Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > Hyde Schools

Hyde's "independent" psych professionals

<< < (3/4) > >>

Ursus:
Here's one student's experience with the saga of receiving outside counseling while at Hyde during the 1990s... The below excerpt was   posted by melindafromhyde a few years ago, my emphasis added:


In general, Hyde had a very backwards viewpoint on the advances in medical treatment of chemical imbalances, including medication and therapy. They did not monitor whether or not students took their medication, "forgot" to pack my medication both times they sent me to outpost (I was sent again in the spring), and made it very difficult for me to see a therapist off school grounds. In order for me to do so, my psychiatrist had to write a note to the school telling them I had to be allowed to see a psychologist and that their own visiting psychiatrist (who came three times a year) was grossly inadequate for an adolescent who recently was diagnosed as bipolar and had attempted suicide. Even after they reluctantly let me go, they sent me to a therapist of their choosing and wanted me to sign away my doctor-patient privileges, threatening that I had to do so in order to see the therapist. I refused. The faculty didn't push it for too long--we both knew it was illegal for them to require such a thing.[/list]

Ursus:
From the above excerpt:

In general, Hyde had a very backwards viewpoint on the advances in medical treatment of chemical imbalances, including medication and therapy. They did not monitor whether or not students took their medication, "forgot" to pack my medication both times they sent me to outpost (I was sent again in the spring), and made it very difficult for me to see a therapist off school grounds.[/list]
Personally, I would consider messing with a kid's medication regimen like that to be tantamount to practicing medicine without a license. I can't remember how long kids are sent to Outpost; for some reason I'm thinking it's 1-2 weeks, but even one week is a long stretch of time to be without your medication. Although forgetting even once to include Melinda's meds is inexcusable, "forgetting" twice seems deliberate. Knowing Hyde's historical antipathy towards psychiatric diagnoses more than underscores that.

Even after they reluctantly let me go, they sent me to a therapist of their choosing and wanted me to sign away my doctor-patient privileges, threatening that I had to do so in order to see the therapist. [/list]
This is a gross interference with a client-therapist relationship. The outside therapist is for the benefit of the client, NOT Hyde. According to commonly accepted practices in the field, it is completely inappropriate for Hyde to attempt to control this relationship or to gain access to the material discussed. Parents pay extra for this service, and they pay the therapist, NOT Hyde. It is NOT part of Hyde's program.

Ursus:
I have to wonder, the above experience having occurred in the 90s, does Hyde still do this kind of thing? Does Hyde still seem to consider the outside therapist, for whom parents pay extra and separately, as an extra auxiliary arm of their program? Has any parent or student questioned the wisdom — let alone the legality — of such obtrusive control of students' hearts and minds?

I'd be real interested to hear of any folks' experience with this sort of thing in the recent past. Perhaps Hyde School has changed? Or not?

Ursus:

--- Quote from: "Ursus" ---Does Hyde still seem to consider the outside therapist, for whom parents pay extra and separately, as an extra auxiliary arm of their program?
--- End quote ---
Apparently so. Apparently, little has changed.

A name which stood out from the above lineup of recommended psych professionals in the Counselor/Therapist category:

Peg Armstrong
Front St., Bath, Maine
233-8608[/list]

Are current and prospective students and parents aware that this individual is not only a former Hyde parent, but also a former Hyde teacher?

This would appear to fly completely in the face of commonly accepted professional standards for not only the practice of social work, but also for how one might expect a "responsible" educational organization to operate.

Ursus:
In the pursuit of finding a more cogent articulation of what strikes me as so utterly "OFF" and inappropriate about the above situation, I came across the National Association of Social Workers' Code of Ethics, to which the state of Maine officially subscribes. Here's an excerpt from the section titled "1. SOCIAL WORKERS' ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES TO CLIENTS," namely the subsection "1.06 Conflicts of Interest," emphasis added:


1.06 Conflicts of Interest

(a) Social workers should be alert to and avoid conflicts of interest that interfere with the exercise of professional discretion and impartial judgment. Social workers should inform clients when a real or potential conflict of interest arises and take reasonable steps to resolve the issue in a manner that makes the clients' interests primary and protects clients' interests to the greatest extent possible. In some cases, protecting clients' interests may require termination of the professional relationship with proper referral of the client.

(b) Social workers should not take unfair advantage of any professional relationship or exploit others to further their personal, religious, political, or business interests.

(c) Social workers should not engage in dual or multiple relationships with clients or former clients in which there is a risk of exploitation or potential harm to the client. In instances when dual or multiple relationships are unavoidable, social workers should take steps to protect clients and are responsible for setting clear, appropriate, and culturally sensitive boundaries. (Dual or multiple relationships occur when social workers relate to clients in more than one relationship, whether professional, social, or business. Dual or multiple relationships can occur simultaneously or consecutively.)

(d) When social workers provide services to two or more people who have a relationship with each other (for example, couples, family members), social workers should clarify with all parties which individuals will be considered clients and the nature of social workers' professional obligations to the various individuals who are receiving services. Social workers who anticipate a conflict of interest among the individuals receiving services or who anticipate having to perform in potentially conflicting roles (for example, when a social worker is asked to testify in a child custody dispute or divorce proceedings involving clients) should clarify their role with the parties involved and take appropriate action to minimize any conflict of interest.[/list][/size]

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page