Second post from CALO by Ken Huey

[kenhuey]

I realize in speaking as a program director here I start out at an immediate disadvantage.  I urge you to put aside your prejudices for a moment and give me the chance to present my case.  I realize many of you here have been hurt and many of you are angry but not all program directors are the same.  Not all programs are the same.  To judge me evil-intended or to judge CALO as somehow abusive--without knowing CALO and without hearing me out--is no better than the lack of due process and the prejudice many of you complain about when decrying residential treatment for teens.

I have spent the last 5 years presenting at conferences around the country on the need for change in residential treatment. I have presented at regional NATSAP’s, national NATSAP’s, FRUA, Wilderness Symposiums, Naropa, etc. about the need to move away from behavior modification and level systems to more humane, relationship-centered approaches that are fundamentally respectful to teenagers and those in programs. This is a matter of record. Searches of my name and many of these conferences will show that I have dedicated considerable professional energy to changing the way residential services are delivered. I believe that therapeutic invitations to change based on relationships, based on psycho-education, based on nurturing, are superior to change that is based on simply modifying behavior.  Accountability, consequences, and structure are needed but relationship-based change is superior, in my opinion, to strict level-systems and behavior mod that do not provide nurturing. In even more succinct terms I openly repudiate change based on coercion, bullying, intimidation, and power. It does not work. It is not right.

The following are some of the ways I think CALO proves its commitment to what is stated above:

1.   CALO does not allow the use of escort services for the transport of our teenagers.
        a. The picture of a young person being awakened at 3am and taken by force from their home is not one I want to be a part of.
        b. CALO will transport a teen by sending the CEO, Clinical Director, therapist, or other highly trained staff with a Residential Coach. This is done with full knowledge of the teenager and is non-confrontational in approach. We have not had a physical confrontation during a transport ever and hope to never have one.

2.   CALO does not use level systems at all. We believe that lasting change comes as a byproduct of relationships that have mentoring power. You cannot mentor someone you control or manipulate. Trust has more impact on change than coercion or bribery.

3.   CALO does censor some reading material, music, and movies. A certain level of maturity is needed to deal with pornography, racist books advocating death, homicidal or suicidal works, etc. Proven harmful material is kept from campus.

4.   CALO does not force teens to change. We invite, encourage, model, and mentor change. We do not believe we can force a certain world view on drugs, relationships, or anything else. We explicitly try to convince teens that there are right and wrong choices but at the end of the day change must be internal or it will not last.

5.   CALO does have high staff to student ratios. Our staffing ratios average about one staff member for every three kids. That is ONLY direct care staff. Therapists and teachers and admin staff do not count in those totals.

6.   CALO does not believe in sleep deprivation or other systems of breaking down behavior in advance of “encounter” groups and the like. Arguments among peers or student anger at staff may be part of a group but we do nothing that is meant to break down a teen and then build them up in the image that CALO desires.

7.   CALO does not have a waiting period before a teen can talk to his or her parents on the phone, or see them in person. Relationships are the key to change and we want teenagers to have access to their caregivers from their start in therapy.

8.   CALO does not and will do nothing to take away basic rights to shelter, food, sleep, education, and nurturing. These are not “privileges” at CALO, they are rights. Nurturance is a right.

9.   CALO does believe in licensure. We are voluntarily licensed by the state of Missouri. We sought out licensing and allow surprise inspections by the state.

10.   CALO does not have custodial rights to kids. Parents retain custody of their children while they are in our care.

11.   CALO does not rush the intake process. The intake process is as long as parents and child want. Usually it is several hours as parent and child are oriented to CALO. We do not require control of the child or hasty goodbyes.

12.   CALO does not see homosexuality as a disease that can be treated.

13.   CALO does not endorse or prohibit the practice of any religion. We have never banned a particular religion but would if it was proven to be an immediate danger.

14.   CALO does not have any sort of time-out room.

15.   CALO does not use mechanical or chemical restraints.
        a. All staff are trained for two days on verbal de-escalation and crisis management. We try to complete this training in the first 30 days of employment. During the last part of that training staff are taught how to safely physically hold/restrain a teen who is a danger to self or others. The focus is on avoiding those holds.
        b. We track holds and debrief them with staff, always focusing on keeping holds to a minimum and only initiating them in cases of a safety concern. Holds per student census have decreased every quarter since CALO was created.

16.   CALO does not employ unqualified therapists. All CALO therapists are masters level or Psy.D./Ph.D. and appropriately credentialed. License numbers are available on parental request.

I do appreciate the opportunity to present some of the philosophy behind CALO’s program. I respectfully invite you to consider the possibility that CALO may be a nurturing, non-coercive, relationship-focused program.

I recognize that much of what is written in this post may challenge notions that some have about CALO and what we do. I am sorry you have had some misinformation about us and the nature of how we operate. This is who we are and what we believe. We are not perfect in the application of our beliefs but this is the standard to which we hold ourselves.

[psy]

If your groups are not confrontational in nature, what do they consist of?  Are kids forced to bring up issues or are they free to keep it to themselves and/or discuss it privately with those they trust?

[Anonymous]

This is done with full knowledge of the teenager and is non-confrontational in approach. We have not had a physical confrontation during a transport ever and hope to never have one.

Define "non confrontational"?  Does this mean intimidation by means of overwhelming force?  The sort of "offer you can't refuse" type of thing?  Do the staff that go to pick up the teens have tazers and such visible?

[Troll Control]

I'd like to know if CALO is voluntary.?  Can any kid leave at any time they desire, unimpeded by CALO staff?  If not, what is the legal justification for keeping kids against their will?

[Inculcated]

On the controversial topic of Attachment Therapy, what specifically does CALO’S application of this treatment entail?

[kenhuey]

If your groups are not confrontational in nature, what do they consist of?  Are kids forced to bring up issues or are they free to keep it to themselves and/or discuss it privately with those they trust?

I just went down and chatted with one of our teens. I thought it more helpful to hear from someone in our program about her actual experience. "H" told me she has been in the following groups led by therapists: Survivors, Social Skills, Mood Regulation, and Trauma. These groups are largely psycho-educational in nature.

H also said that student or residential coach-led groups are also frequent. We call these "power groups," must meaning that they are quick and to the point. H said the motto of those groups that they are "about the behavior, not the person." In those groups they have recently talked about language on campus, conduct while in the community, and appropriate use of time (not slowing everyone down while doing cleaning and household chores). H described those groups as being students bringing up an issue they have with another student or students, staff bringing up an issue about something a student is doing, or students bringing up an issue they have with a staff member or staff members. They work on resolving whatever the conflict. H related that they are usually pointed discussions and sometimes argumentative. I see that as normal relationship stuff. By "not confrontational" I am trying to indicate that we do not force kids to stand in front of all their peers and have them berated in order to break them down. We don't sleep deprive them and then confront them on their issues. That is not to say we don't argue but we look to have that be normal arguing that all relationships have as part of their existence.

[kenhuey]

This is done with full knowledge of the teenager and is non-confrontational in approach. We have not had a physical confrontation during a transport ever and hope to never have one.

Define "non confrontational"?  Does this mean intimidation by means of overwhelming force?  The sort of "offer you can't refuse" type of thing?  Do the staff that go to pick up the teens have tazers and such visible?

Staff do not have tazers or any other weapon. Handcuffs and the like are not even considered. We talk with the teen and talk about what to expect at CALO and during our travel. We work on building the beginnings of a relationship.

[Anonymous]

I'd like to know if CALO is voluntary.?  Can any kid leave at any time they desire, unimpeded by CALO staff?  If not, what is the legal justification for keeping kids against their will?

CALO's coaching packet itemizes how staff should keep "students" from escaping.

Notice Ken Huey says he doesn't use escort services, not that he doesn't physically force human beings into his compound. Do human beings have the choice not to go to CALO after their rendition is requested via check? I think not.

Once an organization incorporates restraints into their “training” you can assume they are a lock down environment.

Two organizations besides gulags use restraints: prisons and psychiatric hospitals. Both do so because force is necessary to hold people captive, force them to do things they desperately do not want to do, and to take the act of “policing” on themselves.
Restraining systems are only used by groups who violate normal legal and psychological boundaries

Those illegitimate "treatment" profiles, have found their way to concerned and benevolent parties, I hope

[Anonymous]

This is done with full knowledge of the teenager and is non-confrontational in approach. We have not had a physical confrontation during a transport ever and hope to never have one.

Define "non confrontational"?  Does this mean intimidation by means of overwhelming force?  The sort of "offer you can't refuse" type of thing?  Do the staff that go to pick up the teens have tazers and such visible?

Staff do not have tazers or any other weapon. Handcuffs and the like are not even considered. We talk with the teen and talk about what to expect at CALO and during our travel. We work on building the beginnings of a relationship.

You are not answering the question.

What if someone refuses to go? Will they be physically forced? Are they informed if they won’t go they will be physically forced, or physically forced to go somewhere else?

Are you saying everyone that CALO has approached with a request to institutionalize themselves has assented?
 ::fullofshit::

[kenhuey]

On the controversial topic of Attachment Therapy, what specifically does CALO’S application of this treatment entail?

The best description of our overall model can be found here:

http://caloteens.com/therapeuticModel.aspx

I think you are asking if we do rebirthing and "rib stimulation" and such. No, we do not use provoking techniques meant to force a teen to attach with us.

[Anonymous]

15. CALO does not use mechanical or chemical restraints.

a. All staff are trained for two days on verbal de-escalation and crisis management. We try to complete this training in the first 30 days of employment. During the last part of that training staff are taught how to safely physically hold/restrain a teen who is a danger to self or others. The focus is on avoiding those holds.

b. We track holds and debrief them with staff, always focusing on keeping holds to a minimum and only initiating them in cases of a safety concern. Holds per student census have decreased every quarter since CALO was created.

Ken Huey failed to clarify the crisis intervention system staff are trained in otherwise known as PCS.  PCS is a crisis intervention model that incorporates "bent wrist control and variations."  I would like Mr. Huey to explain his choice for a crisis intervention system that incorporates "bent wrist control with variations." Caleb Cottle is the PCS instructor at CALO who has an obligation to train employees upon arrival.  CALO leaves the door wide open for lawsuits when staff, who have not been trained within the first 30 days of employment, restrain a child.

[psy]

H also said that student or residential coach-led groups are also frequent.

Whoa whoa...  You say above "CALO does not employ unqualified therapists. All CALO therapists are masters level or Psy.D./Ph.D. and appropriately credentialed."  I suppose the two statements are not technically contradictory, but it sounds here like some of the group therapy (unless you call it something else) is lead by unqualified personnel.  Especially if it's led by a student, I can see it being a recepie for some really inappropriate topics where personal grudges and biases can be used.  A student in such control can quickly become "drunk" with power.  Is there an actual therapist present at all times to make sure things don't cross over a certain line?

We call these "power groups," must meaning that they are quick and to the point. H said the motto of those groups that they are "about the behavior, not the person." In those groups they have recently talked about language on campus, conduct while in the community, and appropriate use of time (not slowing everyone down while doing cleaning and household chores). H described those groups as being students bringing up an issue they have with another student or students, staff bringing up an issue about something a student is doing, or students bringing up an issue they have with a staff member or staff members.

What sorts of issues are brought up...  Could "H" give some specific examples?  The reason why I ask is because I wonder whether or not such discussions are really necessary to have in group and whether the time is better spent on other things.  Does "H" think that these discussions help kids to build better skills to deal with conflicts effectively, or rather do they stoke fires that are already there?

They work on resolving whatever the conflict. H related that they are usually pointed discussions and sometimes argumentative. I see that as normal relationship stuff.

I suppose all depends on how his definition of pointed and/or argumentative.  Do you often sit in on such groups?  If not, it might be a good idea to start.

By "not confrontational" I am trying to indicate that we do not force kids to stand in front of all their peers and have them berated in order to break them down. We don't sleep deprive them and then confront them on their issues. That is not to say we don't argue but we look to have that be normal arguing that all relationships have as part of their existence.

Ok.  That makes some sense, but I still think there should be some credentialed and well trained people moderating the group to make sure it doesn't get out of hand.  Hell.  Look at Fornits.  It's allright since this is voluntary and consentual, but there is a big difference if a kid is confronted in group and can't leave.  Can kids leave group if they choose to?  Do they know this?

[psy]

Staff do not have tazers or any other weapon. Handcuffs and the like are not even considered. We talk with the teen and talk about what to expect at CALO and during our travel. We work on building the beginnings of a relationship.

Ok.  So what if, hypothetically, a teen decided to run for it?  What is your staff instructed to do?

[kenhuey]

Going forward I want to make clear my hopes for this post. Simply, I wish to present what CALO is. I also am willing to have respectful dialogue. I do not expect to have all those who read what I write to agree with me but I do expect to stay out of screaming matches. I don't really want to participate in vulgar exchanges and will choose to avoid them. If we can have a discussion and I am convinced that open sharing of ideas is the real purpose, I am on board.

[Anonymous]

H also said that student or residential coach-led groups are also frequent.

Whoa whoa...  You say above "CALO does not employ unqualified therapists. All CALO therapists are masters level or Psy.D./Ph.D. and appropriately credentialed."  I suppose the two statements are not technically contradictory, but it sounds here like some of the group therapy is lead by unqualified personnel.  Especially if it's led by a student, I can see it being a recepie for some really inappropriate topics where personal grudges and biases can be used.  A student in such control can quickly become "drunk" with power.  Is there an actual therapist present at all times to make sure things don't cross over a certain line?

We call these "power groups," must meaning that they are quick and to the point. H said the motto of those groups that they are "about the behavior, not the person." In those groups they have recently talked about language on campus, conduct while in the community, and appropriate use of time (not slowing everyone down while doing cleaning and household chores). H described those groups as being students bringing up an issue they have with another student or students, staff bringing up an issue about something a student is doing, or students bringing up an issue they have with a staff member or staff members.

What sorts of issues are brought up...  Could "H" give some specific examples?  The reason why I ask is because I wonder whether or not such discussions are really necessary to have in group and whether the time is better spent on other things.  Does "H" think that these discussions help kids to build better skills to deal with conflicts effectively, or rather do they stoke fires that are already there?

They work on resolving whatever the conflict. H related that they are usually pointed discussions and sometimes argumentative. I see that as normal relationship stuff.

I suppose all depends on how his definition of pointed and/or argumentative.  Do you often sit in on such groups?  If not, it might be a good idea to start.

By "not confrontational" I am trying to indicate that we do not force kids to stand in front of all their peers and have them berated in order to break them down. We don't sleep deprive them and then confront them on their issues. That is not to say we don't argue but we look to have that be normal arguing that all relationships have as part of their existence.

Ok.  That makes some sense, but I still think there should be some credentialed and well trained people moderating the group to make sure it doesn't get out of hand.  Hell.  Look at Fornits.  It's allright since this is voluntary and consentual, but there is a big difference if a kid is confronted in group and can't leave.  Can kids leave group if they choose to?  Do they know this?

I hope dysfunction junction or Kat Whitehead join this thread. They'll tell you, as experts, CALO employees are not accredited or educated at the level they should be, to be performing and organizing the treatment they claim to .

What’s more, how can you have peers "hold peers accountable" in groups in which they  are not allowed to leave without fairly what goes on in these "accountability groups" and "power raps" berating ? It’s not reasonably possible.

 Ken Huey, Nicole Fuglsang, you may not choose to recognize this because you are are, well, at least Nicole is, essentially CEDU-Synanotites, but forcing detainees or participants to "confront" other detainees on their supposed wrong doings is THOUGHT REFORM. This is true even for voluntary adult participants. It has been proved harmful to victims over and over, and shown to induce deep pathology, psychological breaks, and suicide. That is evidence based FACT

http://www.culthelp.info/index.php?opti ... ew&id=3090