Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Whooter

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 370
46
Quote from: "psy"
Quote from: "Whooter"
If your child is in need of an anti-cancer medication and all other avenues have been tried unsuccessfully then most parents would be willing to try a medication that is still undergoing trial studies to see if it has an effect on their child.

The difference is parents are warned by doctors that often untested treatments have as much potential for harm as they do to help.  There is an informed consent.  How many programs, how many, will tell the honest to god truth by saying "What we do is experimental. We are not sure that what we do works, but we believe it does as a result of their anecdotal experience; however there have been a significant number of former students who report being harmed as a result of our treatment".  How many will say that, Whooter?  Why is there no warning label on programs like there is on even a bottle of Aspirin?

I was never told the program would be effective.  I was told my daughter would enter an extremely structured environment, visit with a therapist once per week, the therapist and I would talk and the therapist would speak to her home therapist which she was seeing prior to entering ASR.  She would hopefully be weened off her meds which she was.  She would attend school and catch up on her studies etc. We could write to each other,We would get to speak once a week for half an hour and visit periodically.   I spoke with a few parents who had kids graduate from the program and I was free to walk around the campus and speak with the kids.  I knew there was no way anyone could guarantee success and never expected a guarantee .  I cant think of a single industry which talks about their failures.  Cancer doctors talk about survivor rates (not death rates).  If you enter a car dealership they dont have pictures of  car accidents all over the wall.  Its not because they are withholding information its just that people tend to look at the positive aspects vs the negative.



...

47
Quote from: "psy"
Apparently, none of these things seemed to shock Dave Marcus in the least -- certainly not in retrospect. Anyway, wasn't he And even if what he saw and reported was completely accurate, it's still anecdote. There is no proof whatsoever that a single kid was ever saved by a program. There are plenty who think they were, but then again, there are plenty who swear by homeopathy, or Scientology, or foul smelling exotic fruits.

The guy is a Pulitzer prized writer and spent 14 or 16 months inside of a program and wrote about his findings.  You cant get much more accurate than that.  He interviewed kids, wrote what he experienced and saw first-hand.

Quote
Speaking of exotic fruits, the Noni fruit, which Whooter is so fond of is not allowed to be sold in Europe as a health product. It's permitted to be sold as a food, but it's not permissible to sell it with any claims about health benefits. Why? Because there is no real evidence there are any. Why then is it OK to send kids to a programs that makes claims about "saving" kids when there is no evidence that has ever happened and there is considerable evidence the methods often employed are harmful? Should parents be able to subject their kids, as their property, to any untested treatment whatsoever?

I dont think they can claim it here either.  It is not approved by the FDA to cure anything, its a fruit juice.  It has not been evaluated yet,  but preliminary evidence is leaning toward it being very helpful for ones health.  I dont think many people really want to wait another 10 to 20 years for the studies to come out.  There are dozens of herbs and berries way ahead in line to be tested and evaluated.

Quote
That's really the core issue here. Desperate parents are willing to try anything when they feel like their kids are spiraling out of control and programs are more than willing to sell them a solution. The viability or efficacy of the solution doesn't matter. What matters is that it makes the parents feel good and as far as i'm concerned, that's the number one goal of many of these programs -- not helping the kids. Whooter would argue that by helping the kids, the parents are pleased. I would counter that programs need not actually help the kids. All they have to do is get the kids to believe, and openly profess, that they were helped. If they explode later -- well. It's anybody's fault but the program.

I disagree, psy, there is evidence that these programs are extremely helpful.  Of just the ones I have heard of there was a limited independent study done by a PhD graduate student and a few of the programs have conducted studies of their own and paid independent agencies to conduct studies.  I believe the findings were in the area of 80% of the reported kids did better after completing the program.



...

48
Her book did get good reviews, I think we all agreed to that several years ago.  But she never had the opportunity to witness and experience the day to day operations of a program which was unfortunate.  She was limited to just second hand information.  I am not saying it was all inaccurate it just wasn't the complete story.  Many refer to it as drive-by journalism now a days and is why today many reports are entrenched with the troops in Afghanistan , for example, so that they can report information which they know is accurate.



...

49
Hi PODK, its good to see you back again.  I remember the discussion a few years ago also.  There were many posters here on fornits who did not like the report/book because Dave Marcus found The Academy at Swift river to be helpful to most children.  He lived and taught there and followed a peer group for 14 months.  He reported on the good as well as the bad aspects of the industry.  Many here on fornits prefer to discuss only the negative side of the industry and therefore the book was not a favorite here.

Maia never had the visibility nor experienced the inside of any program and merely interviewed and reported on only the negative aspects of the industry.  Her book was accepted here largely because of its negative spin towards the industry, in my opinion.



...

50
Quote from: "psy"
Wow. So basically to get the health benefits from red wine you would have to drink so much you'd die of alcohol poisoning long before. And only if you're a mouse.

lol  No I dont read it that way.  There is no indication we would need to consume the same ratio as mice to reap the benefits.  The studies are ongoing, if it was concluded that we needed to consume 60 lites a day then there would be no need to continue to research this.  Typically they do testing on animals and then follow up with testing on humans.


Quote
And as you've just pointed out with both this and the Noni juice, what often seems like an informed, good decision, based on what you've casually overhead on the 7-o-clock news or what seems to be "common knowledge", is often not in actual fact, a good idea (or at best, completely benign). Parents think, based on superficial research, tv "experts, or "common knowledge", that programs are a good idea for their kids. In actual fact, there has never been any evidence, aside from anecdote, to support that conclusion. We do know, however, based on actual research, that confrontational techniques like the ones commonly used in programs can cause lasting harm. In other words, in order to get the possible, theoretical benefits of Resveratrol, you have to take the very real and documented risk of alcohol poisoning.

I dont take the advice of 7 o’clock news, psy.  Like most other parents we investigate and look at many points of view and collect as much information as possible.  From what I have read, so far, Noni juice is much better for you than most other juices and Red Wine (in moderation) is healthy for you based on studies to date (Mice may benefit more than humans).  
People cant sit around waiting for studies to be done on everything.  If your child is in need of an anti-cancer medication and all other avenues have been tried unsuccessfully then most parents would be willing to try a medication that is still undergoing trial studies to see if it has an effect on their child.

People need to rely on their common sense and the information available to them at the time they need to make a decision.



...

51
Quote from: "psy"

So there's this juice that nobody really knows what it does, there has been at least one study linking it to liver and kidney damage (click side effects, also see Wikipedia), there has been no published concrete evidence of any health benefits whatsoever -- and you've decided it's a good idea to drink it on a regular basis.  Well.  If your risk assessment deems that suitable -- it's your body to do with what you please.  Thank heavens for organ donors.  And as you note since kids are little more than property of their parents, the parents are also free to experiment on their kids with similar abandon.  Science be damned.  Peer reviewed studies be damned.  Anecdote and false hope should be enough for anybody.

I believe in weighing the positives and negatives and making an informed decision on what is best.  Nothing is 100% safe.  Drinking red wine can cause liver damage also but is also good for your heart.  Everything has a negative side effect, drinking too much water puts a lot of stress on the kidneys and disrupts normal digestion.  I think most people collect as much information as they can and make an informed decision whether it be their children or their health.



...

52
Matt Shea stated:
Quote
Maia Szalavitz, author of Help at Any Cost: How the Troubled-Teen Industry Cons Parents and Hurts Kids, told me about some of the horror stories her own research uncovered.

Oh Boy,  If Matt Shea had spoken to Dave Marcus instead of Maia he would have written a very much different and a more accurate article.  Unlike Maia, Dave Marcus, spent 14 months in the “Belly of the Beast” as many of you refer to the industry as and reported his findings in a book called “What it takes to pull me through”.

Maia performed what journalists refer to as “Drive-by” reporting.  She never bothered to spend any time inside a program gathering facts.  She interviewed a few kids who had attended these schools and report only the most horrific stories and painted the whole industry based on her findings.  This is similar to interviewing kids from public school who have been abused, raped by their teacher or attended Columbine high school and reported that there is a good chance your child can be killed or raped if you allow them to attend public school.



...

53
Quote from: "psy"

This is the crux of the issue right here.  He believes he was helped by his treatment and took it upon himself to treat others in turn.  It doesn't matter whether the treatment was objectively helpful in comparison to say, a control group.  All that matters is that he believes he was helped.

I really dont see this as a problem at all Psy.  This is how the whole world has evolved.  People try things and if they benefit from them then they pass it on, if they eat a berry and feel sick or die then others take note and no one will eat that particular berry.  Right now I am adding Noni juice to a morning shake that I make.  It has been reported that it boosts the immune system, although I cannot find any studies that support this I have read enough to know the risk is good and have added it to my diet.  Most people are not willing to wait for outcome studies on anything, even when it comes to their health or childrens health.  People assess the risks and then make a decision.



...

54
Quote from: "blombrowski"
I was actually expecting a little more from you.
 
I really dont have the time I use to have to respond.

Quote
The one consistent motif throughout the industry is that young people should take accountability for their actions, and accept responsibility for the results that those actions bring.  

Leaving aside the hypocrisy, and lack of role modeling on this issue, here's the danger in not publicly addressing the issue.  While there are programs that have evolved, there are programs that most certainly have not.  As I recall as recently as 2011 there was a Washington state based psychologist defending MBA's use of pulling tree trunks - he was defending a practice that the State of Oregon found to be abusive.  Without a public discussion of what in 2013 is antiquated treatment, practicioners will continue use outdated methods.  And I don't expect that the free market will be very effective in weeding those people out in a timely manner, for that very same reason that the profession hasn't declared it to be an antiquated technology.

Oh boy , here is where my opinions get me in trouble.
Personally I would not take the governments word over a professional psychiatrist.  Physiatrists are the enemy of the government because they cost them money and always want to extend treatment past the 30 day limit.  I would easily trust the word of a psychiatrist versus a government burocrat with no knowledge in the area.
I dont know anything about pulling logs or why this would be considered abusive, or if pulling a load of rocks would be more abusive or less abusive.  I would have to read the report.  I am not sure how this could be measured.  If a child was forced to write a book report on a book he read and if it wasnt done he would not eat that night then that would be abusive, in my opinion, but writing a book report isnt abusive.  The same with pulling a tree trunk.  If, for example, a child can pull the tree trunk 30 feet in under 1 minute then he could break the “all time record” and it would be good for his self esteem.  He would get bragging rights and build up his muscles, build up and appetite and focus on something other than his depression.  It may give the child something to work towards.



Quote
It's not that I would expect the industry to flaggelate itself over its past abuses, it's that I would expect in light of everything that's happened over the last seven years, that there would be more of a paper trail of people who work in the parent choice industry talking about how the industry evolved, and exactly why it needed to evolve.  Particularly, if we are to believe that the those who are now in their late 20's and 30's who talk about how they were abused as youth isn't indicative of where the field is today.

If you can point me to articles where this kind of critical analysis has occurred, it would be much appreciated.



I am not convinced that there are all that many kids who were abused by these programs.  I wish there was a way to better measure these result via outcome studies.  I know that Aspen performed many studies in the past  to help better measure their successes and there were a few independent studies done all of which tilted towards positive results.  I am with you that we need more critical analysis of this industry but am unsure where this would start.



...

55
Quote from: "blombrowski"
................................

3.  The industry still needs to make a reckoning with its Synanon-influenced past.  i would like to believe that after the first Miller hearings, the Elan and FFS Truth Campaigns, the closing of Mount Bachelor, a smart businessperson would realize that the world was changing and that having food and sleep deprivation and forced exercise as part of the program milieu was bad business.  But other than some writings by Tom Croke, I haven't seen anything that even reads like an excuse (i.e. well, back in the 90's CEDU was the best thing going for us since medical psychiatry wasn't effective at getting our kids to grow up fast enough, but now we know we can achieve forced maturity without torturing kids).  Without the industry taking accountability for it's past actions, how can we be sure to what extent it has actually changed - so... Whooter you have the floor.

I dont see why the industry needs to dig up the past in order to be successful in the future.  Every industry evolves over time.  The parts that are not effective get dropped or stripped away and the elements which are effective get embellished.  The needs of the children and parents change over time.  Keeping a spot light on the industry and asking for studies to reflect reported successes should help to keep the industry evolving.

When I was young (and little enough) I use to sit on the dash board when we rode in the car while my sisters stood on the front seat.  Now kids have to be strapped into a certified booster seat.  I dont see any use in going back and arresting or reprimanding those parents, car makers or law makers for not keeping the children safe.

As long as we keep measuring the success and continuing to improve then I think we are on a good track and dont need to dwell too much on past mistakes.



...

56
Quote from: "blombrowski"
Whooter, point taken.  However, as a fairly outspoken critic against Teen Trouble, let me try to explain the three levels of critcism that has been directed at Josh Shipp.

1.  I was always of the opinion that his "sin" of sending youth to programs, particularly CCA and DRA, was the least of it and the focus on the programs he was sending youth to actualy obscured the two major issues, that actually made him a one-man caricature if the TTI

2.  He presented himself as being more credentialed than he really was.  At best, he could lay claim to being a peer mentor, with excellent engagement skills developed through his marketing experience and empathy built through shared life experience.  Calling himself a "teen behavior expert" was a stretch.  Saying he was endorsed by Harvard was an outright lie.

3.  The methods he used on camera were borderline abusive, and clearly meant to confront in an effort to break youth down.

We can have a conversation about what would be effective, and I thought that for the most part the first 25-30 minutes of each episode effectively demonstrated how a parenting coach (even a relatively unqualified one) could help facilitate parent-child communication.  But I'm convinced that reality-tv is a poor medium to address our concerns because drama sells, even though drama isn't conducive to good treatment.

Blombrowski,  You seem to be much more informed than I am on this subject.  I have seen the show and initially found it to be a great idea in that it placed a spotlight on the industry and those kids in need of help, but as I thought about it (in light of this discussion) you look at the reality shows and the people in them they all need to keep stepping it up each season, increase the drama from last season.  Many are so desperate to keep it going they create their own scandals, have an affair, get pregnant, get married, get divorced, leak a sex tape etc.  In Jeff’s case the networks were more than likely pushing him hard to increase the drama and he was unwilling to push any harder than he already has for the sake of ratings.

I agree with you that reality TV is a poor place to try and reach out to kids who are struggling and expect positive results or a sincere effort to focus on the kids needs vs increased ratings.



...

57
Hey, Zen, I hope all is well.  Here is my 2 cents.

I dont think Josh shipp should be judged based on if he is on “our side” or someone else’s side.  Josh works for what he believes in.  He was abused as a child and struggled with addiction and because he was helped by adults he was able to overcome many of his problems.  Just like Jacqueline Danforth and many others he wanted to give back and help others to succeed in life.  I don’t think they should be criticized and beaten down for trying to help others.  There are a lot of children in crisis in this country and there are even fewer answers on how to help them and even fewer, still, people willing to step up and give it a try.  Television/ media is one of the best ways to get the word out and enlighten people that there is a problem.  Maybe many here do not agree with the solution but I think we can all agree that there is a need in this country for people to care and intervene.

We just cant beat down and discard an entire concept like “Teen Trouble” without commenting or having an honest discussion on the positive and negatives of its airing.  How did the show approach Self- awareness, social awareness and relationship skills? (to name a few)  It just seems to have gotten to the point where many here on fornits  are not willing to dissect any program and differentiate the good from the bad.......  its boiled down to: “If a child is sent to a program then the program must be bad.”

It would be more beneficial if we could all rise above this mentality.



...

58
Quote from: "psy"
And plenty of Scientologists, Moonies, and the list goes on.  Whether somebody believes they were helped does speak to whether or not they were objectively helped or not.  Her DUI isn't exactly encouraging in this respect.

This should never deter anyone from sharing what has been successful for them.  If people emerge from a program feeling better and living a healthier life then they should spread the word, the same as people who were harmed by a program should let others know.  If a person finds benefit from yoga, for example, they may feel inspired to open a yoga place and help others as they were helped even if it is just her belief.




Quote
Indeed.  Perhaps she can fix her own problems before attempting to "fix" other peoples' kids.

Psy, She did!  She started a program called New Horizons, up in Maine, and helped many other kids like herself.  The DUI occurred just recently at age 44.  I donty think we can tie her DUI back to her program days and say the program let her down the same as we cannot credit a program for a person who stops abusing drugs 20 years after leaving the program.  Many people can relapse for many reasons and “do” every day.



...

59
Quote from: "Oscar"
From what we have learned her program was kind of soft - a misguided attempt so save the world for every girl based on the idea that just because it worked for her, then it would work for others too.

Her eagerness to share her success is a very typical reaction for most people who had a great experience.  Having the means coupled with the desire, experience and ambition to help other women like herself led Jacqueline to create a program which would lead to making a positive impact on other childrens lives.  Hopefully she gets through this rough patch in her life as quickly as possible.



...

60
Open Free for All / Re: Feeling guilty?
« on: May 17, 2013, 08:59:20 PM »
Quote from: "none-ya"
OK I read the wiki link. (or the better pat of it anyway) and I have no clue how that relates to anything here. There are no shortage of people in this world  who will commit the most heinous of acts "just because". They need no coercion. You know how the allies found the concentration camps? By the smell. Yet german civilians "knew nothing" (insert sgt. schultz here). Tell me psy, when you were in your program (cedu?) Did you ever wind up identifying with you captors? I somehow picture you being at least more pragmatic than than that. You did what you had to do and then got the hell out right?
Oh by they way, This is a legit question,but I feel I have to ask for the truth.
If whooter was banned,and he couldn't even read what was going on,how did he know it was ok to come back? Tell the truth, you two are really bffs. and keep in close touch I believe. Who's next max? Oh that's right you admonished me for calling max "fat" and made me promise not to use the "f" word again. People who live in glass houses may not want to seek political correctness.
God I sound like inculcated.

When a person is banned they can still visit the site and read the posts, they are just banned from posting.  I honored and accepted the ban and have not posted for a couple of years (or however long it has been).  I could have changed my IP and kept posting and been a nuisance, but I accepted and respected the decision by Psy and Ginger to have me put off.  When I noticed a new beginning was occurring I reached out for a new start of my own and am sort of getting my feet wet again and getting acclimated to the new rules as I see you are too, None-ya.  It is good to be back and I hope the site can grow into a great discussion board once again.  If things do not work out the admins can easily ban me again and I will accept their decision as I have in the past.



...



...

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 370