to me.  I have yet to enter a medical facility in Calgary where treatment is left to amateurs as long as there are profesionals in close proximity.  I am sure that anyone else in this city would be hard-pressed to find another medical clinic that has no licensed professionals on staff and leaves treatment to unlicensed amateurs.  But thanks again Who for telling us what someone else is saying.  It helps me out immensely when you tell me what I'm thinking, and I can only hope that it does the same for others.  The Glen or Glenda business is intriguing.  You take a highly paternalistic attitude at times, but when you're corner and log-rolling, you resort to high feminine tactics, such as claiming to speak for a group.  You remind me of a thirteen-year-old girl with Daddy issues when you do that.  Keep it up.

[TheWho]

Sorry, who was it that determined that professionals were not needed to render treatment in AARC?  AARC purports to offer long-term treatment to adolescents suffering from chemical dependency and their families.  That sounds like medical treatment to me.  I have yet to enter a medical facility in Calgary where treatment is left to amateurs as long as there are profesionals in close proximity.  I am sure that anyone else in this city would be hard-pressed to find another medical clinic that has no licensed professionals on staff and leaves treatment to unlicensed amateurs.  But thanks again Who for telling us what someone else is saying.  It helps me out immensely when you tell me what I'm thinking, and I can only hope that it does the same for others.  The Glen or Glenda business is intriguing.  You take a highly paternalistic attitude at times, but when you're corner and log-rolling, you resort to high feminine tactics, such as claiming to speak for a group.  You remind me of a thirteen-year-old girl with Daddy issues when you do that.  Keep it up.

I am not saying they don’t need professionals on site or that amateurs should be used in their stead (you are upset because you don’t listen and misunderstand)…..  But they may not need them 24/7 and therefore not need them on staff.  If a place needs meds dispensed prior to bed time you don’t need to have a nurse on staff 24 hours (or on staff).  You could bring one in for the meds and then she could go home, the same with other professionals.  Thats all I am saying.



...

[TheWho]

Look, Who.  I've talked to AARC survivors, and frankly, based on what they've told me, it's one of the worst places i've heard of.  Maybe you should do a little reserach on who you are defending before you decide (in boredom, I suppose) to give AARC some pro-bono propaganda services.

I guess I can take your word for that, I havent done any research on them.  I am not defending AARC as a program, just the tactics used... why try to discredit (for example) a place like Hazelden, just makes everyone here look like idiots.



...

[Ursus]

Look, Who.  I've talked to AARC survivors, and frankly, based on what they've told me, it's one of the worst places i've heard of.  Maybe you should do a little reserach on who you are defending before you decide (in boredom, I suppose) to give AARC some pro-bono propaganda services.

I guess I can take your word for that, I havent done any research on them.  I am not defending AARC as a program, just the tactics used... why try to discredit (for example) a place like Hazelden, just makes everyone here look like idiots.



...

Back in the late 60s, Hazelden started sending people down to Eagleville Hospital in Pennsylvania to "learn their methodology." Eagleville Hospital, meanwhile, had learned their "methods" directly from Synanon, Daytop, and other TCs. It wasn't 'till the mid-80s that Hazelden finally admitted that there "is a better way" than their then current use of hot seats and confrontational therapy.
http://www.counselormagazine.com/content/view/608/

[TheWho]

Back in the late 60s, Hazelden started sending people down to Eagleville Hospital in Pennsylvania to "learn their methodology." Eagleville Hospital, meanwhile, had learned their "methods" directly from Synanon, Daytop, and other TCs. It wasn't 'till the mid-80s that Hazelden finally admitted that there "is a better way" than their then current use of hot seats and confrontational therapy.
http://www.counselormagazine.com/content/view/608/

Thanks Ursus,great find!!  The emotional tone of treatment has come a long way (and still has far to go for some places)

This little known story shows that change is not just difficult for the substance abuser/addict but also for the professionals who treat them:

It can be difficult to change established mental models. The Hungarian physician Ignaz Semmelweis discovered in 1847 that the deaths of mothers from childbed fever could be dramatically reduced if doctors washed their hands before delivering each baby. His discovery was adamantly rejected, however, and he was fired from his hospital position in Vienna. His subsequent studies demonstrated conclusively that handwashing could virtually eliminate these preventable deaths. He published his findings in a book in 1861, but his data clashed with medical theories of the time, and were widely rejected. Practitioners continued to deny the evidence, rather than facing the terrible truth that they had killed countless women simply by not washing their hands. In 1865, at age 47, Semmelweis was involuntarily committed to a mental asylum, where he was beaten to death two weeks later. Another generation passed before handwashing became routine when attending childbirth, and in the interim, thousands of women died needlessly.



...