Lon's take on TROUBLED TEEN vs. STRUGGLING TEEN

[Ursus]

Essays
Posted: Feb 18, 2009


TROUBLED TEEN VS. STRUGGLING TEEN
By: Lon Woodbury

The terms Troubled Teen and Struggling Teen are frequently used interchangeably. I think that is an error because the connotations for each are different.

The term Troubled Teen is usually heard in the mental health field, most often referring to children with serious disorders and with serious problems that do not respond to normal family or society interventions. A bi-polar child or one who is severely depressed would be examples. These children seemed compelled by what in a previous age would have been called "demons." Something internal is driving the child to the extent that the child is unable to control it, and the child is unable to respond positively to external interventions like punishment, encouragement or discipline. The connotation is that the child needs treatment in order to lessen, control or eliminate these compulsions.

The term Struggling Teen has broader connotations. As we use it at Woodbury Reports, it can include a Troubled Teen with serious disorders but primarily includes teens who, for some reason or other, are floundering or failing in mainstream society and schools. These might include children floundering because of an undetected Learning Disability or Learning Difference. It might also include children that have an "entitled" mentality, or ones who internalized some criticism in the past and have lost all semblance of self confidence.

The Struggling Teen child might also appear to be "driven," but the cause is closer to being a gross misunderstanding of how the world works. The cause might not be traced to a serious diagnosis; but these Struggling Teen self-destructive behaviors, apparently throwing away their future, were of serious concern. Serious enough that residential placement was worth considering since they seem to be their own worse enemy.

I first learned of this difference when I was the Admissions Director for an Emotional Growth Boarding School in the 1980s. Many of the teens I was enrolling had been tearing their families apart and were engaging in serious self-destructive activities, thus the reasons the parents decided on residential placement. For many of these children, psychological evaluations had indicated they were more or less psychologically intact.

The most frequent manifestation was that they were emotionally immature for their age. The term often used at the time was "sixteen-years-old and going on four." That they seemed mature by demanding all the rights of an adult was misleading because they were reacting emotionally like a young child. For a child like this, treatment to a diagnosis was often ineffective, but emotional growth structure and experiences often were effective. In essence, what these children needed was to learn how to grow up.

It is important for a school, program, professional or parent to know the difference between a Troubled Teen and the broader implication of a Struggling Teen. Relying primarily on therapeutic treatment of a child whose primary trouble is a Learning or Immaturity problem is ineffective and sometimes can be harmful.

By the same token, emotional growth experiences for a Troubled Teen is ineffective and can be harmful, except when done in conjunction with professional treatment and therapy.

A good school or program will know the connotations of Troubled Teen and Struggling Teen and will act accordingly.


Copyright © 2009, Woodbury Reports, Inc.

[Anonymous]

I AM THE FLIM-FLAM MAN.

[Ursus]

The patronizing condescension in passages like the following, makes me wonder about his capacity to understand human nature outside of a CEDU framework:

The most frequent manifestation was that they were emotionally immature for their age. The term often used at the time was "sixteen-years-old and going on four." That they seemed mature by demanding all the rights of an adult was misleading because they were reacting emotionally like a young child. For a child like this, treatment to a diagnosis was often ineffective, but emotional growth structure and experiences often were effective. In essence, what these children needed was to learn how to grow up.

[Anonymous]

what a fucking doucheberry

[psy]

As we use it at Woodbury Reports, it can include a Troubled Teen with serious disorders but primarily includes teens who, for some reason or other, are floundering or failing in mainstream society and schools. These might include children floundering because of an undetected Learning Disability or Learning Difference. It might also include children that have an "entitled" mentality, or ones who internalized some criticism in the past and have lost all semblance of self confidence.

So basically he just admitted kids are in institutionalized with few if any problems other than normal teenage shit.  Wackos like Lon think programs are appropriate for just about anybody with or without a problem.

What a dick.

[Anne Bonney]

As we use it at Woodbury Reports, it can include a Troubled Teen with serious disorders but primarily includes teens who, for some reason or other, are floundering or failing in mainstream society and schools. These might include children floundering because of an undetected Learning Disability or Learning Difference. It might also include children that have an "entitled" mentality, or ones who internalized some criticism in the past and have lost all semblance of self confidence.

So basically he just admitted kids are in institutionalized with few if any problems other than normal teenage shit.  Wackos like Lon think programs are appropriate for just about anybody with or without a problem.

What a dick.

Exactly what I was thinking.  Can anything be done using this?  I mean, he's basically admitting that normal kids are being incarcerated for being normal.  I don't think they've ever been stupid enough to put it in writing before.

[Anonymous]

So what I get is if all teenagers were have to report to some agency and profess all their drinking and drug useage experiences that probably 80% of teens would be considered  canidates  of these jacked up psychologically damaging programs.   what a concept  so much for the hippie era.......i mean out of the huge number of kids who managed to dodge these programs verses  those who were captured prisoners just dont add up.  so now we have a number of  wounded soldiers wondering about  who need to heal.  but yet the industry does not recognise these former clients who they "fixed up, and made better"   they just keep looking for more naive customers.  we must keep informing the public and educate them to get all the facts, and do the reserach on these programs.    This topic is very hard to comprehend by the "joe public"  becasue it cannot be true that this is happening in modern day land of the free, USA     can anyone say the words CORPORATE  GREED??

[Anonymous]

So what I get is if all teenagers were have to report to some agency and profess all their drinking and drug useage experiences that probably 80% of teens would be considered  canidates  of these jacked up psychologically damaging programs.   what a concept  so much for the hippie era.......i mean out of the huge number of kids who managed to dodge these programs verses  those who were captured prisoners just dont add up.  so now we have a number of  wounded soldiers wondering about  who need to heal.  but yet the industry does not recognise these former clients who they "fixed up, and made better"   they just keep looking for more naive customers.  we must keep informing the public and educate them to get all the facts, and do the reserach on these programs.    This topic is very hard to comprehend by the "joe public"  becasue it cannot be true that this is happening in modern day land of the free, USA     can anyone say the words CORPORATE  GREED??

[Ursus]

As we use it at Woodbury Reports, it can include a Troubled Teen with serious disorders but primarily includes teens who, for some reason or other, are floundering or failing in mainstream society and schools. These might include children floundering because of an undetected Learning Disability or Learning Difference. It might also include children that have an "entitled" mentality, or ones who internalized some criticism in the past and have lost all semblance of self confidence.

So basically he just admitted kids are in institutionalized with few if any problems other than normal teenage shit. Wackos like Lon think programs are appropriate for just about anybody with or without a problem.

What a dick.

Exactly what I was thinking. Can anything be done using this? I mean, he's basically admitting that normal kids are being incarcerated for being normal. I don't think they've ever been stupid enough to put it in writing before.

Yup, I responded to it the same way the minute I first read it. Don't know whether it can be used, though. Is this Essay just his personal opinion, or his "professional opinion?" You'd think that being such an "experienced" Ed Con, he would understand that even his personal opinion carries a different kind of weight with parents than the average person.

[Ursus]

So what I get is if all teenagers were have to report to some agency and profess all their drinking and drug useage experiences that probably 80% of teens would be considered  canidates  of these jacked up psychologically damaging programs.   what a concept  so much for the hippie era.......i mean out of the huge number of kids who managed to dodge these programs verses  those who were captured prisoners just dont add up.  so now we have a number of  wounded soldiers wondering about  who need to heal.  but yet the industry does not recognise these former clients who they "fixed up, and made better"   they just keep looking for more naive customers.  we must keep informing the public and educate them to get all the facts, and do the reserach on these programs.    This topic is very hard to comprehend by the "joe public"  becasue it cannot be true that this is happening in modern day land of the free, USA     can anyone say the words CORPORATE  GREED??

Don't forget those kids who do not even have any drinking and drug use to speak of, but whose parents are coerced into sending their kids off to be polished into better, more up-standing, respectful, religious, etc. young adults. It is just past comprehension to the average person that this kind of thing goes on. These places truly are cults.

The end goal, from my perspective, is the creation of a "better" (more malleable) society, which fits right in with furthering the interests of...yep: corporate greed. I'm not just talking about the greed of specifically the TTI here. I'm talking about multinational corporate interests, who'd prefer a more placid herd of bovines to milk for all they're worth.

[Anonymous]

Wouldn't a "floundering" kid be better served by community based or simple outpatient counseling?  Oh, I forgot...Lon doesn't get paid for those services.  Residential for nosepicking, that's how Lon gets paid.

[Ursus]

Wouldn't a "floundering" kid be better served by community based or simple outpatient counseling?  Oh, I forgot...Lon doesn't get paid for those services.  Residential for nosepicking, that's how Lon gets paid.

True. But, I think there's a whole lot more to it than just getting paid. It's a part of Lon's unabashed infatuation with the Human Potential movement. It's part of creating "A Better Society." He, and others of his ilk, simply cannot comprehend how or why anyone wouldn't think this is good for everyone.

[AuntieEm2]

So incarceration without appeal for nuisance behavior? Got it. Amazing and appalling that he is blatantly stating it.

Also appears to be another shift in terminology designed to get around the increasingly negative associations with the "troubled teen industry."

What never changes is that no matter what the child's situation may be, the "struggling teen industry" has a snake oil that will cure it.

Auntie Em

P.S. It's also an interesting reality check to substitute the word "adult" for "teen" or "child" in an argument like this and notice how differently society regards the treatment of adults--forced committal without appeal is accepted as wrong.
Try for example:

The cause might not be traced to a serious diagnosis; but these Struggling ADULT self-destructive behaviors, apparently throwing away their future, were of serious concern. Serious enough that residential placement was worth considering since they seem to be their own worse enemy.
-snip-
Many of the ADULTS I was enrolling had been tearing their families apart and were engaging in serious self-destructive activities, thus the reasons the parents decided on residential placement. For many of these ADULTS, psychological evaluations had indicated they were more or less psychologically intact.

[Ursus]

Also appears to be another shift in terminology designed to get around the increasingly negative associations with the "troubled teen industry."

Fat chance that it's going to make any difference. He's still going to use it, since that is what parents google.

From the top of the home page, bold emphasis his: "educational consultants," "help for parents," "troubled teens."

You have found the original Internet site of trained and experienced educational consultants providing balanced news, information and professional help for parents of struggling and troubled teens find programs and schools for teens and at risk youth.
http://www.strugglingteens.com/

From the bottom of that page, in small print:

StrugglingTeens.com is published by Woodbury Reports, Inc. Our goal is to be the leading online source of information for parents of children making poor decisions, and professionals trying to help those families and professionals working with at-risk teens. The focus is on residential Emotional Growth (Character) schools and programs that work. This includes short and long term wilderness and outdoor programs, home style programs, highly structured boarding schools, therapy boarding schools, RTCs and psychiatric hospitals for children with behavior and emotional problems. All emphasize teaching self-discipline, consequences, responsibility, accountability and improved self-esteem. - Lon Woodbury

Does anyone really believe that "self-discipline, consequences, responsibility, accountability and improved self-esteem" is actually learned at these places?

I would say you tend to learn that "might is right," and to become accustomed to being shamed, punished, and harassed if you are unwilling or unable to betray the trust of your peers. I would also add that you learn to fear groups of people, and to lose trust in your own survival instincts and in doing anything of your own volition.

All this presuming that no egregious violations of trust occur, e.g., physical or sexual assault, harm experienced while forced to engage in activities beyond reasonable limits and the like.

This hardly sounds like a recipe for the "creation" of a fully functional and productive member of society.

[Anonymous]

School and camping trips isn't considered incarceration. Lon is talking about the good programs, not the chosen few held up as example by you fine folks.