Against Their Will?

[Anonymous]

how does a total control enviroment and not being able to cross your legs, look out the window or pee by yourself prepare you for the big bad world? Is that their purpose or is it to prepare you to chew on whatever the program feeds you until you get a "vision" to grow the program and/or become an employee because after all this is not only good for teen Johnny it is good for the whole world and should be in public schools etc. according to Gilcrease and all his magical child followers

does is seem to you WWASPers that the whole world is against you and the groups efforts are misunderstood...damn- if you could just get them to a seminar! I'ts gotta be tough when you are trying to save the world...review cult behavior

[Anonymous]

:idea:  

my suggestion to parents that would do "anything" to save their child is to give up your life for a few months and go with your troubled kid to a foreign land that could use your help...sweat and work side by side giving your life away for a while- bet you'll BOTH be changed and your child will have renewed respect for you and your committment to them and the world. Imagine what a difference these families could make and it would still be you in charge of your child.  

anybody tried anything like that?

[Anonymous]

Teen Help activities touched off investigations by law enforcement or regulatory agencies in several states -- including Utah, South Carolina and Ohio -- and three foreign countries -- Mexico, the Czech Republic and Western Samoa. Facilities in Utah, Mexico and the Czech Republic were closed,

[Anonymous]

Carey, if you keep your only car keys on your person and your kid still manages to steal the car, it is obvious that it has been stolen and you as a parent are *not* liable for the damage because you did not *allow* the child to have the car.  You weren't *negligent*----any and all liability rests on negligence.  No negligence means no liability.  No court is going to find that merely not shipping your kid off to private reform school constitutes negligence---unless you disobey a court order to put him/her in something or other.

And you can then file a police report and have your kid *prosecuted* for stealing the car and incarcerated by the state in a prison----which is much more humane and less damaging because at least prison *admits* to being a hostile place, doesn't demand to be able to dig around in your mind, and doesn't hire unqualified pseudo-shrinks to do the digging.  Oh, and prisons don't stop you from writing letters to and receiving letters from your friends.  And prisons have oversight to guarantee that you get minimally nutritionally adequate meals.

If it's a choice between your kid going in a "program" that stops his/her mail as a matter of routine (not by a licensed psychiatrist with dr/patient relationship, deciding *individually* under the ordinary legal and ethical strictures), and your kid hanging around and *maybe* going to jail if he screws up badly enough and breaks the laws-----pick jail.  It's safer.

When I was a teen, the kids whose parents thought they were little angels were into a whole lot of stuff, and the kids whose parents thought they were into *everything* were frequently wrong and fruitloops to boot.  The kid's peers usually were the ones who had an *accurate* read on what the kid was and was not into.

What I see is far too many ditzy fruitloop control freaks with more dollars than sense committing their kids for woefully insufficient reasons.

I want the laws changed.  It should require a court order to commit a kid to a restrictive boarding school treatment center, and based on exactly the same criteria for involuntary commitment of an adult.  Parental "consent" on behalf of the child should be insufficient---too high a percentage of these parents are fruitloops.  All restrictive boarding schools should be required to be licensed as treatment centers and should be required to maintain the same patient files as any other mental institution that accepts involuntary commitments.

*Nobody* but the government should have the authority to place any individual in a residential penal institution (outside the home :smile:, and is not actually a mental hospital, it should be flatly illegal.

And I'm pretty darned confident that someday it will be.

[Anonymous]

Carey, if you keep your only car keys on your person and your kid still manages to steal the car, it is obvious that it has been stolen and you as a parent are *not* liable for the damage because you did not *allow* the child to have the car. You weren't *negligent*----any and all liability rests on negligence.

I don't know what state you are living in, but in mine, Lousisiana, the parent can be held liable.

And you can then file a police report and have your kid *prosecuted* for stealing the car and incarcerated by the state in a prison----which is much more humane and less damaging because at least prison *admits* to being a hostile place, doesn't demand to be able to dig around in your mind, and doesn't hire unqualified pseudo-shrinks to do the digging.

Please don't add to what I said.  I said nothing about shipping kids off to any program.  I was responding to Deborah's senario, the stepford wife thing.

I am against shipping teens off.  I agree, we should use the legal system that is in place. If my child breaks the law then I want him to go through the channels that are in place in society.  

I just think if parents are held accountable for placeing their kids in abusive programs, then they will be a whole lot more careful before choosing another one.  Also, I think it would be a deterant for other parents who are considering placement for the first time.

[Anonymous]

Okay.  What I would like to see is placement in any program that restricts a kid's mail (except according to the same strictures that would be legal and ethical for an adult) requiring a court order, and removal across state or national boundaries for the purpose of placement being grounds for other friends and relatives to sue for custody for purpose of removing the kid from the institution.

I would like to see any court order be preceded by a mandatory psychiatric evaluation by a court-appointed psychiatrist (at the parents' expense) of *both* the child and the parents.

If the parents have significant insufficiently treated psychological or psychiatric problems, the intervention of *first* resort should be to place the child in foster care with adult guardians who do *not* have insufficiently treated psychiatric problems to see if the child stabilizes under the guardianship of stable people.

I am not as concerned with sane parents placing their kids than I am with parents with untreated major mental illnesses or personality disorders or addictions or, well, control freaks (which should probably be classed as a personality disorder but I don't think it is) placing kids in restrictive environments when a regular home environment under sane guardians is what the kid *really* needs.

(Not true for all kids---but true for some of the kids getting placed.  Probably a *lot* of the kids getting placed from what I've been seeing since I started looking into this.)

And I don't think the parents should be held liable if the child steals unless the parents were negligent.  If the state where you live is like that, then maybe its laws need some changes.

[Carey]

Please don't add to what I said.  I said nothing about shipping kids off to any program.  I was responding to Deborah's senario, the stepford wife thing.

I am against shipping teens off.  I agree, we should use the legal system that is in place. If my child breaks the law then I want him to go through the legal system that is in place in society.  If it turns out he/she  needs to spend time in juvenile detention.  Then so be it.  

I tried to edit the previous post.  I could not so I will just add it here.


Maybe some of the parents who put their teens in a "program" do so to save their own reputation (not the childs reputation, but their own).  In otherwords maybe they do it because they are selfish.  Maybe they want to be able to say "my kid is in a boarding school in Costa Rica."  Maybe they would find it too hard to tell their firends "little Johnny is in juvenile detention."

I just think if parents are held accountable for placeing their kids in abusive programs, then they will be a whole lot more careful before choosing another one.  Also, I think it would be a deterant for other parents who are considering placement for the first time.

[Anonymous]

On 2003-09-12 10:46:00, Anonymous wrote:

"how does a total control enviroment and not being able to cross your legs, look out the window or pee by yourself prepare you for the big bad world? Is that their purpose or is it to prepare you to chew on whatever the program feeds you until you get a "vision" to grow the program and/or become an employee because after all this is not only good for teen Johnny it is good for the whole world and should be in public schools etc. according to Gilcrease and all his magical child followers



does is see to you WWASPers that the whole world is against you and the groups efforts are misunderstood...damn- if you could just get them to a seminar! I'ts gotta be tough when you are trying to save the world...review cult behavior"

Hmmm.  I used to work for a company that said too many people were looking out the window and doing their work- so they installed partitions that covered the windows.  We had to ask permission to leave our desk to go pee.  Our mail came to us opened, since it was a high security business.  Could look at the men, but couldn't date them or be fired!And on and on.  Aren't ALL programs pretty much that way in the beginning? Teach rules, follow rules, get priviledges?  Agree with everything?  Nope.  There's a lot I don't agree with in many areas of life.  I stayed at that company for a lot more years than I wanted to - not exactly against my will, but the benefits were worth it and I learned to work with the stupid rules.  Those stupid rules helped me out in another job.  I learned to discipline myself and got a lot further than if I had challenged or not followed the rules. I got more changed within the organization by making clear requests instead of complaining.  That's what Iwould advise parents that don't agree with the current rules.  Make a clear request!  

Where did you get that wwasps wants to save the world?  That's funny! One family at a time healing, learning, growing, and knowing nothing is perfect.

[Anonymous]

Carey - it's true some parents would do what you said.  We come in all shapes, sizes and thoughts.  Most do it to create a healthier family and do the work it requires to get there.  What is the criminal justice system going to teach our kids, or us for that matter?  Fear, being with criminals, feeling worthless.  How many of these kids go back to jail as adults?  Did they ever thank their parents for not helping them stop the destruction?  This is really getting old, the abuse thing.  I wouldn't want to be where my kid was 24/7, but he was never hurt, never starved, never mentally brainwashed. He chose to change his choices, as did I.  Call it whatever you want.  The press hasn't got a clue.

[Anonymous]

On 2003-09-12 12:04:00, Carey wrote:

"Maybe some of the parents who put their teens >I just think if parents are held accountable for placeing their kids in abusive programs, then they will be a whole lot more careful before choosing another one.  Also, I think it would be a deterant for other parents who are considering placement for the first time."

Bear in mind, the majority of these parents send their kids to a locked boarding school without even making a personal inspecton of the facility.  How risky is that?

[Anonymous]

About the kid who "chose to change his choices"---why would I find that more convincing coming from him---ten years *after* leaving the program.

I don't think any parent---even me----should have the right to involuntarily commit their child to a place where they cannot send and receive mail freely and go back home on vacations and are forced to participate in therapy----without a review by a financially and emotionally disinterested and *licensed* psychiatrist appointed by the State.

If you can't live with your kid, and he/she isn't immediately suicidal or violent, and he/she isn't being prosecuted by the authorities, he/she should have the option of foster care and outpatient treatment by a licensed professional, if a licensed professional agrees that he/she needs it, rather than involuntary commitment.

I don't know if your kid was in immediate danger of suicide or an immediate threat of violence, or was in the process of being prosecuted for some crime, but if not, I don't think you, or I, or any parent should have the power to involuntarily commit a child for lesser reasons.

And I believe the long term pattern of abuses by money-hungry quacks will eventually result in changes in legislation to implement that as the law of the land.

[Anonymous]

"commit their child to a place where they cannot send and receive mail freely..."


When did that start? That's not a wwasps program. Hasn't it always been where they and the parents can get and receive mail 6 days a week, including faxes?

[Anonymous]

On 2003-09-12 18:43:00, Anonymous wrote:

"About the kid who "chose to change his choices"---why would I find that more convincing coming from him---ten years *after* leaving the program.



I don't think any parent---even me----should have the right to involuntarily commit their child to a place where they cannot send and receive mail freely and go back home on vacations and are forced to participate in therapy----without a review by a financially and emotionally disinterested and *licensed* psychiatrist appointed by the State.



If you can't live with your kid, and he/she isn't immediately suicidal or violent, and he/she isn't being prosecuted by the authorities, he/she should have the option of foster care and outpatient treatment by a licensed professional, if a licensed professional agrees that he/she needs it, rather than involuntary commitment.



I don't know if your kid was in immediate danger of suicide or an immediate threat of violence, or was in the process of being prosecuted for some crime, but if not, I don't think you, or I, or any parent should have the power to involuntarily commit a child for lesser reasons.



And I believe the long term pattern of abuses by money-hungry quacks will eventually result in changes in legislation to implement that as the law of the land."

You "think" and you "believe" - Until you KNOW, you nor I could never understand.

[Deborah]

Anon wrote:
Deborah - you have all the answers.  Are you teaching Parenting 101?  

Probably not ALL the answers, but I do value my opinion and enjoy sharing it. I'm doing the same thing you're doing- our opinions are obviously very different, and that appears to be the burr in your butt. You program people can't control what's said and read here. I imagine that is a source of frustration and what compels you to incessantly defend your choice, your program of choice, and your referal fees.

**What are those little ones you care for doing while you're on the computer all day?  

All Day? That's the kind of desperate exaggeration that is so very typical of program people. Is that the best response you could muster? Because you are unable to think for yourself, I'll remind you that young children take naps- I'm not about sleep deprivation or BM.

**This board is saturated with accusations to steer parents away from real help.

"Real" help? If a parent is set on persuing the "help" offered by the industry, nothing I or anyone else says will change that. Having access to other's stories and opinions may cause some to think more carefully about their decisions, to do more research, to carefully read their contract. What's it to you if they choose something different? Do you have a vested interest in parents believing that your brand of "help" is the only option?

**You had separation anxiety in whatever program your son was in.

Separation anxiety? Excuse me while I laugh out loud.  :lol: Is that how your program suggested and conditioned parents to think of the feelings they might experience after incarcerating their child? That's got to be one of the better ones I've heard.

Separation anxiety doesn't remotely describe how I felt when I received a call from a stranger who proceeded to dictate if and when I would have contact with my son. It doesn't remotely describe how I felt when I saw him for the first time after 4 months of isolation from the world.
 
The "treatment" my son endured and the surreal reality we lived with for almost two years was unacceptable. My reaction to it was exactly appropriate. Separation anxiety my ass.
What's up with you continually practicing your shade-tree analysis on me? What specifically got you going? Do you enjoy it? Do you have any clue how ignorant you came off when your only response to my post was to attack me personally with your wild imaginings.

I think you are the one with separation anxiety, anxious about being separated from your referal fees.

Deborah

[Anonymous]

The U.S. Congress also has taken interest in the Utah-based WorldWide Association of Specialty Programs (WWASP), the behavior-modification umbrella organization to which Dundee belonged.

House Representative George Miller of California, the ranking Democrat on the House Education Committee, last month asked the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to review WWASP's tax-exempt status and investigate whether the organization has received any special tax treatment in the past.

One of Rep. Miller's congressional aides said this week that the congressman also is preparing to ask U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft to open a federal criminal investigation into alleged child mistreatment at WWASP programs,