Second post from CALO by Ken Huey

[Anonymous]

Guess what? Last weekend when I saw him he said that after CALO he wants to go back to the wilderness program, because the people there were "chill." Go figure....

Oddly, his preferred destination was not "home"...

[Troll Control]

Dear Lizard Tits, aka Ken Hooey.

I know why you are posting here. It isn't going to work, unlike you, I'm not that big of an idiot.  We'll just have to wait and see what the future brings. We both know it won't be much longer.


As for Blombro:

CALO is every bit as toxic and disturbing as Thayer is and ever will be. You giving them any credit is a slap in the face to all of those kids jacked up in a bent wrist arm lock and thrown face first on the ground.


To the rest:

Keep in mind Mr. Ken Hooey has to protect his revenue flow. What businessman hasn't lied about his dealings to protect his profits? Don't be taken in by this scumbag.

Very nice and respectful language - Che. It is one way to avoid intelligent dialogue, eh?

One thing that comes to mind when thinking about the question "are kids free to leave" is this: are kids free to leave ANYWHERE? If my kid gets mad or upset about life in our home s/he isn't free to go. Also, in the public school they attend, they are not "free" to leave campus during the school day.

I have attended several of the CALO peer group sessions discussed earlier on this thread. There is no "screaming" or confrontation and if somebody doesn't want to talk, they can just sit there. At least two coaches are there to keep things respectful and on track, I suppose. CALO is not Elan or Family Foundation.

Most of the posters here disagree with the principle of RTCs in general, and are hell-bent to find specific "bad" things at CALO. Give it a break! And with regard to RTCs in general - if not a place like CALO, what do its detractors suggest instead? In our case it would have been jail or a lock-down psych facility.

Well, this is the paradoxical thinking we are asked to embrace when dealing with programs, isn't it?  On one hand the program says "We don't take violent, dangerous or criminal kids" and on the other hand the parents say "My kid would have been in jail or in a lockdown psych facility."  One of you isn't being honest.  

You can't say that your kid was such a danger to self or others that s/he couldn't remain at home and say at the same time that CALO is a safe environment that doesn't take kids with severe problems.  Either your kid isn't that bad and you're exaggerating (for the record I believe you) or CALO accepts dangerous and violent criminals (for the record I believe this is true).

One way or the other, we're asked to wilfully suspend disbelief in one case or the other and both statements can't be true, as they are mutually exclusive premises.

I also agree with Psy that it sounds like CALO does not use any clinically appropriate therapies.  Parents should never be allowed to sit in on group sessions (it violates so many privacy laws and ethical principles) and the people facilitating the groups have no educational basis upon which to perform this duty.

From just what Ken Huey and this one parent have posted, I can state unequivocally that CALO is not the place to send children.  Ken, Tiger, you've shot CALO in the foot trying to support it.

Tiger Eye, what's your response to this?  Does CALO accept dangerous children (you said yours was an arsonist, I believe)?  How about court-ordered kids?  What about convicted felons?

Just waiting for your answer here.  It seems you'll answer the most trivial posts like how far people live from CALO, but you're not addressing the substance of this thread.  Why wouldn't you want to respond to items like the above or bent wrist control techniques?  Seems like a very familiar tactic.  Very familiar.

[TigerEye]

Why? Because it was not relevant to my posts and I've been asked the question before.(and answered it). So fuck off!

[M_Hilton]

hmm CALO is in Lake of the Ozarks
im like 1-2 hours from there  

temped to go up there one day see for my self

As a tourist?

yes in a way
id like to know what really goes on
and why not?
if every thing is on the level whats wrong with letting some one take a look around and ask the kids a few questions?

I can think of lots of reasons - safety and privacy, to name a couple. It's not like visiting Mount Rushmore...

having been in a program my self do you think i would out the poor kids at the place
i would just like to hear from them with out staff or parents what THEY think
again if its all on the level whats the issue?
then again if they have some thing to hide...
and whats my going to see it different from say a parent wanting to check things out for them selves first
i know if i ever sent my kid to any kinda boarding school i would want to see it IN PERSON be for i did any thing

[Troll Control]

OK, then.  We have confirmed that CALO takes deeply disturbed kids like arsonists who are dangers to themselves and their families.  Just wanted to get that cleared up so we can talk about CALO's population more intelligently.  

Do they mix in more-or-less normal kids with the dangerous ones like your boy?  Or is there a general population and some sort of special housing unit where they keep the really bad ones?

[psy]

OK, then.  We have confirmed that CALO takes deeply disturbed kids like arsonists who are dangers to themselves and their families.  Just wanted to get that cleared up so we can talk about CALO's population more intelligently.  

Do they mix in more-or-less normal kids with the dangerous ones like your boy?  Or is there a general population and some sort of special housing unit where they keep the really bad ones?

A bit blunt and callous, but I see your point.

Calo's webpage states:

As residential treatment has matured, the one size fits all approach has lost its appeal. There are many presenting problems that are not well grouped together. A program that puts eating-disordered teens with Conduct Disordered ones will feel the strain of the differing needs of those populations. Simply put, specialist care is needed for many emotional and behavioral issues. Eating Disorders, issues of trauma, Reactive Attachment Disorder, non-verbal learning disabilities, substance abuse; these and many other issues demand specialized knowledge and treatment. CALO was created with this need for specialty care in mind.

CALO focuses on only three presenting issues: issues of emotion, trauma, and attachment.

An even more concise way of presenting CALO’s specialty is to say that issues with trauma at their core are what we treat. Trauma during the attachment window will frequently create attachment issues in later adolescence. Trauma will also lay the groundwork for later Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Trauma will predispose some teens for emotional regulation issues like Bi-polar Disorder or Depression. CALO treats trauma-induced emotional and behavioral problems.

Our theoretical framework is based on attachment research. Our treatment model relies on relationships and attachment interventions to create lasting change. CALO is a relational, attachment-centered program.

The following would be a partial list of the type of teenager CALO would specialize in treating:

    * A teenage adoptee struggling to connect with parents and caregivers
    * A teen who has been physically, emotionally, or sexually abused and is now acting out behaviorally
    * A teen who has survived a trauma and cannot maintain emotional control
    * A foreign-adopted teen who is not fitting in at home or at school and is draining emotional resources from his/her adopted family
    * A teen with anger control issues and a history of abuse or neglect
    * An untrustworthy and sexually promiscuous teenager who does not enjoy deeper connection with family or caregivers

Maybe i'm not seeing everything here, but it seems to me that pretty much anything whatsoever could be attributed to "issues of emotion, trauma, and attachment".  I wonder if there is much difference in practice from the varied population in other programs.

[Ursus]

The following would be a partial list of the type of teenager CALO would specialize in treating:

• A teenage adoptee struggling to connect with parents and caregivers
• A teen who has been physically, emotionally, or sexually abused and is now acting out behaviorally
• A teen who has survived a trauma and cannot maintain emotional control
• A foreign-adopted teen who is not fitting in at home or at school and is draining emotional resources from his/her adopted family
• A teen with anger control issues and a history of abuse or neglect
• An untrustworthy and sexually promiscuous teenager who does not enjoy deeper connection with family or caregivers

A lot of these characteristics are also based, at least in part, on subjective observation. Parental or diagnostician bias can figure into this quite heavily. What one person considers "lack of emotional control" can be substantially different from someone else's call.

[Anonymous]

TigerEye,

I have some questions for you.  

(1) Did Ken Huey explain to you that PCS incorporates "bent wrist control methods with variations."
(2) Did you ask questions about consequences for rule violations?
(3) Did you discuss staff credentials with Ken Huey?
(4) Did you speak with students who were recently enrolled at CALO?
(5) Did you tour the entire campus when you enrolled your son at CALO?
(6) Did you eat a meal with your son to see how staff interacted with students?
(7) Did you ask questions about crisis intervention training and appropriate restraint techniques/procedures?
( Did you ask for CALO's business license number and verify it with the appropriate state agency?
(9) Did you speak with the appropriate state agency to see if they received complaints about physical abuse, emotional abuse and sexual abuse?
(10) Did you walk through the dorm your son would be living in?
(11) I don't 'know if you're aware but Ken Huey, Landon Kirk, Caleb Cottle, and Nicole Fuglsang worked at abusive programs.  Do you see this as a red flag?
RE: (12) viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810

[TigerEye]

TigerEye,

I have some questions for you.  

(1) Did Ken Huey explain to you that PCS incorporates "bent wrist control methods with variations."
(2) Did you ask questions about consequences for rule violations?
(3) Did you discuss staff credentials with Ken Huey?
(4) Did you speak with students who were recently enrolled at CALO?
(5) Did you tour the entire campus when you enrolled your son at CALO?
(6) Did you eat a meal with your son to see how staff interacted with students?
(7) Did you ask questions about crisis intervention training and appropriate restraint techniques/procedures?
( Did you ask for CALO's business license number and verify it with the appropriate state agency?
(9) Did you speak with the appropriate state agency to see if they received complaints about physical abuse, emotional abuse and sexual abuse?
(10) Did you walk through the dorm your son would be living in?
(11) I don't 'know if you're aware but Ken Huey, Landon Kirk, Caleb Cottle, and Nicole Fuglsang worked at abusive programs.  Do you see this as a red flag?
RE: (12) http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810

I would say yes to most of the above but not the last (no.11)
And regarding the previous posts, one thing should be clear - what is dangerous behavior by a kid out in the community is not necessarily the same behavior that would be manifested in a controlled setting. Isn't that partly the point of a restrictive setting?  A kid who uses drugs, gets into fights, steals, destroys public property, cuts him or herself, etc. is placed into a setting where that is pretty much impossible - and situations that do arise are nipped in the bud. Do you dig what I am saying? We are not talking about kids who are psychotic, or who have a true conduct disorder, as I think they would probably be excluded from a setting like CALO.

[TigerEye]

[
having been in a program my self do you think i would out the poor kids at the place
i would just like to hear from them with out staff or parents what THEY think
again if its all on the level whats the issue?
then again if they have some thing to hide...
and whats my going to see it different from say a parent wanting to check things out for them selves first
i know if i ever sent my kid to any kinda boarding school i would want to see it IN PERSON be for i did any thing

Well, I suppose you can try. I can't think of any place that would let you just wander in to chat with the kids, though. Not even public schools!

[TigerEye]

Oh, and regarding the profile of the kids there, I think that the description typically fits kids who were adopted, often from institutions, where all kids of issues arose that don't necessarily respond to "behavioral modification." Early neglect rewires the brain in a negative way, that therapeutic support, relationship-building, etc. can help to overcome. Behavioral modification is just what it says: changing behavior. Which in certain kids will only work temporarily.

[Anonymous]

TigerEye,

I have some questions for you.  

(1) Did Ken Huey explain to you that PCS incorporates "bent wrist control methods with variations."
(2) Did you ask questions about consequences for rule violations?
(3) Did you discuss staff credentials with Ken Huey?
(4) Did you speak with students who were recently enrolled at CALO?
(5) Did you tour the entire campus when you enrolled your son at CALO?
(6) Did you eat a meal with your son to see how staff interacted with students?
(7) Did you ask questions about crisis intervention training and appropriate restraint techniques/procedures?
( Did you ask for CALO's business license number and verify it with the appropriate state agency?
(9) Did you speak with the appropriate state agency to see if they received complaints about physical abuse, emotional abuse and sexual abuse?
(10) Did you walk through the dorm your son would be living in?
(11) I don't 'know if you're aware but Ken Huey, Landon Kirk, Caleb Cottle, and Nicole Fuglsang worked at abusive programs.  Do you see this as a red flag?
RE: (12) http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810

I would say yes to most of the above but not the last (no.11)
And regarding the previous posts, one thing should be clear - what is dangerous behavior by a kid out in the community is not necessarily the same behavior that would be manifested in a controlled setting. Isn't that partly the point of a restrictive setting?  A kid who uses drugs, gets into fights, steals, destroys public property, cuts him or herself, etc. is placed into a setting where that is pretty much impossible - and situations that do arise are nipped in the bud. Do you dig what I am saying? We are not talking about kids who are psychotic, or who have a true conduct disorder, as I think they would probably be excluded from a setting like CALO.

Please be more specific than "I would say yes to most of the above but not the last (no.11)"


(1) Did Ken Huey explain to you that PCS incorporates "bent wrist control methods with variations."  Yes or No?  If not, what was said about restraints?
(2) Did you ask questions about consequences for rule violations? Please be specific.
(3) Did you discuss staff credentials with Ken Huey?  Are you aware that certain CALO staff don't have experience working with youth?
(4) Did you speak with students who were recently enrolled at CALO?  If so, how long were they at CALO for?
(5) Did you tour the entire campus when you enrolled your son at CALO?  Did CALO staff offer to walk around the entire campus with you?
(6) Did you eat a meal with your son to see how staff interacted with students?  
(7) Did you ask questions about crisis intervention training and appropriate restraint techniques/procedures?  If yes, please be specific.
( Did you ask for CALO's business license number and verify it with the appropriate state agency?
(9) Did you speak with the appropriate state agency to see if they received complaints about physical abuse, emotional abuse and sexual abuse?
(10) Did you walk through the dorm your son would be living in?
(11) I don't 'know if you're aware but Ken Huey, Landon Kirk, Caleb Cottle, and Nicole Fuglsang worked at abusive programs. Do you see this as a red flag?
RE: (12) http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810

[TigerEye]

Who are you, the Grand Inquisitor? Or is this a job interview...

[Anonymous]

Who are you, the Grand Inquisitor? Or is this a job interview...

The questions above are common sense.  Every parent should ask them.  If you did not, then that is indicative you failed to do your homework about CALO.

[Troll Control]

OK, then. We have confirmed that CALO takes deeply disturbed kids like arsonists who are dangers to themselves and their families. Just wanted to get that cleared up so we can talk about CALO's population more intelligently.

Do they mix in more-or-less normal kids with the dangerous ones like your boy? Or is there a general population and some sort of special housing unit where they keep the really bad ones?

This is all any parent needs to know.  Dangerous population, mixed together, living together and untrained, uneducated "coaches" facilitating "therapy."  I'd run from this place.  This "treatment model" is crazy!

For those of you 'who' haven't noticed yet, "TigerEye" is not a CALO parent.