Info on Moonridge Academy or Kolob Canyon RTC?

[Anonymous]

On 2004-04-20 22:51:00, Anonymous wrote:

"**Virtually every severe "issue" that preteens have is either an undiagnosed medical problems (i.e. bipolar disorder) or a parenting problem.** Written by "Notworking"



Good name, Notworking.  You say you know a lot about child development.  NOT! There's a much bigger picture here.  Can you see it? I didn't think so.    



BTW, I wasn't aware Moonridge admitted pre-teens.  Maybe I can find their website and see.  It seems to me you just want to get on your soapbox and this thread seemed to be the place to be.   :wink:  "

Actually, the medical problem or parenting problem assessment, since she said "virtually" and not "absolutely" is pretty much spot on.

Even if the problem is drug abuse---a lot of non-casual drug abuse in pre-teens or teens is an attempt to self-medicate an emerging psychiatric disorder they don't know they have.

They know they feel bad, but they don't know why.

Even smoking can be an attempt to self-medicate a psychiatric disorder---most schizophrenics are chain smokers, because the nicotine actually improves the symptoms of the schizophrenia.  At a terrible cost, but the side-effects are no worse than many of those accepted by the medical community as a reasonable trade off in other anti-psychotic drugs.

When you have a pre-teen with problems, you need to take a hard look for psychiatric problems or parenting problems.  And the overwhelming majority of the time, one of those things will be the problem.

Granted, you can have cases like Elizabeth Smart's where the kid is traumatized by people other than the parents.  

For the most part, though, Notworking is spot on.

[Anonymous]

***You don't *beat* the dog with a can of pebbles, you *shake* the can---the dog doesn't like the noise. It's a mild punishment, like a spritz in the face with a water bottle, that lets the dog know you don't like what it did.***

Actually the dog associates the can being shaken with pain. I feel certain that the 'trainer' shook the can, then shocked him with a cattle prod. He might have thrown the can at him too. Don't know, wasn't there. But, the technique shouldn't be used.
But, just like program parents who drop or ship their kids off to teen warehouse facilities, they failed to ask the trainer HOW he was going to condition their dog. Just trusted him to 'do the right thing'. No one assumes that abuse will be employed.

[Timoclea]

poor dog....

Q. I simply ask, why is PUNISHMENT the solution with regards to the narrow group of behaviors which encompass illegal drug use....?

A.Pharmaceutical Business, both legal and illegal, run by the same people either way, money coming to the middle from both ends.  Bush.
http://www.luxefaire.com/' target='_new'>Bill Gallagher

[Antigen]

On 2004-04-19 20:25:00, Anonymous wrote:

" You know NOTHING of Moodridge Academy, but have decided they aren't worth admitting a kid that is self-destructing because YOU had a bad experience in whatever program you were in.  If you had a bad experience, then everyone else must?   :wink:  "

No, if you actually read the posts before yours, you'll find we were talking about why the kid can't have any contact w/ anyone, including the mother (who assures our friend that the kid is fine)

Since you seem to have some firsthand information about this particular program, would you care to address that? How, exactly, is isolation therapeutic?

Hear me people: We now have to deal with another race - small and feeble when our fathers first met them, but now great and overbearing. Strangely enough they have a mind to till the soil and the love of possessions is a disease with them. These people have made many rules which the rich may break but the poor may not. They take their tithes from the poor and weak to support the rich and those who rule.
http://www.powersource.com/gallery/people/sittbull.html' target='_new'>Chief Sitting Bull, speaking at the Powder River Conference, 1877

[Anonymous]

"Restraint and involuntary seclusion have no therapeutic value and should only be imposed to ensure the physical safety of a patient.  They cannot be used as punishment or for staff convenience."

NAMI
National Alliance of the Mentally Ill

[notworking]

On 2004-04-20 22:51:00, Anonymous wrote:

"**
Good name, Notworking.  You say you know a lot about child development.  NOT! There's a much bigger picture here.  Can you see it? I didn't think so.    



BTW, I wasn't aware Moonridge admitted pre-teens.  Maybe I can find their website and see.  It seems to me you just want to get on your soapbox and this thread seemed to be the place to be.   :wink:  "

Not sure what you mean about the "bigger picture" here.  If you're talking about a "teen help" industry that preys on confused parents and unhappy children, then I can see it.  And, as I've mentioned, it makes me sick.  If you're talking about some sort of vast conspiracy between the Freemasons, the Emperor of Japan, and a network of manipulative, deceitful teen failures who are trying to turn kids from decent families into crazed criminals who they will eventually kill (altogether now, "or he'll be insane, in jail or DEAD..."), then you're gonna have to connect the dots for me.
 
The reason I'm talking about preteens/young teens is because I read the first post in this thread carefully.  It was talking about a child who was in junior high.  Most junior high school students are between 11-13, maybe 14 at the very end(6th through 8th grade).  As I said, I don't know anything about Moonridge Academy per se, so I don't know what age range of kids they take.  I can tell you that LOTS of these programs tell you they don't take kids who are violent or mentally ill but they do, so why should fudging on the age range be any different?  

Do I have a "soapbox"?  Sure, although I prefer to think of it as an issue I care passionately about.  Everyone does, if they're capable of thinking about anyone besides themselves.  And, in my value system, caring passionately about the welfare of children is a better issue than, say, caring passionately about the right to own your own rocket launcher or the right to pollute the environment.

[notworking]

On 2004-04-21 09:43:00, Anonymous wrote:

"***
Actually the dog associates the can being shaken with pain. I feel certain that the 'trainer' shook the can, then shocked him with a cattle prod. He might have thrown the can at him too. Don't know, wasn't there. But, the technique shouldn't be used.
<
"

No, really, you just shake the can at the dog. It gets their attention and they don't seem to like the noise.  It's mentioned in a lot of dog training books, virtually none of which mention using a cattle prod or throwing the can at the dog.

As much as I've been tempted to use a shock collar on my dog, I don't.  It's difficult, though, to find ways to communicate with him since he doesn't talk and has a very limited understanding of language.  Which is why I don't give my CHILDREN, who ARE capable of understanding language, little pieces of liver when I want to change their behavior.

[Anonymous]

Website for Moonridge Academy (with links to Kolob Canyon)
http://www.moonridgeacademy.com

It says that this school specializes in girls 11-14.

  :mad:

[Anonymous]

The original poster asked a question or two, legitimate questions for someone who is unfamiliar with these sort of programs. Why in the hell is everyone attacking this person?

[Anonymous]

Why ask why?  It's obvious.  If it looks like a program for teens, it will be attacked.  Show me some links that, for the mostpart, are singing praises of Programs.  Funny thing is, or not so funny, is that no one has the slightest clue about this program.  It's all assumptions based on their own experiences, or lack thereof, about their program.  If it's a program, then they ALL must be the same.  

What I would like to ask of those that are bashing or making assumptions and who were teens in a program...did any of you talk to your parents much prior to going?  So all of a sudden, not talking to them while you learn to communicate respectfully is a problem.  If this program prohibits letter writing, that is a new one.  The programs that prohibit phone calls for a while do so for a good reason.

My take is that the teens are all butt hurt they are there, and saying they wantto talk to their parents is an excuse to tell their parents how sorry they are, even though they aren't. They just want to come home and get back to what they were doing before.   There are many scenarios, and we've heard it all before we chose residential programs.  Being a parent doesn't mean being verbally manipulated and abused.  Being a parent means being able to admit we were part of the problem and doing something about it.  

If Moonridge is a good program, great.  If not, they'll go away like so many others soon enough.  If the mom feels things are going well, why would anyone else care?

[Deborah]

***Funny thing is, or not so funny, is that no one has the slightest clue about this program. It's all assumptions based on their own experiences, or lack thereof, about their program. ***

Quotes about this program in this thread:
mom said that she has not been allowed to have any direct contact with her daughter for well over a month (no mail, no calls).

She said that the program told her that her daughter needed to earn the priviledge of communication with her parents, so none of her letters would be sent nor could she get any letters or calls until she reached a certain level. I guess her daughter is slower than most kids, as the mom said she was told that the daughter was being taught a lesson about consequences for not doing her work.

Apparently your response, anon?
If it's important to the girl to talk with her mom, she will do what needs to be done to have the calls and the mail. The first part of the stay at the school I'm familar with is the compliance phase. After that it's when the teen shows they are making changes for themselves, not the parents or the staff.

You don't get it do you? Incarcerating a teen is wrong. Denying contact or 'earning the privelege' to have contact with parents and family is wrong.
And yes, that is my opinion.

***So all of a sudden, not talking to them while you learn to communicate respectfully is a problem.***

That is not what is going on. Teens are not allowed to talk to their parents in the intital phase of programs for several reasons:
1) Instill fear.
2) Set the precedent that parents have abdicated responsibility and the program is in full control.
3) To reduce 'attrition'. They want the kid (money) to stay, so they limit contact with the parent while the precedent is being set.

While they're 'learning to communicate respectfully' is not one of them sweetie.  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:
You say:  The programs that prohibit phone calls for a while do so for a good reason. My take is that the teens are all butt hurt they are there, and saying they wantto talk to their parents is an excuse to tell their parents how sorry they are, even though they aren't. They just want to come home and get back to what they were doing before.

And so what of that? So, the programs are protecting the fragile parents who can't listen to their kids? That is not a reason to deny contact. I'd like to see a judge rip that notion to shreads. Isn't it enough that the lame-ass parent is off the hook to parent the teen, but they can't listen to them complain, vent, whatever. Disgusting how gullible parents can be. And they think they were 'manipulated' by their teen.  :lol:

***There are many scenarios, and we've heard it all before we chose residential programs.***

Who is 'we', who've heard it all before? Do you have some other program parents in your pocket? Are you a mouthpiece for the Industry?

***Being a parent doesn't mean being verbally manipulated and abused.***

You're not going to get much empathy here for that poor me, victim attitude. Try Struggling Teens where parents love to comisserate about how their teens abused them.

***Being a parent means being able to admit we were part of the problem and doing something about it.***

That line is the best sales pitch the Industry has. The covert goal is to relieve parents of guilt and convince them that sending their teens away is doing the right thing.  

***If the mom feels things are going well, why would anyone else care?***

Did you fail to understand what this board, and the regular participants are about? My perception is that a person came here to voice his/her concerns about the policies of a program and asked for information. I'm sure s/he will draw his/her own conclusions from the various view points that have been shared, including your own twisted opinion.

Your attempt to 'protect' the parent in question is oh so familiar- just the way the program protected you from your lying, manipulating, abusive teen. Wouldn't you just love it if you could somehow block Struggling Parents from this forum?

Truth is, a program parent is a program parent and will incarcerate their teen if they find one shread of support in that direction.
Then there are those parents who are considering a program, but have their brains engaged in the process. Having done some research, they may choose not to incarcerate their teen. Those are not the type of parents you/the Industry are looking for. I'm sure there are an ample number of lame brains who will keep the Industry going for some time to come. Relax. We're just sharing opinions and experience here. No need to feel so threatened.

[notworking]

On 2004-04-22 22:34:00, Anonymous wrote:

"Why ask why?  It's obvious.  If it looks like a program for teens, it will be attacked.  

No, actually, there are lots of programs for teens that aren't listed here.  I haven't seen any mention of the John Dewey Academy, for instance, which is a therapeutic boarding school on the east coast.  The man who runs it has actually published some articles about working with teens and, while I'm personally not thrilled that he seems to endorse some form of confrontation therapy, he does seem to acknowledge a responsibility for the wellbeing of his patients.  Or maybe he's a good con, but anyway, I haven't seen it here.  There are many programs in my area for troubled teens that aren't mentioned here and I'm sure there are elsewhere.

What I would like to ask of those that are bashing or making assumptions and who were teens in a program...did any of you talk to your parents much prior to going?  So all of a sudden, not talking to them while you learn to communicate respectfully is a problem.  If this program prohibits letter writing, that is a new one.  The programs that prohibit phone calls for a while do so for a good reason.

First of all, yes, I did talk to my parents.  They just didn't want to hear it.  Was I disrespectful?  Sure, sometimes.  But here's a clue -- NORMAL ADOLESCENTS ARE DISRESPECTFUL SOMETIMES.  Adolescence is a time of experimentation -- trying on new values and interests and identities.  Even the Amish, not a group of people one generally associates with "spoiling" their children or being "soft" on discipline (not to mention having a lot of exposure to popular culture, another bugaboo of the TC movement), recognize this.  They allow their teens the freedom to experiment and participate in the outside world.  For some kids, that means knowing they have that freedom, checking things in modern culture out, and returning to their original lifestyle.  Other kids drink and date and generally raise hell for awhile.  Some leave, but most come back.  It's a system that works because it recognizes and allows normal development.

 They just want to come home and get back to what they were doing before.

Or maybe they just want to come home, period.  You should be GRATEFUL your child loves you so much that s/he wants to come back after you've paid someone to abuse her/him.  

Being a parent doesn't mean being verbally manipulated and abused.  Being a parent means being able to admit we were part of the problem and doing something about it.  

Adults are not manipulated unless they allow themselves to be.  Same thing with real abuse.  And if you're in that situation, outpatient therapists do wonders with teaching you how to adopt alternative coping methods and set limits.    Hearing something you don't want to hear is neither manipulation nor abuse.  

Yeah, being a parent means being able to admit you did something wrong.  Then you apologize and stick it out while you try to fix it.  Think about the lesson you're teaching YOUR child -- if you do something wrong, hide the problem away hoping someone else fixes it for you.  No wonder we have all of these corporate scandals -- people are running businesses like they deal with their children and vice versa.

If Moonridge is a good program, great.  If not, they'll go away like so many others soon enough.  If the mom feels things are going well, why would anyone else care?  "

My guess is that mom's friend, who was the initial poster, was concerned about both mom and the girl.  On a larger level, though, is this relativism something we should apply to child welfare?  "Well, you or I might see locking a kid in a closet for 12 hours a day as abuse, but mom thinks it works great."  "Not all families view incest as a bad thing and, as long as they're not doing it on the front lawn, I think we should let them be."

[Anonymous]

So I did talk to my friend with the kid at Moonridge Academy.  She is struggling with the conflict of believing in the benefits of the program and with the reality of now almost two months without any written or verbal communication permitted from her 7th grade daughter.  The comments on this site have been useful - there seems to be some division along the lines of "all programs are bad for teens" and "some kids need tough love", but no one has defended no contact at all for this long of a time.  I wonder why no one has heard of this program, and I am very uneasy - but don't know if I should butt in and tell her this is very bad for her kid.

[Anonymous]

I wouldn't tell her she did something wrong.  I would ask her to get an explanation, a very clear one, on the purpose of not allowing incoming or outgoing mail.  As far as I'm concerned, that is NOT okay. She obviously has contact with someone there, so to get clear on just this one rule would be very interesting to find out about.  I personally know of no other school for pre-teens, or teens for that matter, that restrict mail.  She's gotta feel so lonely right now.  

As long as the mom knows why and feels this is okay, then leave it at that.  There are other sites that may be more helpful in getting stories from people that don't necessarily like their kid being in a program, but saw no alternative.  I don't get that this mom sent her daughter away just to get rid of her, as so many here seem to believe.

[Timoclea]

Academy at Swift River stops the kids' mail.

What experiences and history teach is this-that people and government never have learned anything from history, or acted on principles deduced from it.

--G.W.F Hegel (1770-1831)