Author Topic: Dean-o's Nose Grows Again  (Read 3683 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TheWho

  • Posts: 7256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Dean-o's Nose Grows Again
« Reply #15 on: June 10, 2009, 11:49:08 AM »
Quote from: "Guest"
It's well established that Union's entrance standards and program requirements are far less rigorous than an institution such as the University of Calgry.  The question posed in this thread, still unanswered, is why AARC and Vause lied about Vause choosing Union because it had a specialization in addiction studies, when in fact Vause's PhD is in Educational Psychology.  It is in fact quite easy to find fault with someone who has repeatedly lied about being a psychologist, when he is in fact not.  It is also quite easy to find fault with someone who has used his academic qualification that is of, to say the least, questionable merit, to legitimize his continued unlawful and unscientific behaviour modification experiment.  So the questions remain: why did Vause choose to get a paper from Union when he was not producing new knowledge or research, but rather was writing an explanation for a program that already existed?  Why did he feel that an explanation for his choice of Union was necessary?  Why did he lie about choosing Union for a program he did not enter?  Only Dean Vause knows these answers with certainty.

Exactly, only Vause would know why he made the choices he did.  Many people set out in one direction and end up changing course due to a variety of reasons.  If he is practicing without a license then this can be nipped in the bud very quickly.  Chances are you have gotten hold of some bad information.  As far has his PhD, if it was accepted by an accredited institution then it would have met all the requirements needed as far as research otherwise all PhD's would be in question as to weather they broke new ground or not.
Interesting discussion but I dont see any laws that have been broken or ethical boundaries.  I am interested in looking into the Union institute a little more though.
Thanks
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Dean-o's Nose Grows Again
« Reply #16 on: June 11, 2009, 01:09:11 AM »
It's well established that Union's entrance standards and program requirements are far less rigorous than an institution such as the University of Calgry. The question posed in this thread, still unanswered, is why AARC and Vause lied about Vause choosing Union because it had a specialization in addiction studies, when in fact Vause's PhD is in Educational Psychology. It is in fact quite easy to find fault with someone who has repeatedly lied about being a psychologist, when he is in fact not. It is also quite easy to find fault with someone who has used his academic qualification that is of, to say the least, questionable merit, to legitimize his continued unlawful and unscientific behaviour modification experiment. So the questions remain: why did Vause choose to get a paper from Union when he was not producing new knowledge or research, but rather was writing an explanation for a program that already existed? Why did he feel that an explanation for his choice of Union was necessary? Why did he lie about choosing Union for a program he did not enter? Only Dean Vause knows these answers with certainty.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline TheWho

  • Posts: 7256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Dean-o's Nose Grows Again
« Reply #17 on: June 11, 2009, 10:56:08 AM »
Quote
It's well established that Union's entrance standards and program requirements are far less rigorous than an institution such as the University of Calgry. The question posed in this thread, still unanswered, is why AARC and Vause lied about Vause choosing Union because it had a specialization in addiction studies, when in fact Vause's PhD is in Educational Psychology.
I am not sure who you are expecting to answer these questions.  They should be asked to Vause, the rest of us, yourself included, can only speculate.  It seems a bit silly to worry about why someone chooses one school over another or why they switched majors.  Not sure if you ever spent any time on campus but if you had you would see that many people don’t end up majoring in what they initially started with.  Look at the number of people that choose a particular school because it is strong for becoming a lawyer and they end up taking premed courses.

Quote
It is in fact quite easy to find fault with someone who has repeatedly lied about being a psychologist, when he is in fact not.
Do you have a link to that?  I haven’t seen that.

Quote
It is also quite easy to find fault with someone who has used his academic qualification that is of, to say the least, questionable merit, to legitimize his continued unlawful and unscientific behaviour modification experiment.
It is easy to find fault with anyone.  Pick someone at random and you can find fault with them.  Why would a someone who lives in Connecticut chose to go to Harvard when Yale is only a 5 minute drive?  Can we speculate that they are trying to get out of the city because they did something wrong?  We could.  If he changes his mind and becomes a Doctor instead of a lawyer should we warn everyone that he is a liar?

Quote
So the questions remain: why did Vause choose to get a paper from Union when he was not producing new knowledge or research, but rather was writing an explanation for a program that already existed?
Well, he did produce a dissertation and it was accepted by an accredited University.  So you are in error there.
Quote
Why did he feel that an explanation for his choice of Union was necessary?
Maybe someone had asked
Quote
Why did he lie about choosing Union for a program he did not enter? Only Dean Vause knows these answers with certainty.
Exactly only the person himself can answer.  People change course and majors all the time, ask anyone who spent time on campus.
Just out of curiosity why are you questioning every aspect of this person?  How has his degree from Union benefitted him vs a degree from another institute?  I am not sure I see a connection or why it would matter.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Dean-o's Nose Grows Again
« Reply #18 on: June 11, 2009, 01:16:35 PM »
It's well established that Union's entrance standards and program requirements are far less rigorous than an institution such as the University of Calgry. The question posed in this thread, still unanswered, is why AARC and Vause lied about Vause choosing Union because it had a specialization in addiction studies, when in fact Vause's PhD is in Educational Psychology. It is in fact quite easy to find fault with someone who has repeatedly lied about being a psychologist, when he is in fact not. It is also quite easy to find fault with someone who has used his academic qualification that is of, to say the least, questionable merit, to legitimize his continued unlawful and unscientific behaviour modification experiment. So the questions remain: why did Vause choose to get a paper from Union when he was not producing new knowledge or research, but rather was writing an explanation for a program that already existed? Why did he feel that an explanation for his choice of Union was necessary? Why did he lie about choosing Union for a program he did not enter? Only Dean Vause knows these answers with certainty.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline TheWho

  • Posts: 7256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Dean-o's Nose Grows Again
« Reply #19 on: June 11, 2009, 04:03:35 PM »
I would give up the discussion, guest, Ajax cant defend himself so he will only repeat posts.  I tried myself, just let him be.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Dean-o's Nose Grows Again
« Reply #20 on: June 11, 2009, 07:02:55 PM »
It's well established that Union's entrance standards and program requirements are far less rigorous than an institution such as the University of Calgry. The question posed in this thread, still unanswered, is why AARC and Vause lied about Vause choosing Union because it had a specialization in addiction studies, when in fact Vause's PhD is in Educational Psychology. It is in fact quite easy to find fault with someone who has repeatedly lied about being a psychologist, when he is in fact not. It is also quite easy to find fault with someone who has used his academic qualification that is of, to say the least, questionable merit, to legitimize his continued unlawful and unscientific behaviour modification experiment. So the questions remain: why did Vause choose to get a paper from Union when he was not producing new knowledge or research, but rather was writing an explanation for a program that already existed? Why did he feel that an explanation for his choice of Union was necessary? Why did he lie about choosing Union for a program he did not enter? Only Dean Vause knows these answers with certainty.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline TheWho

  • Posts: 7256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Dean-o's Nose Grows Again
« Reply #21 on: June 11, 2009, 08:42:33 PM »
Quote from: "Guest"
I would give up the discussion, guest, Ajax cant defend himself so he will only repeat posts.  I tried myself, just let him be.

I do mostly reading here but thought I would jump in.  Looking back at all the posts, the open discussions are important and as you read the important stuff rises to the surface...................... the more discussion the more truth that comes out.  The rest sort of falls to the wayside.

If you step back and look at all the posts regarding AARC you don’t see posts about kids being abused, running off or raped.  You don’t see posts from people who paid alot of money and claimed they were not helped.  People here post about one person fondling their junk, or another who thinks the owners wife is overweight.  There is another guy,Ajax I think, who has it out for one of the employees named Vause who decided to attain a PhD while still working at AARC and is criticized for trying to better himself because he chose a school in the US instead of Canada.

Its more high school type of rhetoric which lacks any substance, so what if the owner switch majors in mid stream.  Bill Gates switched majors and then never even finished college as he promised his parents but he is not known worldwide as a liar.  Microsoft is judged by its product not its directors.  If the product stinks it doesn’t matter if the president finished college or not people just are not going to buy it.  The same with AARC if the owner wants to get a degree in art at a local college of his choice who cares.  The bottom line is that the kids are doing fine and getting the help they need.  

If you read posts about CCM or other programs they talk about specific abuses and people being brought in in handcuffs.  But this just isnt the case with AARC.  They dont seem to have the problems other programs do, atleast they are not discussed here on fornits.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Dean-o's Nose Grows Again
« Reply #22 on: June 11, 2009, 11:49:12 PM »
Hello, I am a former AARC client. I was very happy to see the CBC’s realistic portrayal of AARC to the public. I feel that I was brainwashed there and that my parents were conned into the program.

I was admitted into AARC after my assessment determined that I had level 2 alcohol and drug use and level ¾ behaviour. From what I understand you are only considered by AARC to have drug and alcohol abuse problems at level 3.

I was defiantly in a teenage rebellion. My family was falling apart and my parents would split permanently while I was in AARC, but I was not an alcoholic.

Upon entry I was told that if I didn’t strip down and get in the shower in front of two strange women with two men standing guard outside that they would do it for me. The women watched me do this.

I tried to run away from a host home family and was beat up by the old comers in their trying to subdue me. I had two black eyes from it. I was also tackled to the pavement outside of the home by two men who worked at AARC. I was not allowed to wear shoes at any time after this, even when walking to the host family car in the rain or when mopping the floors in AARC which resulted in my feet being dry and cracked from the chemical cleaner. My shoe wearing "privilege" was returned to me only after I "admitted" that I was an alcoholic, which I was not although I became convinced I was and continued in AA for a few years after AARC.

During the time I was not allowed to wear shoes I was also not allowed to participate in card games or watch tv with the other clients, or use the exercise gym.

Once I “admitted” that I was an alcoholic life in AARC got way easier, I was everyone’s friend, allowed shoes, the gym and to participate in games.

I did not suffer from any sexual abuse as an AARC client although I have heard stories of old comer girls making their newcomers bath with them.

I felt intimidated by Dean Vause. At times he would get right in the face of clients and yell at them. This defiantly happened to me after I tried to run away. I could feel his hot breath on my face. When I tried to tell my parents I wanted to go home on the first supervised visit that I had with them after I had been in the institution for three weeks or a month I was physically removed from them by two men who worked at AARC.

I was forced to analyse everything, always have an issue about myself, and always look at the negative. I was taught that the only way to get better, or advance in the program was to feel guilt and shame. These are patterns that still affect my life today.

AARC admits children that are not alcoholics and puts them under the direct and sole supervision of other children that have been in the program a few months. AARC promotes aggressive confrontation, which is also carried out unsupervised by the old comers. There was no one who worked at AARC during my time there who had any education or training in the fields of psychology, drug addiction, behavioural problems, or any kind of therapy, aside from Dean Vause and I’m unsure of the extent of his accreditations.

While you are in AARC you are allowed no outside contact.

I knew one girl who tried to hang herself in a host home and was taken to the hospital. While in the hospital she got in contact with a social worker. I think the social worker pushed to know what was happening in AARC because the girl was allowed contact with her. This is the only time I remember a “new comer” being allowed outside contact. She was released from AARC a few weeks later. Maybe there was too much heat?

I also know of one girl who had very limited drug and alcohol use on intake. She was only 12. She lied about her using to fit in and only “got honest” way later in treatment. I guess this caused alot of confusion. She ended up being kept in there a very long time, something like 2 years and 8 months, I’m not sure exactly though.

I was also involved in “girls Raps” run by a man in a room with a one way mirror. Girls raps made all sexual relationships shameful. They would call girls sluts and hoers.

The CBC show has finally validated what I feel. Thank you. I'm grateful to the former clients who exposed themselves to the public on your show to create change.

I never felt care from Dean Vause. I don't think that he should be in a position of care or charge of children. I don't feel that the program works. It may create change in behaviour in the same way that electro-shocking would but it does not fix what problems are there and in many ways I feel that it creates deeper long term problems.

I’m sure I'm counted as part of the 80% success rate because I am not dead, in jail or insane, as Dean Vause says are the only other options then his treatment program. In fact my life is pretty good aside from struggling with the negative patterns taught to me at AARC. This is because I never should have been there. I was misdiagnosed as an alcoholic / addict by untrained teenagers and young adults, and I have suffered due to it.

This place should not exist.I'm Sure I'm one of the 80% Sucess rate and I don't want to be!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Dean-o's Nose Grows Again
« Reply #23 on: June 12, 2009, 12:52:13 AM »
Quote
From what I understand the union institute is accredited. Something to look at is what is Vause doing differently since he received his degree? Has he changed the program or stepped into a new role that would require him to be licensed? If the answer is no then I dont see any harm in the attained knowledge.

The harm is that Vause didn't get a PhD. in Horticulture, or something else completely unrelated to "grow" as a person or for personal knowledge. He submitted "his" thesis, and has been using that AND his mill-PhD to make him LOOK credible and qualified to be doing what he's doing.

Everyone thinks he's a doctor specializing in addiction. Or at least a psychologist... or a psychiatrist.

He's NONE of those things, but no one discourages people from believing it!

MOST people get a degree first and THEN follow it. Vause based his thesis on a program that was already in operation in Calgary!

Vause worked at KIDS with Miller Newton
Miller Newton got his PhD from Union
Vause got HIS PhD from Union

Coincidence? Are ya nuts?

 :nods:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Dean-o's Nose Grows Again
« Reply #24 on: June 12, 2009, 10:32:24 AM »
Quote from: "Guest"
Hello, I am a former AARC client. I was very happy to see the CBC’s realistic portrayal of AARC to the public. I feel that I was brainwashed there and that my parents were conned into the program.

I was admitted into AARC after my assessment determined that I had level 2 alcohol and drug use and level ¾ behaviour. From what I understand you are only considered by AARC to have drug and alcohol abuse problems at level 3.

I was defiantly in a teenage rebellion. My family was falling apart and my parents would split permanently while I was in AARC, but I was not an alcoholic.

Upon entry I was told that if I didn’t strip down and get in the shower in front of two strange women with two men standing guard outside that they would do it for me. The women watched me do this.

I tried to run away from a host home family and was beat up by the old comers in their trying to subdue me. I had two black eyes from it. I was also tackled to the pavement outside of the home by two men who worked at AARC. I was not allowed to wear shoes at any time after this, even when walking to the host family car in the rain or when mopping the floors in AARC which resulted in my feet being dry and cracked from the chemical cleaner. My shoe wearing "privilege" was returned to me only after I "admitted" that I was an alcoholic, which I was not although I became convinced I was and continued in AA for a few years after AARC.

During the time I was not allowed to wear shoes I was also not allowed to participate in card games or watch tv with the other clients, or use the exercise gym.

Once I “admitted” that I was an alcoholic life in AARC got way easier, I was everyone’s friend, allowed shoes, the gym and to participate in games.

I did not suffer from any sexual abuse as an AARC client although I have heard stories of old comer girls making their newcomers bath with them.

I felt intimidated by Dean Vause. At times he would get right in the face of clients and yell at them. This defiantly happened to me after I tried to run away. I could feel his hot breath on my face. When I tried to tell my parents I wanted to go home on the first supervised visit that I had with them after I had been in the institution for three weeks or a month I was physically removed from them by two men who worked at AARC.

I was forced to analyse everything, always have an issue about myself, and always look at the negative. I was taught that the only way to get better, or advance in the program was to feel guilt and shame. These are patterns that still affect my life today.

AARC admits children that are not alcoholics and puts them under the direct and sole supervision of other children that have been in the program a few months. AARC promotes aggressive confrontation, which is also carried out unsupervised by the old comers. There was no one who worked at AARC during my time there who had any education or training in the fields of psychology, drug addiction, behavioural problems, or any kind of therapy, aside from Dean Vause and I’m unsure of the extent of his accreditations.

While you are in AARC you are allowed no outside contact.

I knew one girl who tried to hang herself in a host home and was taken to the hospital. While in the hospital she got in contact with a social worker. I think the social worker pushed to know what was happening in AARC because the girl was allowed contact with her. This is the only time I remember a “new comer” being allowed outside contact. She was released from AARC a few weeks later. Maybe there was too much heat?

I also know of one girl who had very limited drug and alcohol use on intake. She was only 12. She lied about her using to fit in and only “got honest” way later in treatment. I guess this caused alot of confusion. She ended up being kept in there a very long time, something like 2 years and 8 months, I’m not sure exactly though.

I was also involved in “girls Raps” run by a man in a room with a one way mirror. Girls raps made all sexual relationships shameful. They would call girls sluts and hoers.

The CBC show has finally validated what I feel. Thank you. I'm grateful to the former clients who exposed themselves to the public on your show to create change.

I never felt care from Dean Vause. I don't think that he should be in a position of care or charge of children. I don't feel that the program works. It may create change in behaviour in the same way that electro-shocking would but it does not fix what problems are there and in many ways I feel that it creates deeper long term problems.

I’m sure I'm counted as part of the 80% success rate because I am not dead, in jail or insane, as Dean Vause says are the only other options then his treatment program. In fact my life is pretty good aside from struggling with the negative patterns taught to me at AARC. This is because I never should have been there. I was misdiagnosed as an alcoholic / addict by untrained teenagers and young adults, and I have suffered due to it.

This place should not exist.I'm Sure I'm one of the 80% Sucess rate and I don't want to be!


This could have been written by someone who was in Straight or KIDS.  More evidence that AARC is lying when they say that they are unlike Straight, Inc.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Dean-o's Nose Grows Again
« Reply #25 on: June 12, 2009, 10:36:24 AM »
Quote from: "'nother guest"
Quote
From what I understand the union institute is accredited. Something to look at is what is Vause doing differently since he received his degree? Has he changed the program or stepped into a new role that would require him to be licensed? If the answer is no then I dont see any harm in the attained knowledge.

The harm is that Vause didn't get a PhD. in Horticulture, or something else completely unrelated to "grow" as a person or for personal knowledge. He submitted "his" thesis, and has been using that AND his mill-PhD to make him LOOK credible and qualified to be doing what he's doing.

Everyone thinks he's a doctor specializing in addiction. Or at least a psychologist... or a psychiatrist.

He's NONE of those things, but no one discourages people from believing it!

MOST people get a degree first and THEN follow it. Vause based his thesis on a program that was already in operation in Calgary!

Vause worked at KIDS with Miller Newton
Miller Newton got his PhD from Union
Vause got HIS PhD from Union

Coincidence? Are ya nuts?

 :nods:


Like his mentor, Miller Newton, Vause does nothing to discourage the belief that he is qualified to treat addiction.  Like his mentor, Miller Newton, his qualifications are mythical.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline TheWho

  • Posts: 7256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Dean-o's Nose Grows Again
« Reply #26 on: June 12, 2009, 01:53:25 PM »
Quote from: "'nother guest"
Quote
From what I understand the union institute is accredited. Something to look at is what is Vause doing differently since he received his degree? Has he changed the program or stepped into a new role that would require him to be licensed? If the answer is no then I dont see any harm in the attained knowledge.

The harm is that Vause didn't get a PhD. in Horticulture, or something else completely unrelated to "grow" as a person or for personal knowledge. He submitted "his" thesis, and has been using that AND his mill-PhD to make him LOOK credible and qualified to be doing what he's doing.

Everyone thinks he's a doctor specializing in addiction. Or at least a psychologist... or a psychiatrist.

He's NONE of those things, but no one discourages people from believing it!

MOST people get a degree first and THEN follow it. Vause based his thesis on a program that was already in operation in Calgary!

Vause worked at KIDS with Miller Newton
Miller Newton got his PhD from Union
Vause got HIS PhD from Union

Coincidence? Are ya nuts?

 :nods:

Its hard to believe what you are saying here because of your inconsistencies.  first of all the man"is" a doctor specializing in addiction because that is what AARC does, whether he got a degree in art or life sciences you need to look at what he is currently doing.  Secondly he didnt get a PhD from a paper mill as you stated.  He recieved it from an accredited university.
BilL Gates never went to school for business and Never received an MBA or PhD yet he is running a business....or was.   An education gives a person a solid platform on which to grow from.  It doesnt neccessarily define the direction a person is going to proceed for their careers nor does it define success.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Dean-o's Nose Grows Again
« Reply #27 on: June 12, 2009, 03:21:39 PM »
It's well established that Union's entrance standards and program requirements are far less rigorous than an institution such as the University of Calgry. The question posed in this thread, still unanswered, is why AARC and Vause lied about Vause choosing Union because it had a specialization in addiction studies, when in fact Vause's PhD is in Educational Psychology. It is in fact quite easy to find fault with someone who has repeatedly lied about being a psychologist, when he is in fact not. It is also quite easy to find fault with someone who has used his academic qualification that is of, to say the least, questionable merit, to legitimize his continued unlawful and unscientific behaviour modification experiment. So the questions remain: why did Vause choose to get a paper from Union when he was not producing new knowledge or research, but rather was writing an explanation for a program that already existed? Why did he feel that an explanation for his choice of Union was necessary? Why did he lie about choosing Union for a program he did not enter? Only Dean Vause knows these answers with certainty
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Dean-o's Nose Grows Again
« Reply #28 on: September 01, 2009, 08:03:06 PM »
Vause says if you leave AARC your life will be in the gutter?

Not only  is my kid NOT "deadinsaneorinjail", he got his driver's license today.
He's starting a job at $50/k and is too busy living life to bother with the 12 steps.

Oh how Deano-o's Nose Grows!

 :twofinger:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline TheWho

  • Posts: 7256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Dean-o's Nose Grows Again
« Reply #29 on: September 01, 2009, 08:25:54 PM »
Quote from: "Pure Bullshit"
Vause says if you leave AARC your life will be in the gutter?

Not only  is my kid NOT "deadinsaneorinjail", he got his driver's license today.
He's starting a job at $50/k and is too busy living life to bother with the 12 steps.

Oh how Deano-o's Nose Grows!

 :twofinger:

Thats good to hear.  It looks like AARC had a positive effect on him.  All the credit goes to your son, AARC was there to add support, but your son did all the work.  Goodluck to you and your son!!  Sounds like he is moving along.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »