General Interest > Tacitus' Realm
Wow, obama is going to win
Anonymous:
--- Quote from: "KathyS" ---No, I suppose consultants could be unethical like any other business, parents just need to be careful or make sure their consultant is affiliated with a respectable group.
--- End quote ---
Such as? The only groups for them to be affiliated with are basically self governing. Programs pay a fee and get the stamp of approval. It doesn't mean anything. There's no follow up or continuing education requirements.
--- Quote ---For a short adjustment period of a few weeks I don’t see any problem with it.
--- End quote ---
What's the reasoning for it? Why is it ever necessary to monitor communication between a parent and child?
--- Quote --- You need to remember that most of these kids didn’t talk to their parents for weeks/months on end anyway (in any positive communicable way)! A few more isn’t going to effect the natural bond between them.
--- End quote ---
Yes, it will. They're being forced to be non-communicative. They're removed from everything they feel comfortable with and are then prevented from communicating with their parents for what therapeutic reason?
Anonymous:
--- Quote from: "KathyS" ---I have seen many studies which shows the success of these schools. They are not very scientific or clinical but the results have been favourable.
--- End quote ---
Re-read that and lemme know if you want to stick with it.
--- Quote ---I have seen the before and after of each child. There is no need to be snippity. I don’t make any statistics or figues myself!
--- End quote ---
The after for how long? It's usually taken a minimum of at least 5 years for the brainwashing to wear off before any of us began to understand what happened to us.
--- Quote --- I am looking for long term clinical studies,
--- End quote ---
So are we.
--- Quote ---I am not responding to you further until you apologize.
--- End quote ---
:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:
Anonymous:
--- Quote from: "psy" ---How does that ensure anything? The most "respectable" group of educational consultants is the IECA, and although they do have ethical guidelines, they also have no real method of enforcing them. If an educational consultant is taking kickbacks it won't matter if he promised not to do it at some point. Nobody is holding him/her to it.
--- End quote ---
IECA personnel go thru ethics training. But like any other job a person can go bad. A well respected doctor could push a medication because he gets kick backs.
--- Quote --- Again. Thats the theory and the marketing, but i've never seen or even heard of it practiced like taht. It sounds like you're being a bit evasive here. If you know of a program where this is practiced. Please list it.
--- End quote ---
I hesitate to name schools here because the focus then becomes to discredit the ones listed instead of the topic at hand, which can be easily done for any school or category.
--- Quote --- Again. You're sounding a bit evasive here. You didn't answer the question. You answered whether you have a problem with it, but not what I asked, which was whether there is anything that can justify interfering with parent child communication (what is the up-side)?
--- End quote ---
The upside would be that the child gets a break from the family dynamics which could be causing some issues with the kid. Maybe the child isn’t working too well within the family environment and needs to learn a few coping skills to deal with the communication.
--- Quote ---
*facepalm* But I asked you whether you know of a program... Oh nevermind. Do you think it's ethical for a program to accept kids without diagnoses? Based on a phone interview?
--- End quote ---
There needs to be a problem in order to work on possible solutions. If the family needs a break and wants to travel to Europe for a year, specialty schools are not a solution for off loading a child. They have regular Boarding schools for that. Noo ne could get to know a family enough over the phone. The phone interview may cause the family to seek solutions locally and then have that information forward to the school and or ed consultant. But on phone call could never be enough, in my opinion, to place a child
--- Quote --- That's good. Because studying how abusive programs have "worked" in the past (what mechanisms have helped them to work... very similar to cults) can help a person recognize current, similar trends in programs (Isaccorp has good warning signs in this regard). So far as i've seen I haven't been able to find a single program where such warning signs do not exist (which is why I asked if you knew of a "good" program).
--- End quote ---
I wouldn’t not recommend someone to a school because it contained one of 10 warning signs. I have not seen your list of warning signs but you may be miss led on how to apply them. Warning signs are meant to raise awareness. For example one of the warning signs of depression is weight loss. But because a child is losing weight does not mean they have depression, they could have a serious medical condition or just be on a silly diet due to social pressure, but it is something to keep your eye on.
I could never give a full list of schools, but a few that come to mind are:
Wil Lou Gray
The Academy
The family foundation school
Fulshear ranch academy
Most of the Aspen schools and wilderness programs
Anonymous:
--- Quote from: "KathyS" ---I hesitate to name schools here because the focus then becomes to discredit the ones listed instead of the topic at hand, which can be easily done for any school or category.
--- End quote ---
Yeah, that's usually the excuse.
--- Quote ---The upside would be that the child gets a break from the family dynamics which could be causing some issues with the kid. Maybe the child isn’t working too well within the family environment and needs to learn a few coping skills to deal with the communication.
--- End quote ---
It's fine to try and assist with family communication, but what purpose does it serve to prohibit it? What if a parent AND child BOTH requested to speak privately? Would that be honored?
--- Quote ---There needs to be a problem in order to work on possible solutions.
--- End quote ---
I know you probably didn't mean it how that sounded but wow. Yes.....in order for programs to sell themselves to gullible parents there needs to be a problem. But what if there's not really a problem? What if just a couple of over-reactive parents? Programs are well adept at creating the fear in parents that there might someday be a problem if they don't catch that defiant behavior quick!!! :o ::OMG::
--- Quote --- I could never give a full list of schools, but a few that come to mind are:
Wil Lou Gray
The Academy
The family foundation school
Fulshear ranch academy
Most of the Aspen schools and wilderness programs
--- End quote ---
You're saying these are acceptable to you? You recommend Aspen??? Honestly? This has GOT to be a joke, right?
psy:
--- Quote from: "KathyS" ---
--- Quote from: "psy" ---How does that ensure anything? The most "respectable" group of educational consultants is the IECA, and although they do have ethical guidelines, they also have no real method of enforcing them. If an educational consultant is taking kickbacks it won't matter if he promised not to do it at some point. Nobody is holding him/her to it.
--- End quote ---
IECA personnel go thru ethics training. But like any other job a person can go bad. A well respected doctor could push a medication because he gets kick backs.
--- End quote ---
Sure. But a doctor can get in trouble for such behavior. There is the possibility he could lose his license or even go to jail. There are no such consequences for educational consultants taking kickbacks (other than the possibility of civil suits). What you seem to be saying is "yes, there is no way a parent can be sure... but it's not so bad since it happens elsewhere too!". Am I right?
--- Quote ---
--- Quote --- Again. You're sounding a bit evasive here. You didn't answer the question. You answered whether you have a problem with it, but not what I asked, which was whether there is anything that can justify interfering with parent child communication (what is the up-side)?
--- End quote ---
The upside would be that the child gets a break from the family dynamics which could be causing some issues with the kid. Maybe the child isn’t working too well within the family environment and needs to learn a few coping skills to deal with the communication.
--- End quote ---
Fair enough. That's usually the answer i've heard in teh past, but the fact of the matter is: whatever possible upsides to the lack of communication, the downsides are that if there is abuse it will go unreported. During the 30 day period a "bad" program can discredit a student to the parents (telling them to expect manipulation) and threatening the kid to give only positive reports about the program(either implicitly or explicitly through punishment after the fact, or cutting off the call). The danger is what such restriction in communication allows.
--- Quote ---
--- Quote ---
*facepalm* But I asked you whether you know of a program... Oh nevermind. Do you think it's ethical for a program to accept kids without diagnoses? Based on a phone interview?
--- End quote ---
There needs to be a problem in order to work on possible solutions. If the family needs a break and wants to travel to Europe for a year, specialty schools are not a solution for off loading a child. They have regular Boarding schools for that. Noo ne could get to know a family enough over the phone. The phone interview may cause the family to seek solutions locally and then have that information forward to the school and or ed consultant. But on phone call could never be enough, in my opinion, to place a child
--- End quote ---
When you were talking to Marcy, you recommended a website she visit. That website is one of WWASP's referral websites. I know parents who have called up that very number and gotten kids accepted over the phone. It was not a soft sell at all. In fact, the parents were quite pressured to place. In addition, the "assessment" that was given was a series of questions such as:
13. Is your teen manipulative or deceitful? [which ones aren't]
14. Does your teen seem to lack motivation?
15. Do you suspect that your teen lies or is dishonest?
16. Are you concerned that your teen may be sexually active? [my GOD! the HORROR]
17. Any evidence of suicidal ideation? [interesting that the program's contract in the fine print says they do not accept kids who are suicidal]
18. Do you suspect that you have had money or valuables missing? [must have been the teen then!]
19. Does your teen's behavior concern you for their safety? [this is NORMAL, you yourself admitted it]
20. Is your teen angry or displaying anger outbursts? [with parents sending a kid to program for these reasons, who wouldn't be!]
21. Does your teen seem to lack self-esteem and self worth? [must be drugs!]
22. Do you have a lack of trust with your teen? [warning. this problem requires institutionalization!]
23. Does your teen have problems with authority? [there was a time when this was considered to be a good thing. Power corrupts. It's wise to teach this early and well. Might does not make right]
24. Does your teen engage in activities you don't approve of? [depending on the parent, this could be a very, very long list]
25. Do you think your teen is using or experimenting with drugs/alcohol? [screw proof. suspicion is enough]
26. Are you concerned about your child's well being and their future? [lol! which parents aren't!]
ALL the questions are like this, many of which are reworded/duplicate, leading, or flat out rigged. There are 30 of them. Here is the key:
18+: HIGH RISK. Get help! A Residential Center, Treatment Program or Specialty School is STRONGLY RECOMMENDED. Call me now at 1-800-250-5446.
9-17:Borderline Risk. The problems may be resolved by tightening up the family rules and structure. However, a Residential Center Treatment Program or Specialty School may need to be considered.
Do you not investigate the options you recommend?
--- Quote ---I wouldn’t not recommend someone to a school because it contained one of 10 warning signs.
--- End quote ---
Would you recommend a school that has been under investigation by the authorities with substantiated accounts of abuse (by authorities as well as independent watchdogs), with lawsuits, and with congressional testimony against it?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version