Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => Hyde Schools => Topic started by: HydeFan on October 07, 2005, 03:45:00 AM
-
NOTICE: I AM NOT A HYDE REPRESENTATIVE AND DO NOT SPEAK FOR HYDE. THE FOLLOWING IS SIMPLY MY PERSONAL OPINION. SINCE THE SUBJECT MATTER IS VERY COMPLEX, WHAT I WRITE WILL BE NECESSARILY INCOMPLETE!
Dear Potential Hyde Parents:
Based on my experiences at Hyde as a student, intern and aliumni, I am an unabashed Hyde Fan. Realizing it is not worth my time to respond ad naseaum to every statement made on this website, I thought I would write my peace (sic) and leave you to make your own informed opinion.
1. THE MOST IMPORTANT DECISION YOU WILL EVER MAKE, is a decision that you make over and over, every day, and that is how to best care for your child. I commend you for getting to this site and for putting the most possible effort you can into making yourself the best parent possible and making the smartest, most imformed, most humane, most loving decisions you can for your child.
2. IMHO, THIS WEBSITE HAS A DOMINANTLY NEGATIVE BIAS. This website is full of people with a lot of mixed motives. Fundamentally, this is not a website for people to come and express pro's and con's, this is primarily a website for people who either (a) did not have a good experience at Hyde, or (b) have no relationship to Hyde, but have a political agenda about all schools they believe could be Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform schools. What you will not get here is a lot of the people who are Hyde supporters, NOR an ability to determine relative numbers.
3. RESULT OF WEBSITE BIAS - THE CON. I do not discount some of the things said on this side by families who went to Hyde, but my experience is that the results are fairly skewed. People who had a good experience with something typically don't spend a lot of time looking for a place to go rave about it. They send in their annual alumni contributions, they read school newsletters, and they remember their experience with the full range of emotions that it meant to them.
4. RESULT OF WEBSITE BIAS - THE NUMBERS. One of the questions you must face then, is whether you are reading the views of a vocal minority, or something more systemic. Many on this website will presume to answer that for you. I don't really know the answer quantitatively, I simply have my own long-term experience with Hyde that says there a LOT of people for whom Hyde was profound and life-transforming. I know that Hyde has been somewhat contraversial, but has generally received aplomb in the national press, that many of Hyde's alum have gone on to be leaders in society (business, politics, etc.) and for what its worth, the children of a good number of rich and famous have and are attending Hyde.
5. MOTIVES OF PARTICIPANTS. As a result of the inherent and structural bias and nature of the beast, it may seem like a large number of people are dissatisfied. Truth is, since almost everyone here is anonymous, it is hard to determine numbers, have a meaningful discussion, or ascertain bias. Clearly, some just want a place to blow off steam about their experiences at Hyde. I support that. Some are out to change the world, and I support that as well, but I would caution you to take any comment of an anonymous participant with a grain of salt (and mine too for that matter)!
6. HYDE IS HARD. I don't think Hyde is for everyone, and if you are looking for a fix it school and are not willing to look at yourself and grow as part of the process, Hyde is probably not for you.
7. THEORY. I think some of the posters on this website may have encountered some level of abuse. And on some level, that happens at every school, public/private/alternative. Right or wrong, I also think that many of the most angry and vocal simply never got it. By it I mean, they never understand the "whys" of Hyde's process in any deep soulful way, and certainly never embraced its principles. As you might be aware, the human psche is a heavily defended creature, and people will go to great lengths to have to avoid taking a real look at themselves, their family, their lives and then tell the truth about it. Some here don't even see this as important or anyone else's business. And some of these people self-confess to blaming Hyde for their station in life 30 years later. That alone should, IMHO, give you pause. And if you do a search for my posts on this site, you will see discussions where others make fairly outrageous claims, that so far have turned out to be bald-faced lies. This should also give you pause enough to realize that angry people do no always tell the truth (nor do brainwashed people as no doubt I will be accused of being), so as there might be clear motivations for any pro or con comment to be either an exaggeration or outright fabrication, you must decide veracity for yourself!
8. THE TEST. Here is a really simple test for you. For any claim here that really bothers you, call Hyde and see what they have to say. Go up and stay at the school for a few days and talk to random people and see what they have to say. Ask to speak to someone on 2-4. Ask about any scandal you want. If you are answered openly and honestly then you got your answer, but trust that you will know what's honest and what isn't without having to take the word of an anonymous poster. Here is my belief: The truly abusive schools are closed societies. They will not let you in to observe anything closely, and will pretend to give you reason why. NEVER TRUST YOUR CHILD TO ANY SCHOOL THAT WON'T LET YOU SEE EVERY PIECE OF IT, AND IF THAT INCLUDES HYDE, SO BE IT, BUT I DON'T THINK IT DOES. The point is, don't take anyone's word that it will or won't, just go ask! If you don't like what you see and they can't explain it to your satisfaction, then again, its probably not for you.
9. MAJOR HYDE PROBLEMS (ALLEGED AND OTHERWISE).
a. Faculty Turnover. This is a real issue, but its not necessarily a scandal. I don't know the real numbers, not sure anyone here does, and you should ask for those. But in the same way Hyde is tough for students and families, it is tough for faculty. It requires a commitment way above and beyond the usual teacher, probably for less pay (at least per hour), and like some families where there is not a good fit, I am sure some staff are selected only to discover its not a good fit.
b. Academics. I don't have a sense of how Hyde really ranks currently. I do see the annual list of where the graduates are going to college....and the list is long and the college selection seems applicably broad-based. Hyde probably isn't an Ivy League feeder, but (if I recall correctly) has maybe a few each year who achieve that as well.
c. One-Size-Fits-All Approach. I get a little confused by this comment. Pretty much every school has this, include public and prep. I think this comment more appropriately translates into, this school operates on a certain belief system I didn't like or don't agree with. For sure there are schools with basically no structure (free schools), and schools where you can get one-on-one guidance and support for your child ($$$$$), but otherwise, in the realm of financial reason, you will be forced to choose a school with a bias. And that bias will be applied across the board. Its the only cost effective way to run a school. It really comes down to, what are the rules and expectations for me as a parent, and for my child as a student, and do they fit my own vision.
d. FIX-MY-TEEN-INDUSTRY. Some on this site will tell you that Hyde fits into the fix my teen industry. I disagree. To the extent that is someone's perception, I think they are wrong about Hyde--and a good reason they failed there is because the family wouldn't grow with the teen. Personally, I was rejected from admittance to Hyde because my family was not ready to grow with me. I saw this happen in a number of cases, and part of the reason the interview is so intensive is that Hyde will not just accept anyone, so they are evaluating the entire family in the interview process to see if the conditions needed for collective change are present. IMHO, the real fix-my-teen industry wants your money, puts the child into harsh conditions to make them grow up and then presents the finished product back to the parents for approval. (Read some of the posts on the Seed forum to this effect.)
e. HYDE'S TOUGH LOVE. On the topic of tough love, and whether it works for all, I would say, lets first define what we are talking about, and to agree that of course, no one program works for everyone. On the first part, what seems to happen in many families is that they set standards of acceptable behavior outside of which certain behaviors will incur certain consequences. When pressed, however, many parents are not will to step up and implement those consquences when the child test these boundaries, resulting in the child believing boundaries don't need to be respected. For me "tough love" is just a unphemism for, we Hyde school require of both ourselves and you the parents to live up to our own and your own stated consequences with the child, however hard that may be.
f. Scandals. This one seems a bit amazing to me. The only reason why a lot of information about Hyde is public is because much more than most institutions which I have experienced in my life, they air their dirty laundry. Every school and I would argue every person has it, its just whether or not they hold it in or let it out. Hyde may not always achieve this, but (again IMHO) they sincerely try to hold themselves to the same standards as the students and resond accordingly. Many will take issue with this, but the evidence should speak for itself.
g. LGATs. One member on this list will simply regurgitate how HYDE's process uses LGATs and how those have been completely discredited. From wikipedia: "Large Group Awareness Training or LGAT is a mechanism for promoting awareness change and rapid, thorough commitment to a cause or idea. LGATs tend to be brief but intense sessions of a few hours or days in which, ideally, participants adopt the message of the 'training' promptly and enthusiastically. Historically, LGAT origins trace back, at least in part, to the encounter group movement of the 1960s. Current examples of LGAT programs would include Landmark Education, Neuro-Linguistic Programming, Lifespring, Tony Robbins seminars, etc."
This definition certainly does not apply to Hyde, nor are the listed items inherently bad (NLP is in fact used by many therapists today, and is widely viewed as a very viable medium for change). For the bad ones (EST/LANDMARK FORUM), Hyde is in no meaningful way similar to these programs. The key thing to note about the anonymous person continually posting about LGATS is the lack of definition, lack of posted references, and and lack of indentification which parts of HYDE's program might fall therein.
The best article I found on the topic is at http://skepdic.com/lgsap.html (http://skepdic.com/lgsap.html) and I reiterate, by this definition, these types of LGAT have no commonality with Hyde's process. [EDIT: Found another great piece on LGATs..... http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eldon.braun/awa ... lgat1.html (http://perso.wanadoo.fr/eldon.braun/awareness/lgat1.html) -- and these again are completely different from they Hyde experience in seminars.]
===========================
I will add onto this post in the future, but this is a start and I will try and keep it fresh rather that debating anonymous streams of people who never attended Hyde, or attended and had troubles for good reasons, or even those with legitimate beefs. Again no school or system is 100% perfect.
I hope this has been of some help.
========================
FOLLOW ON NOTES:
Just so you can keep track of the profiles here:
TommyFromHyde1: He went to Hyde for Summer School and 1/2 a school year, running away three times, the last in January of 1977! His desire to shut down Hyde and any similar schools because 30 years later he's just getting in touch with his feelings. His real name is Tom Allan. He posts a lot of stuff on here like he knows Hyde inside out.
Sample Post URL: http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... tart=#1253 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=210&forum=9&start=#1253)
Post URL: http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... =30#112674 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=469&forum=43&start=30#112674)
Oppositional Defiance: Likely a former Marine. AKA
Black Francis the 2nd
Email- skiesel93@hotmail.com
One time I was sent on 2-4 because my SONOFABITCH "friend" Rob Ebling ratted out to Dean's Area that I told him that I knew that Jesse Wang had cigarrettes. This was during a "bust". During a bust sometimes half the fucking school would be on 2-4.
Antigen: Runs this website and has a vested interest in promoting anything she thinks is part of the troubled teen industry. Never went to Hyde. [ This Message was edited by: HydeFan on 2005-11-11 02:06 ]
-
"Shoreland" shines a light on Gulag schools like Hyde
Anonymous
Unregistered User Posted: 2005-08-17 09:29:00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ingeborg Lauterstein's new novel shines a light on the "fix my teen" industry, which Hyde and other schools fall into. She is my mother and I survived Hyde School back in the mid-80's. This was right when Gauld came back and took the school over. While some of the problems that Gauld saw in society and education were very real, the "tough love" approach his schools use do not always work. In my case, Gauld made sure that I was out of his school and could not graduate. This all happened close to the end of the school year. As a direct result of his efforts, my choices in college were limited and my entire life since has been impacted. I am not making this up. It turns out that a brand name education, followed by that all important first and second jobs affects your future a lot more than anything Gauld could ever offer in terms of character. It took years and years, but now at 38 I finally get paid an o.k. wage, but only on a freelance basis. Of course the novel is about a lot more than these brainwashing centers that pass themselves off as schools, it's about family and what that means and it is funny, maybe too funny for my tastes.
-
On 2005-10-06 05:52:00, Dysfunction Junction wrote:
"I'd be really careful dealing with ANY "emotional growth" program. Remember, these are NOT "schools." Most have unaccredited academics and cannot issue diplomas, so as far as "school" is concerned, you'll have an 18-year-old with a 9th grade education and in serious need of remediation.
Please continue your good research and critical thinking. Be sure to read up on LGAT (Large Group Awareness Training), as nearly every single "program" is based upon this philosophy.
Please read threads about other facilities you are considering. If you have questions, please ask.
"
You are right about academics and the quality of "teachers" at Hyde. I know one former Hyde student who left because the parents were very concerned about her education. She was in 11th grade at Hyde. When she interviewed for a spot in a local private school the admissions counselor stated the work she was previously doing was more on a 8th or 9th grade level.
The above is only one of the reasons you should not base your decision on Hyde's marketing materials. At Hyde, Character comes before education, but in life you have to have both and Hyde is not qualified to teach either.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post URL: http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... t=D#138159 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=12085&forum=43&Sort=D#138159)
Dysfunction Junction
Frequent poster
Joined: 2005-03-06
Posts: 595 Posted: 2005-10-06 05:52:00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd be really careful dealing with ANY "emotional growth" program. Remember, these are NOT "schools." Most have unaccredited academics and cannot issue diplomas, so as far as "school" is concerned, you'll have an 18-year-old with a 9th grade education and in serious need of remediation.
Please continue your good research and critical thinking. Be sure to read up on LGAT (Large Group Awareness Training), as nearly every single "program" is based upon this philosophy.
Please read threads about other facilities you are considering. If you have questions, please ask.
_________________
"Compassion is the basis of morality."
-Arnold Schopenhauer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post URL: http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... t=D#138116 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=12085&forum=43&Sort=D#138116)
Anonymous
Unregistered User Posted: 2005-10-06 04:27:00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am new to this board. Someone recommended that I look at this board as part of my exploration of schools.
I have looked into many schools and talked with many educational consultants and parents about their advantages and disadvantages. I have to say that my strong impression is that Hyde is in a class by itself, in many respects. Thus far I have not encountered this kind of intense debate about a school's model and program. Controversies about Hyde, alleged scandals at the school, etc., are very disturbing. My overall impression is that Hyde has a relatively small number of passionate supporters who buy into the model and a huge number of equally passionate critics. I can't say I've ever encountered more sustained criticism about a school and its treatment of students and parents (although Hyde certainly has its fans, as this board shows). While some of Hyde's critics on this board seem to take potshots and provide only superficial (and occasionally immature) criticisms, I'm very impressed with the number of very thoughtful, insightful and intense comments from a number of parents (and students perhaps?) who seem to know Hyde very well.
It seems clear that Hyde has one model that it tries to impose on every student. If it's true that Hyde accepts many students with major behavior and mental health issues (that's the strong impression I'm getting), that approach is very troubling to me. If I've learned anything over the years, it's that programs need to be sensitive to kids' individual needs. For that reason, primarily, I wouldn't consider sending my child to Hyde. The Hyde model seems very superficial compared to what I've heard about other schools; it may work well for some, but I get the impression that it doesn't work well for many and that the attrition rate is very high.
I'm also very troubled by what sounds like Hyde's very doctrinaire approach and dominance by one family and its close allies. Reading the comments on this site from a couple of Hyde supporters, I sense a strong tone that's rather patronizing, admonishing, defensive, and finger-pointing. I haven't picked up that attitude in my conversations with parents and staff of the other schools I've explored. Is that style typical of what one finds at Hyde?
I should also add that I recently chatted with two experts in the boarding school world who expressed serious concerns about Hyde's "arrogance" and "doctrinaire" style. These education professionals are very well informed and were able to offer thoughtful insights about a whole range of schools. This pattern of feedback is steering me away from Hyde. My strong sense is that there are other schools for struggling adolescents that are a much better fit.
-
It is quite humorous that HydeFan keeps admonishing people for speaking the truth because one of the sayings at Hyde is, "Truth Over Harmony" in other words don't worry about keeping harmony, rather it is important to speak the truth and put yourself out there.
I agree there are legitimate concerns for the teachings and indoctornation of Joe Gauld. As he gets older he seems to be more out of control if he CANNOT CONTROL.
Let us not forget Hyde is now in the public sector ie DC, New Haven. Hyde recently opened up another "Charter School" in Oakland California and is also in the process of opening up one in NYC. I think it is of the utmost importance to inform the school system of NYC about Hyde's practices and destructive patterns. If you have any ideas, let the rest of us know.
-
Hyde Fan is entitled to his take on Hyde. He clearly is a Hyde Fan, but don't just go by Hyde Fan's very well written marketing letter.
As a Hyde Parent I can say that going to the school and being taken around on tour by one of the star pupils was not productive and in fact gave me a false view of the school. What a parent needs to do is to sit in on a seminar or better yet ask to be a part of a Family Weekend. This will give you a good indoctrination, but it will never happen because Hyde will never allow it.
-
Parents should research LGAT's and Lifespring Seminars, as they are the basis of the Hyde seminars. They've been shown to be psychologically damaging to participants.
-
Hyde doesn't accept everybody, I'd say 1 outta three gets into the school. The school is honest about expectations and will not take on a family if they do not want to be there. There is also $1 million dollars in financial aid each year between the two boarding campus'. The attrition rate is high because when a parent who hasn't really bought in the program sees a behavior change in their kid...two things go thru their mind: My kid's fixed so no more family work and no more $40k per year.
The Hyde staff are not ball-busters...they demand excellence from your kid, just like you will eventually do. They see your child's best and expect that from them at all times.
It's true that Hyde has a young group of faculty members, just like any boarding school..they also have an expereinced group that have been there for years..most with advanced degrees that guide and train the new staff members. If you look at a list of faculty members from 3 years ago..you'll see the same names of senior faculty members and a good amount of younger faculty, but just like anywhere else, they like to go on to get their advanced degrees or try a new teaching experience and many come back to teach a few years down the road.
You ARE expected "to get deep" in seminars and regional meetings. There's a reason you are looking at a school like Hyde...something's not only wrong with your kid..something's very wrong with the family or environment they are growing up in, until that is changed, there's very little the school can do. The people who are posting on this site about the cult environment or the fact that Hyde sucks...they failed to mention that their kid and their family are still screwed up, because nobody wants to face the music and make a change.
As far as Joe Gauld goes...his involvement in the school is quite minimal. He does a meeting every weekend on both campuses for the parents who are up for an FLC, but other than that he's out working on the very successful charter school program. Washington, DC has a school of 770 K-12 kids and a new school opened this fall in Oakland, CA. NYC will open next fall. His son is the President and his daughters both work at the schools, one is the Head of School in Bath and the other (who went to school with Tommy) is the head of family ed in Woodstock.
Speaking of Tommy...dude, you need to be a big boy and go visit Bath or Woodstock and see what's going on there...it's VERY different from when we were there.
Folks, You're hearing from the Hyde failures on this site..not the successes that out number these boobs 20-1. If you're thinking about attending either of the Hyde Schools, go there for an interview....it's free and they won't drug and kidnap you..you'll see first hand what's going on and get an honest outlook from the student tour guides...you'll be wonderfully refreshed at how candid they are.
-
Honestly, I have read many of the posts on this site about Hyde and I find them more and more frustrating.
I think that the charter school in NYC is such an amazing idea because I've known people from the charter school in DC who have had wonderful experiences (check out the NPR story - Jesse Jean, a friend of mine, and a great kid)
I graduated last year and I am now at a very competitive liberal arts college, I did well at the school and although I disagreed with many things and it was not easy for me, I do accredit a lot of who I am today to the things I went through at that school.
As for the tour guides who are hand picked, you are wrong. Unless the person is completely off-track, they can give a tour, and in fact sometimes very off-track kids do give tours because it's a good experience.
It is not the place for everyone, but if anything it is a far more meaningful experience than the average public high school. Not everyone can handle it, but it depends on your maturity, it is nonsense to call the school a cult. And in terms of the teachers, some of the most amazing people work at that school. They are young, but consider the commitment that embody in spending 24 hours a day at a school like that. In fact, the thing that I was most grateful for at that school was the amazing faculty, who were willing to have conversations with me all the time, or invite me in to their home when I was having a bad day, or just let me do homework in their house.
Most of the kids who are saying these EXXAGERATIONS AND MISINTERPRETATIONS are probably bitter because people were honest with them, and they could not handle it.
I would not usually imagine myself sticking up for the school, because I had a very difficult time there, but most of what people are saying is simply not true.
-
Regarding seminars....
Faculty are participants in the group just as much as they are facilitators, and a lot of the harsh feedback comes from students, parents, AND faculty, so if someone is offended by something, it was not necessarily from a faculty.
The amount of seminars that i have sat through is indefinte, I spent 7 years sitting through seminars, since my brother attended the school before I did. People's boundaries are respected, if there something very personal about their past then they are encouraged to share it, but not required. I know this first-hand. The mandatory journaling questions and such are pretty vague: "what are your hopes and dreams?" "what resentments do you have towards your past?" people can answer however they want.
Again: I don't think that the school is perfect, I was often a student who stood up for things that i disagreed with, and I had many conversations with the headmaster, asst. headmasters, and all my teachers about the things that were not right about the school. But you don't really have the right to talk about that before you really give it a chance...and I don't mean just sitting in a seminar, but really really participating.
-
HydeFan seems to be getting more and more desperate to distort the truth. On another thread he does a great sales pitch for Hyde, but the problem is what he says is not the truth. I grant him that there are some truthful points he makes, but not many. To go through each one and debate is a waste of time that I don't have.
I have a life and a career no thanks to Hyde and find it impressive that HydeFan spends so much time trying to defend an institution that clearly has always had many flaws. As far as the school being open for anyone to see, HydeFan knows this is not true and that no potential student or parent will ever be allowed in a seminar. HydeFan will say this is because of privacy, but the fact remains that many times what is done in these seminars is destructive and harmful! These "group leaders" allow the level of these seminars to get to a very dangerous point and I do not believe the outside world will ever be privleged to see one unless Hyde sets a controlled one up with selecting the participants, the same way they set up the tours with their star students.
My question to HydeFan is, why are you going to such great lengths to try to prove all the other posters wrong? Doesn't seem that you have let go of your control and dominance! At least the other posters point out the negatives and positives of Hyde. You simply dispute any negatives and want the public to believe that Hyde is an Oasis if you do the work that Hyde expects. This is not so and you know it!!
HydeFan, you give the perfect impression of Hyde. A CULT
-
I agree that this article about Hyde is very disturbing (http://www.educationnext.org/20051/22.html (http://www.educationnext.org/20051/22.html)). The author seems to understand how destructive and cult-ish Hyde can be, while acknowledging that some students may have some beneficial experiences. The author also seems to understand how this (largely) family run business shuts out much of the rest of the world and marches to its own drummer. No wonder so many people view it as a cult that's dominated by so many narrow-minded staff.
-
I have a customer/friend who's little step-brother got sent to Hyde. Kid wasn't bad, really, just flunking out and agreed that maybe he needed a little more structure. He agreed to go to Hyde. It was the parents who sensed something not right. They went to the first required parent weekend and found it cultish and weird. The older step daughter (my customer) knew I was into researching these places and asked me about it. I told her Hyde was not among the worst, but it seems to be a cultish little program. No so bad as Elan. But not real wholesome, either.
They had already decided to pull him out at the end of the semester when he refused a weekend off campus because he thought he had been bad and needed to spend the entire weekend praying. They pulled him immediately. No regrets. They seem to be of the opinion that Hyde was brainwashing their kid. Turns out, the kid was just depressed, and thus quite succeptable to manipulation aimed at gaining better access to the family forture.
Watch yourself! Best bet! It's summer. Take a much needed vacation and go camping with your kid. What a concept, eh?
-
:scared:
Now, connect the dots. What sort of deeply disturbing private matter would a guy like Jesse Jean have to share in group w/ your 12yo daughter? How would you like to have him leading a parent seminar when some mousy, shy little guy insists he's got nothing he'd like to talk about? I bet he could be a very, very effective LGA facilitator.
I am not a great believer in school. School is primarily an institution for the perpetuation of adolescence...The thought that school educates is not one I have accepted yet...Thank God I am not young. I could not survive this horror.
--Peter F. Drucker
-
On 2005-10-07 15:20:00, Anonymous wrote:
"HydeFan seems to be getting more and more desperate to distort the truth. On another thread he does a great sales pitch for Hyde, but the problem is what he says is not the truth. I grant him that there are some truthful points he makes, but not many. To go through each one and debate is a waste of time that I don't have.
Actually, not desparate at all. I started a new threat to simply tell my piece and leave the rest to the parents to decide.
I have a life and a career no thanks to Hyde and find it impressive that HydeFan spends so much time trying to defend an institution that clearly has always had many flaws.
Thank you. My purpose in writing a separate stream was to return to my life while the rats keep eating the trash.
As far as the school being open for anyone to see, HydeFan knows this is not true and that no potential student or parent will ever be allowed in a seminar. HydeFan will say this is because of privacy, but the fact remains that many times what is done in these seminars is destructive and harmful! These "group leaders" allow the level of these seminars to get to a very dangerous point and I do not believe the outside world will ever be privleged to see one unless Hyde sets a controlled one up with selecting the participants, the same way they set up the tours with their star students.
Actually, what I said above is, that if Hyde won't let you see one of these seminars or any part of Hyde and that troubles you and you can't see their intrinsic purpose and potential value, DON'T GO THERE.
My question to HydeFan is, why are you going to such great lengths to try to prove all the other posters wrong? Doesn't seem that you have let go of your control and dominance! At least the other posters point out the negatives and positives of Hyde.
I think I have pointed out many negatives about Hyde. It is not a panacea and is not for everyone. But I am also not willing to throw the baby out with the bath water.
You simply dispute any negatives and want the public to believe that Hyde is an Oasis if you do the work that Hyde expects. This is not so and you know it!!
On the last point, I think it is so, and in my experience, it was so.
HydeFan, you give the perfect impression of Hyde. A CULT
I am actually hoping to give the impression of a rounded, reasonable, thoughtful person who is willing to stand up for what he believes in, even in a forum where the premise virtually pre-determines the outcome.
The real question is, why am I such a threat to you? Why not just go back to your own posts?
-
On 2005-10-07 16:05:00, Antigen wrote:
" :scared:
Now, connect the dots. What sort of deeply disturbing private matter would a guy like Jesse Jean have to share in group w/ your 12yo daughter? How would you like to have him leading a parent seminar when some mousy, shy little guy insists he's got nothing he'd like to talk about? I bet he could be a very, very effective LGA facilitator.
Antigen, who has never been to Hyde or had any real involvement is now raising the spector that an older man might be placed in a group with a 12 year old girl and then say something horrifically inappropriate.
Your post is completely made up, inflammatory, based on things that don't happen at Hyde.
The spector of the deranged older man (which Jesse is not....listen to his story on NPR) being in a room with a 12-year old girl and sharing something inappropriate is distasteful beyond words.
You never went to Hyde and you know from little to nothing about it.
Folks, at least when I was there, the seminars were peer seminars. At times there are school seminars, but I was never exposed to anything there that I had not heard or seen before.....or had not wished my family had the courage to talk about.
And if you don't think your son or daughter is exposed to EVERYTHING about life in junior high and high school, including trouble kids, you haven't visited either in a long time. (And if your primary desire is to shelter your child, send them to prep school. Hyde clearly isn't for you.)
This post is classic for the type of mis-information you will get on this site.
[ This Message was edited by: HydeFan on 2005-10-07 19:29 ]
-
Hyde Fan wrote:
****"Actually, not desparate at all. I started a new threat to simply tell my piece and leave the rest to the parents to decide."****
Started a new "threat," huh? Little Freudian slip there...
-
Another "satisfied customer"...
_________________________________________________
On 2005-10-07 13:27:00, Antigen wrote:
"Who can guess which program this author is talking about?
During this time, everyone from "the program" is constantly telling you to hurry up and get to the [proper name obliqued] seminars. Another form of misrepresentation, now the blinders are in place. The seminars are basically everything I have been through as businessman with the exception that they "Act" like they are therapists. The seminar is to make you aware of why you messed your child up. Then they attempt to change your lifestyle forever. I personally think they change your lifestyle by soaking your bank account. I think humiliating people in front of others is simply not appropriate. Making people cry, telling them they should blame their parents for the way they have been raised, in your face until you disclose some deep dark secret. The worst part was when a facilitor (who is not a qualified therapist) tells the parents to go to Hawaii (or any trip) and send your child a postcard, "Having a great time without you." Now that was an eye opener.
_________________________________________________
Not only does this sound EXACTLY like Hyde, I could tell you some of the exact same stories. Whoever wrote this is right "on point" about what goes on in seminars. I am a former Hyde parent and they tried to convince me that my parents failed me, and now I am failing my child. This observation by a facilitator who was a former drug addict and alchoholic was astounding! Unfortunately this is the norm at Hyde. Why would anyone want their child "learning" about life through the eyes of recovering addicts? Have brains parents, if you have to send your kid to a boarding school, put them in one with professional, loving teachers who will set a good example, not expose them to the horendous things at Hyde.
_________________________________________________
I guess this parent "just didn't get it" either.
-
On 2005-10-07 19:03:00, HydeFan wrote:
I am actually hoping to give the impression of a rounded, reasonable, thoughtful person who is willing to stand up for what he believes in, even in a forum where the premise virtually pre-determines the outcome.
How is it predetermined?Innocence implies the ability to restrain from the initiation of aggression, and to question those who don't.
Sorin Cucerai
-
HydeFan wrote:
I am actually hoping to give the impression of a rounded, reasonable, thoughtful person...
Well, I guess keep hoping. It hasn't panned out thusfar...
-
And if you do a search for my posts on this site, you will see discussions where others make fairly outrageous claims, that so far have turned out to be bald-faced lies.
Outrageous claims that are bald-faced lies? I don't recall anyone on these posts telling you that YOU did NOT EXPERIENCE something you claim to have experienced! invalidating your experiences so WHY are you again invalidating what others have experienced at Hyde?
I was at Hyde. I witnessed many things at the school with my own eyes! Teachers drunk at night in the hall, staff sexually harassing me and my girlfriends, girls being picked up by local guys after being unescorted to AA meetings in town, parents and kids being driven to hysteria in seminars in which no professional was available to give guidance, etc, etc.
DON'T TELL ME THESE THINGS DID NOT HAPPEN, because I witnessed it or was a part of it! THESE ARE FACTUAL things that happened, not "bald-faced lies." You can pick apart all you want and justify by saying these things happen in all schools, but in all schools you are not paying $35,000 per year for professional staffing to make sure your kid is safe! I wasn't safe and my parents were not aware of it because of the BULL Hyde fed them!
Fine if you want to say positive things about Hyde, but STOP telling me that I am a liar by posting the truth!
-
More tilting at windmills....
I never said anything about your personal experience.
I said that you would find other lies on this site that I have carefully documented.
The first one was a claim that student on student rapes legally had to be reported by all schools and that Hyde had failed in this obligation.
The second was someones claim of irrefutable proof by the NIH that Hyde programs don't work.
The point was that it seemed clear people on this site are prone to exaggeration, distorion and outright lies.[ This Message was edited by: HydeFan on 2005-10-08 11:30 ]
-
On 2005-10-08 11:21:00, HydeFan wrote:
"More tilting at windmills....
I never said anything about your personal experience.
I said that you would find other lies on this site that I have carefully documented.
The first one was a claim that student on student rapes legally had to be reported by all schools and that Hyde had failed in this obligation.
was edited by: HydeFan on 2005-10-08 11:30 ]"
Oh, when a student/students rape another at the school, it does not have to legally be reported. This is great representation about the kind of person you are. So what if LEGALLY someone doesn't have to report a crime, I am not saying this is the case) does this make it ok? What kind of crazy place is Hyde and the people who work there? Didn't you learn anything about morals and character at Hyde?
-
The point was that it seemed clear people on this site are prone to exaggeration, distorion and outright lies.[ This Message was edited by: HydeFan on 2005-10-08 11:30 ]"
Yeah, you're one of the worst offenders. You're so full of shit that it's not even funny.
-
On 2005-10-08 11:21:00, HydeFan wrote:
The first one was a claim that student on student rapes legally had to be reported by all schools and that Hyde had failed in this obligation.
I think you have to be into the kool aid up to your eyebrows to think that the above statement makes Hyde look good.
Take note, parents! If a kid (your kid?) gets raped at Hyde, this extremely devoed Hyde Fan will not report it. So... there may well be active rapists at the school right now who are protected from legal prosecution.
Worse? They do not see a problem with this! You get that? It's all ok, the legal system's got nothing on them, they can cure anything from addiction to bolimia to deviant sadistic sexual tendencies, all on their own.
It's obnoxious to ask law enforcement to follow the law. That's insulting to every cop.
--John Lovell, lobbyist for the California police chief's association
-
This is what I've been saying. People like HydeFool will say anything to defend the program.
They'll even say, "So what if a student raped another student? Hyde isn't required to report it!" Normal folk would say, "That poor child! I'm calling the authorities!" :roll:
-
What is being said on this thread is appalling!! How can HydeFan protect Hyde by saying, "they were under no obligation to report a rape based on the fact that it was students to student!! UNBELIEVABLE!! And don't forget, this comment has been posted by one of the "successes" at Hyde!!!
-
Wow. Ok, this is good, parents, because it should really tell you about who is posting on this site.
Before you read anything else, go read the "Rape at Hyde" thread and you will see what a profound distortion this is.
On that thread, one member assert that a student on student rape had occurred and that even though the victim apparently spoke openly about this in some sort of peer or school meeting, the school successfully covered it all, and that Hyde was guilty of the crime of failure to report the rape and should be prosecuted.
My response to that was, ASSUMING there even was a rape (something which happens at times in every school but which I have no evidence of here either way);
a. I support the VICTIM's choice in making the decision whether or not to report a rape,
b. for the poster to show evidence that if it did occur, that it had not been reported (to which they was no reply nor could there have been unless you were in this families inner circle),
c. to ask for evidence that Hyde had violated a legal obligation to report the alleged crime.
The person could not back up the claim then, and now many of these same people, some who didn't go to Hyde or ever in their lives have any association with it, turn this into personal attacks stating (a) there may well be rapists at Hyde, (b) they won't be reported, and (c) they do not see a problem with it.
I suppose that's a better approach than admitting they were WAY off base with their original unsupported accusations about what really happened (since they actually don't have any way of knowing) or what the law is.
Again, hopefully this makes their folly fairly transparent. At least I own my bias. [ This Message was edited by: HydeFan on 2005-10-08 22:08 ]
-
Oh, when a student/students rape another at the school, it does not have to legally be reported. This is great representation about the kind of person you are. So what if LEGALLY someone doesn't have to report a crime, I am not saying this is the case) does this make it ok?
So, just to make it clear, absent a legal obligation to report, I support the victim's decision to report a crime or not. When its a minor, I think that should be done with the victim's family. Assuming a rape really happened and he spoke about it in public (as alleged in the post), I think its fair to say the family was involved (since they ran the school).
Moreso, my statement was made in response to someone else who stated Hyde breached its legal obligation to report (something they actually had no way of knowing whether it happened or not).
I merely poked around a little to show how at least some of you have no trouble lying to make a point.
The TRUTH was that if it happened at all, this person learned about it by the victim speaking about it openly, not some crime where no one else knew about it and now the poster was bringing a big scandal to light.
The TRUTH was that no one knows what the victim and his family decided with regard to his life.
The TRUTH was that the poster didn't know if a report had been made or not and had no way to know.
The TRUTH was that in response to my challenge, no one found a legal obligation to report supporting the position that Hyde committed a crime.
Lies, lies and more lies. All to convince you parents that Hyde is bad and evil. So here is my sound-byte of the day:
HYDE SUCKS WHEN YOU LIE. I know. I was on 2-4 for lieing once. That was but one of a wide array of hard and joyous experiences there which changed my life. Here's the rub. The people who didn't get that then, are people who are still lieing when it suits their purpose. And when you are still lieing 20-30 years later, its your life that must suck.
That is a shame and a waste.
Fortunately, you parents get to decide what you want for you and your child. To be posting lies on some random website 30 years later about how your life was all messed up--or confronting the possibility that you need help with changing what's not working and making things better for you and your child by leading.
[ This Message was edited by: HydeFan on 2005-10-08 22:06 ]
-
HydeFool's mind was raped at Hyde. The effects are still ingering.
HydeFool had graduated from drinking the Kool-Aid to snorting the Kool-Aid powder. Pretty sad.
-
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=n ... ng+seminar (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLG,GGLG:2005-35,GGLG:en&q=lifespring+seminar)
Lifespring Seminars
_________________________________________________
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=n ... :en&q=LGAT (http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLG,GGLG:2005-35,GGLG:en&q=LGAT)
LGAT
_________________________________________________
http://www.pianofinders.com/es/breakingthesecrecy.htm (http://www.pianofinders.com/es/breakingthesecrecy.htm)
http://www.nospank.net/bean.htm (http://www.nospank.net/bean.htm)
http://www.denver-rmn.com/desperate/sit ... rate.shtml (http://www.denver-rmn.com/desperate/site-desperate/day2/pg3-desperate.shtml)
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=3107&forum=9 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=3107&forum=9)
"TASKS" Seminars used by Hyde and nearly every other abusive "Emotional Growth" facility
_________________________________________________
This should give you a good baseline. There is much more material on the web to read as well.
Once you understand that this same seminar series is used by all WWASP facilities and almost every other "program," including Hyde, and that they are based on Lifespring and that Lifespring is LGAT, you are well on your way to understanding the psychological damage caused by places like Hyde.
_________________
"Compassion is the basis of morality."
-
Ok HydeFan, I challenge you to talk to one of your contacts at Hyde. Make sure it is either Malcolm Gauld, or Duncan McCrann. Ask them about the rape of a student who they know VERY WELL. You can tell them that you think there are vicious rumors being spread on the internet and ask them to dispel them. Ask THEM how they handled it, and then get back to us! I think you will be very sorry you called us liars and will be making an apology shortly!
The student told everyone in group how it was being handled, so if you want to call anyone a liar, then call him one because it came from the horses mouth!
Again you continue to say, "it happens in all schools." You truly did not learn anything from Hyde if this is your attitude. I can just imagine one day you having a child and that child is gang raped and as much as you tell the school these kids need to be prosecuted, you say to yourself, "oh well, the school is not obligated. We will handle it in house." You DON'T GET IT!! According to this boy, the way it was handled was like all things at Hyde are handled. That talked about it in seminar with a bunch of kids and a non professional facilitator!! UNBELIEVABLE!!
-
Slipery is as slipery does, Anonymous.
According to this boy, the way it was handled was like all things at Hyde are handled. That talked about it in seminar with a bunch of kids and a non professional facilitator!!
Hmmmm. The new facts you are alleging today are not that the allegedly raped student was talking about his anger over the rape in a seminar, but that he was upset with the way the school handled it, and wasn't allowed to go to the police. Is that what you are saying?
The problem is, your sentence starts: "according to the boy", but then goes on to suggest a third person narative of what a third person would have seen, not a report of what the boy said. This is a common technique (often subliminal) of someone who doesn't want to come right out and tell a lie, but knows what they are saying isn't true. A non sequitur as you will; a reply that has no relevance to what preceded it.
For instance, if I was writing about what I heard, then I would have written, "according to this boy, he was pissed that the only place he had to talk about this was in a seminar because pressure was put on him not to take it to the police".
Assuming my interpretation is correct (otherwise you should tell us more precisely what the boy said), you are now saying he was allowed to talk about it in a group seminar and did so freely, but wasn't allowed to talk with the police about it, and even when he was so upset, he was really pissed at the process, not just the rape.
Do you know how ridiculous this sounds? Even if you had written it this way, it doesn't fit into any realm of reason. It also shows you have about zero experience with dealing with violent crime victims.
In any event, that isn't how you wrote it, so while you can try and rest your argument on innuendo and trying to reframe the arguement to suggest I don't favor reporting crimes (or something like that), I think most will see through it.
You say "according to the boy", but the rest of your sentence and the following one don't fit, grammatically or logically.
Honestly, I think you are lying again because you were caught in a lie (that Hyde had a legal obligation that they violated), and are now shift the discussion by adding new "facts", without actually stating them as facts.
Anyway, I have no intention of calling Hyde. If you don't want to prove your allegations yourself, that's your problem. I actually never questioned the alleged rape itself (other than to say I am suspect at anything you say because you are a proven liar at this point).
One last question Anonymous. If all of this did happen, how come you didn't make an Anonymous call to the police? As far as I can tell, as between you and I, the only one with a history of not doing "the right thing" with regarding to reporting violent crime is you.
-
You aren't even worth answering, but I will. You are trying to play word games in order to make me out to be a liar. I will say this loud, I AM NOT LYING ABOUT THIS INCIDENT!!
Obviously you are much more educated them me as far as your writing skills, so you say!! My guess is you are an attorney by the way you write and the fact that you are so self rightous!
Facts:
1) Several boys sodomized a student at Hyde within the last 10 years
2) This CRIME was handled "in house" through seminaring. The boy spoke out about it.
3) You can try to put words in my mouth, try to justify, or try to do whatever you want. I DON"T CARE. Fact is a boy was raped and it was not reported to the police. If you want to continue with your crap about Hyde not being obligated to report it, FINE!!
As far as trying to turn this around and ask me why I did not report it, well idiot, I went to Hyde at the time, and I did not want to go on 2-4 for going against them!
You can try to insult me all you want by correcting my grammar, but those really interested in Hyde most people can see through you!! I would NEVER devulge the name of this student because this was a horrible crime. No one who had this happen to them deserves to have this published. I obviously have more integrity than you! Maybe someone else from Hyde would like to talk more about this, but I won't be the one to hurt this kid more!!
-
On 2005-10-09 12:51:00, HydeFan wrote:
"Slipery is as slipery does, Anonymous.
According to this boy, the way it was handled was like all things at Hyde are handled. That talked about it in seminar with a bunch of kids and a non professional facilitator!!
Hmmmm. The new facts you are alleging today are not that the allegedly raped student was talking about his anger over the rape in a seminar, but that he was upset with the way the school handled it, and wasn't allowed to go to the police. Is that what you are saying?
The problem is, your sentence starts: "according to the boy", but then goes on to suggest a third person narative of what a third person would have seen, not a report of what the boy said. This is a common technique (often subliminal) of someone who doesn't want to come right out and tell a lie, but knows what they are saying isn't true. A non sequitur as you will; a reply that has no relevance to what preceded it.
For instance, if I was writing about what I heard, then I would have written, "according to this boy, he was pissed that the only place he had to talk about this was in a seminar because pressure was put on him not to take it to the police".
Assuming my interpretation is correct (otherwise you should tell us more precisely what the boy said), you are now saying he was allowed to talk about it in a group seminar and did so freely, but wasn't allowed to talk with the police about it, and even when he was so upset, he was really pissed at the process, not just the rape.
Do you know how ridiculous this sounds? Even if you had written it this way, it doesn't fit into any realm of reason. It also shows you have about zero experience with dealing with violent crime victims.
In any event, that isn't how you wrote it, so while you can try and rest your argument on innuendo and trying to reframe the arguement to suggest I don't favor reporting crimes (or something like that), I think most will see through it.
You say "according to the boy", but the rest of your sentence and the following one don't fit, grammatically or logically.
Honestly, I think you are lying again because you were caught in a lie (that Hyde had a legal obligation that they violated), and are now shift the discussion by adding new "facts", without actually stating them as facts.
Anyway, I have no intention of calling Hyde. If you don't want to prove your allegations yourself, that's your problem. I actually never questioned the alleged rape itself (other than to say I am suspect at anything you say because you are a proven liar at this point).
One last question Anonymous. If all of this did happen, how come you didn't make an Anonymous call to the police? As far as I can tell, as between you and I, the only one with a history of not doing "the right thing" with regarding to reporting violent crime is you."
Wow. You are really a fucking asshole. It's plain and simple. You have no idea how pompous and arrogant you sound, aside from the fact that you defend this wretched so-called "school."
BTW, you have no business correcting anyone's spelling or grammar because, to the literate among us, your spelling and grammar are atrocious.
I disagree with the poster who thought you may be a lawyer. I believe you are a liar, not a lawyer (although those terms are somewhat interchangable). You should edit your posts with the help of a dictionary and review basic grammar rules, as you have scarcely a clue as to how to construct a proper sentence.
You are an obtuse fool who tries to hide behind your language and reasoning "skills," but to those of us who are clearly more highly educated than you and who clearly have superior reasoning ability than you, you appear as nothing more than a tool.
-
Know what? It doesn't matter whether this particular incident occured or not. You, HydeFan, have stated pretty clearly that, even if it did happen, you're fine w/ protecting the rapist from prosecution. And you're right, the victim and their family do have the right to decide what to do about it. I just think that's a usful tidbit of information for any prospective customers, that's all. They ought to know the policy on student/student assaults of various kinds before they ship their kids to you.
And thank you for clarifying that. You're a big help. Our nada who art in nada, nada be thy name. Thy kingdom nada, thy will be nada as it is in nada. Give us this nada our daily nada and nada us our nada as we nada our nadas and nada us into nada but deliver us from nada; pues nada. Hail nothing full of nothing, nothing is with thee.
--Ernest Hemingway, American author
-
On 2005-10-09 13:50:00, Anonymous wrote:
I disagree with the poster who thought you may be a lawyer. I believe you are a liar, not a lawyer (although those terms are somewhat interchangable). You should edit your posts with the help of a dictionary and review basic grammar rules, as you have scarcely a clue as to how to construct a proper sentence.
Maybe HF got their degree from Southern Methodist University? :rofl: Wicked men obey from fear, good men from love.
--Aristotle
-
Why even bother to reply to this Ass Hole, (HydeFan) on this thread? Just brings more attention to him. Attention that he doesn't deserve!! No one was threatening or saying anything derogatory to him yet he had the need to lash out at anyone who didn't agree with Hyde's methods! Real Jerk!!
-
On 2005-10-09 17:44:00, Anonymous wrote:
"No one was threatening or saying anything derogatory to him yet he had the need to lash out at anyone who didn't agree with Hyde's methods! Real Jerk!!"
I loved the irony in this one. Really! I actually laughed out loud. No one was saying anything derogatory to me....but I'm a real jerk? Do you see the irony? See you said something derogatory right after saying no one was saying anything derogatory. Let's not forget that you needn't read far above to see quotes to the effect that I am "kool-aid drinking" "full of shit" "fucking asshole" whose mind was "raped" at Hyde. Nope, nothing derogatory there either. Phew!
Now, I challenge you to go back and look at my posts for anything similar. I *think* about the most I have done in terms of lashing out is, on the basis of fairly solid evidence, to call someone a liar. I probably digressed a couple times beyond that, but hardly any lashing out. I'm mostly trying to stick to provable facts so we can see who is actually lieing.
To that end, let's look at some other interesting quotes of late....
I would NEVER devulge the name of this student because this was a horrible crime. No one who had this happen to them deserves to have this published. I obviously have more integrity than you!
Bravo!!! Very noble of you. How unselfish to potentially secrifice winning the argument by protecting the down-trodden victim. I guess my only question then is, how do you explain the next two quotes?
Hey HydeFan, why don't you have the courage to ask a certain headmaster whether it is true that his son was gang raped while at the Bath Campus. He spoke about it in group and I seriously doubt he made it up! What irks me is how they chose never to call in the authorities.
Speaking of legalities, is anyone aware of the rape of a certain son of a headmaster? WHY did someone who professes character and integrity not report this to the authorities when it happened? I feel very sorry for this poor kid, not being able to count on his own parents to protect him!
Did I miss something, or did you not just disclose who the victim was, the one you now claim to be protecting?
Anyway, despite your protests and outrage of concern over not identifying the victim, looks to me like you've actually done that in two separate posts. That would make you....yes, sadly, a liar. (Oh, and self-righteous too. I guess that means I ain't the only one with that chip on his shoulder, eh amigo?)
Or maybe those were posted by someone else, and we have two anonymous posters here claiming to have been in the seminar where this was divulged.
Getting back to the topic of lies though, which was how we got into all this in the first place, I thought now would be a good time for a more comprehensive revisiting of the other posts you (or your brethren) have made:
Hyde has a LEGAL obligation as a school to notify the authorities when there has been sexual abuse at their school. Hyde feels they are above the law and can handle everything through seminars and FLC's. Hate to tell you this, but there are laws in the U.S. and they are there to protect our youth. Hyde is NOT ABOVE THE LAW even though they think they are!
Hyde does have a legal duty to report crimes no matter who it happened to.
HYDE AS A SCHOOL had an obligation to report this. ...it is mandatory for Hyde to report crimes they are aware of and they were absolutely aware of this.
Any teacher or staff member who did not report this abuse has violated the law and should be terminated and prosecuted.
What do all these statements have in common? They are, as far as anyone can tell or has been able to show (though I was and remain open to there actually being a law to the contrary) not true.
And in my posts, I merely used them as support for the proposition that the poster was out of control in his anger and that parents should take note, since if he lies about this, what else do you need to know?
Indeed, we still don't have an answer to the innuendo posted above (see my last post). Nope, cut and run, call people names, and change the story. That brings us to the most recent version of the story (version 3 now, or is it 4):
Facts:
1) Several boys sodomized a student at Hyde within the last 10 years
2) This CRIME was handled "in house" through seminaring. The boy spoke out about it.
3) ....Fact is a boy was raped and it was not reported to the police.
Fact is. "Fact" "is". Those are strong words. It is commendable you have finally relented about the legal obligation, even if instead of apologizing for your lack of intergrity you try and make me the heavy for your having made those statements in the first place. Indeed, I probably coaxed you into making that lie, so, hey, my bad!
But I keep thinking about the words "Fact is". "Fact is it was not reported to the police". Well, I have to ask the obvious: how on God's green earth would you know the answer to that? That's all I've been asking for, five hundred and fifty posts later (<---exaggeration, not really 550). Did this anonymous unnamed "son of the headmaster" say in his seminar that he wanted to tell the police, but his parents wouldn't let him?
Moreso, can you not even think that the question of whether to report a crime is a complex matter to be decided by the victim and his/her family alone? Why do you think it is that only 16% of rapes are reported, and that rape is called "the most underreported violent crime in America"?
http://www.vpul.upenn.edu/ohe/library/v ... istics.htm (http://www.vpul.upenn.edu/ohe/library/violence/statistics.htm)
As far as trying to turn this around and ask me why I did not report it, well idiot, I went to Hyde at the time, and I did not want to go on 2-4 for going against them!
You want to know when you are getting close to the truth? Its when people get more defended, and they start losing reason and typically end up in name calling. See, Hyde isn't a lock down. You could have easily dropped a quarter in a pay phone anywhere in Bath and reported this if you were so concerned, and no one would have ever found out it was you. Somehow I don't think the victim was really your first concern then or now.
And I also think you are lying. Again (and again and again).
Anyway its bed time here, but I did want to share some points I won't debate you on. I am very smart (and I thank Hyde for helping me get the education I needed to fully realize that). I can definitely be self-righteous. My spelling sucks. My grammar is sometimes lacking. And yes, I can also be a real jerk.
Here is the thing though. When people deal with me, at least they know they are getting the truth. Brainwashed or whatever else you want to say, it is what I know to be true.
We have fairly ample support for the proposition the same cannot be said of you.
[ This Message was edited by: HydeFan on 2005-10-09 20:41 ][ This Message was edited by: HydeFan on 2005-10-09 20:42 ]
-
To Other Anonymous,
Only a handful of people could be this arrogant. Has to be either Joe or Malcolm Gauld!!
-
he has a point, u couldve reportd
-
On 2005-10-10 00:29:00, Anonymous wrote:
"he has a point, u couldve reportd"
I don't understand how a program for "troubled kids" expects their clients to have more sense and decency than their staff.
Blaming a kid for Hyde's failing to protect its "students" (I use that term loosely) is absolutely absurd. Are you saying that Hyde is like "Lord of the Flies"? The children have leadership roles, not the adults? I'm sorry, but that is just ignorant.
-
On 2005-10-10 07:53:00, Dysfunction Junction wrote:
"I don't understand how a program for "troubled kids" expects their clients to have more sense and decency than their staff.
I think we've established that no one here knows what the family did in response to this issue.
I don't believe anyone here has any knowledge of what the faculty did either.
All we know is that the alleged victim voluntarily brought it up in a seminar.
What was or wasn't reported is between the family and police.
Hardly scandalous material, but hey, if you want, keep beating this dead horse.
What I find most interesting is how you all seem to think that reporting was the only right thing to do, whether or not this was in the victim's interest.
Combined with the very poor judgement of disclosing the victims identiy, that shows me you all are trying to make a point so bad (badly? can someone help with my grammar?), you have lost sight of your humanity.
Shame on you all....
-
Last post was me, fwiw
-
HydeFan says someone mentioned who the victim was. Could you please tell me where it says this? I don't see it in any posts, but possibly I missed something. I did see that it is a child of one of the Headmasters, but this could be most anyone as Headmasters have changed through the years and there are at last count 4 or 5 schools.
-
On 2005-10-10 09:34:00, Anonymous wrote:
"HydeFan says someone mentioned who the victim was. Could you please tell me where it says this? I don't see it in any posts, but possibly I missed something. I did see that it is a child of one of the Headmasters, but this could be most anyone as Headmasters have changed through the years and there are at last count 4 or 5 schools."
You obviously aren't following these posts too closely, but that's ok, neither is "Anonymous".
It happened in the 90's
Facts:
1) Several boys sodomized a student at Hyde within the last 10 years
Last 10 years, but during the 90s, that means from 10/95-12/99 on the Bath, Campus (another thread said that, I can retrieve if you want). So let me suggest that if you were close to the school at all during that period, you would know the answer.
Any other questions? Or can we accept that we are some major facts short of a scandal, that at least some of us here are prone to distortion, and that maybe the biggest scandal here is that Anonymous made it fairly easy to publicly identify an alleged rape victim.
Anyway, if nothing else, this stream shows the resiliance of the distorters, and I think the parents reading this should be able to see that fairly clearly at this point.
[ This Message was edited by: HydeFan on 2005-10-10 11:12 ]
-
On 2005-10-10 09:56:00, HydeFan wrote:
"
Any other questions? Or can we accept that we are some major facts short of a scandal, that at least some of us here are prone to distortion, and that maybe the biggest scandal here is that Anonymous made it fairly easy to publicly identify an alleged rape victim.
[ This Message was edited by: HydeFan on 2005-10-10 11:12 ]"
I certainly can't accept that the major problem surrounding a child's being sodomized at Hyde ("gang raped") is that another former client of Hyde made it easy to identify the victim. That's ludicrous.
Obviously, the major problem is that this boy was sodomized in an unsafe environment and the adults (Hyde staff) that were charged with his welfare failed miserably in safeguarding him and subsequently failed to properly report the incident as is required by law.
HydeFan, you have a really twisted view of the world. Your tortured soul is still haunted by thinking imbued by Hyde. It's really sad and a shame.
-
So these purpatrators, what did happen to them? Did they advance up through the ranks at Hyde? Were they placed in positions of authority over other kids? How did Hyde go about protecting the new kids from these predators?
And here's a silly question for you. Until you started posting in this forum about it, did any of the staff at Hyde make any effort to inform prospective marks (parents) that their kids would be living in close quarters w/ known rapists?
Understand that legal and illegal are political, and often arbitrary,
categorizations; use and abuse are medical, or clinical, distinctions.
--Abbie Hoffman
-
I certainly can't accept that the major problem surrounding a child's being sodomized at Hyde ("gang raped") is that another former client of Hyde made it easy to identify the victim. That's ludicrous.
So you don't see any problem then with disclosing the identity of a rape victim, potentially forcing the to relive a trauma that they CHOSE to not relive any more than they had to 5-10 years ago?
That's fairly illuminating....
Obviously, the major problem is that this boy was sodomized in an unsafe environment
From my experience, there is a fair degree of vigilent observation at Hyde. Not like public schools where everyone looks the other way. That said, there is also a fair degree of freedom. Hyde is not a lock-down, and the kids aren't monitored on cameras.
Anyway, this would be a nice fact....IF YOU HADN'T MADE IT UP!
and the adults (Hyde staff) that were charged with his welfare failed miserably in safeguarding him
Yes, I see, based solely on the fact that it was alleged to have happened, ergo, Hyde failed "miserably" in safeguarding him.
and subsequently failed to properly report the incident as is required by law.
You don't really want to go through all of this again. Well, apparently you do, so:
1. Show me any credible evidence that the child ask for it to be reported and that he was prevented from doing so;
2. Show me any credible evidence the child's family wasn't intimately involved in this decision and chose to do the best thing for the child;
3. Show me any credible evidence that no report in fact was made;
4. Show me any credible evidence that there was a duty to make this report.
Here's why you can't and won't be able to show any of these things: They are all fundamentally private communications, and anyone who pretends to know otherwise is lying.
Its really not much more complicated than that.
-
i'm sorry, but you just have a warped sense of ethics. there's no other way to explain it.
you keep coming on here saying that hyde did nothing wrong, yet a child was gang raped while under their care and that child was directed to tell other children about it in a seminar rather than police being notified and appropriate action taken.
you've got some real problems, hydefan. seriously.
a child gets gang-sodomized at hyde, nothiong is done about it except to revictimize the kid in front of other kids and you think everything's a-ok about that. some things should be handled by professionals, not untrained hacks.
anyway, thank you for doing the victims of this type of hideous abuse at the hands of hyde schools a service. your lack of ethics and morals as well as your defense of unconscionable negligence has done more to dissuade potential clients than you anyone else could have done.
you've given a unique insiders' perspective on hyde's philosophy on how to deal with sexual assaults and possibly other serious crimes committed on their watch: divert, digress, dissemble and, when all else fails, blame the children. good job in showing what kind of a misanthrope you are and what a sham hyde is. thanks, i mean it.
when you can't educate, elucidate or administrate, blame the victim. p.s.: go for the crotch.
-
On 2005-10-10 13:48:00, Anonymous wrote:
you keep coming on here saying that hyde did nothing wrong,
What I keep saying is we have no evidence of wrong-doing.
yet a child was gang raped while under their care and that child was directed to tell other children about it in a seminar rather than police being notified and appropriate action taken.
Nice! More new facts. Tell me, how do you know what the child was directed to say and whether the police were notified and what if any other action was taken?
a child gets gang-sodomized at hyde, nothiong is done about it except to revictimize the kid in front of other kids and you think everything's a-ok about that.
Again, something you don't have the facts about.
anyway, thank you for doing the victims of this type of hideous abuse at the hands of hyde schools a service.
Yes, yes, I see. I caused the rape too, doncha know?
your lack of ethics and morals as well as your defense of unconscionable negligence
More defamation. Nice.
has done more to dissuade potential clients than you anyone else could have done.
Really?
when you can't educate, elucidate or administrate, blame the victim. p.s.: go for the crotch.
Really, where?
-
On 2005-10-10 13:10:00, HydeFan wrote:
Here's why you can't and won't be able to show any of these things: They are all fundamentally private communications, and anyone who pretends to know otherwise is lying.
Or they were in group when the kid brought the issue up and so they heard it straight from the horse's mouth.
That's one of the fundamental flaws w/ the LGA/Synanon method, hun. It is inapropriate and damaging to the confessor as well as the wittnesses to discuss highly emotional, personal information in a group setting. Never MIND a group of kids; most being held under coercion.
This I believe: That the free, exploring mind of the individual human is the most valuable thing in the world. And this I would fight for: The freedom of the mind to take any direction it wishes, undirected. And this I must fight against: Any idea, religion, or government which limits or destroys the individual.
--John Steinbeck, American novelist
-
On 2005-10-10 15:20:00, Antigen wrote: Or they were in group when the kid brought the issue up and so they heard it straight from the horse's mouth.
See that's just my point Antigen. No one here is alleging that they heard this child say anything with regard to my number 1. The only "fact" was that it was alleged to have happened and the child spoke about it.
Here are all 4 points for you again:
1. Show me any credible evidence that the child ask for it to be reported and that he was prevented from doing so;
2. Show me any credible evidence the child's family wasn't intimately involved in this decision and chose to do the best thing for the child;
3. Show me any credible evidence that no report in fact was made;
4. Show me any credible evidence that there was a duty to make this report.
Since the childs parent was the headmaster, we know #2 can never be even be alleged.
Since a report could have been made by either faculty, victim or parents, and a report could have been made without the entire school knowing it, there is no way anyone can say what happened their either. Moreso, no one has alleged that the child was allowed to speak about this freely in a seminar, but wasn't allowed to report it to the police. And then we are to belive that in the seminar he commented on how he wasn't allowed to report it. If you knew Hyde, you would know wny Anonymous has not made that allegation. It simply makes NO SENSE.
For #4, well, that's just the law.
Oh, and FWIW, Hyde students are free to come and go. They are not "held against their will". Hyde is not Synanon, and the LGAT's by definition are dramatically different from Hyde's seminars.
Antigen you had no affiliation with Hyde and never did, so where do you get off telling people what its about. Your posts are as disingenuous as anyones here.
-
On 2005-10-10 09:56:00, HydeFan wrote:
"
On 2005-10-10 09:34:00, Anonymous wrote:
"HydeFan says someone mentioned who the victim was. Could you please tell me where it says this? I don't see it in any posts, but possibly I missed something. I did see that it is a child of one of the Headmasters, but this could be most anyone as Headmasters have changed through the years and there are at last count 4 or 5 schools."
You obviously aren't following these posts too closely, but that's ok, neither is "Anonymous".
It happened in the 90's
Facts:
1) Several boys sodomized a student at Hyde within the last 10 years
Last 10 years, but during the 90s, that means from 10/95-12/99 on the Bath, Campus (another thread said that, I can retrieve if you want). So let me suggest that if you were close to the school at all during that period, you would know the answer.
Any other questions? Or can we accept that we are some major facts short of a scandal, that at least some of us here are prone to distortion, and that maybe the biggest scandal here is that Anonymous made it fairly easy to publicly identify an alleged rape victim.
Anyway, if nothing else, this stream shows the resiliance of the distorters, and I think the parents reading this should be able to see that fairly clearly at this point.
[ This Message was edited by: HydeFan on 2005-10-10 11:12 ]"
What I find interesting is that YOU HYDEFAN are helping to identify this supposed victim. You are trying publicly to tie all the posts together in order to identify this person and at the same time, accusing Anonymous of the same! Make your mind up!
You say that it happened on the Bath Campus, but did Anonymous say it was a Headmaster from the Bath Campus? I didn't see that. Please forgive me if I am wrong, I know you have all the answers......NOT!
-
You say that it happened on the Bath Campus, but did Anonymous say it was a Headmaster from the Bath Campus? I didn't see that. Please forgive me if I am wrong, I know you have all the answers......NOT!"
Like I said, if you were familiar with the campuses during this period you would know there was only one possibility.[ This Message was edited by: HydeFan on 2005-10-10 16:05 ]
-
Although you think you are so smart, maybe you aren't! I know exactly who anonymous is talking about and it ain't even close to what you are thinking. Everyone knew about it. It was all over campus! Leave it alone!
-
Out of respect for the victim, I am willing to leave that part alone as long as others are as well.
-
So this old farmer slaughters a couple of pigs and leaves them strung up from a tree to bleed out. Then he goes about the rest of his chores, returning an hour or two later to find one of the pigs missing.
Weeks turn to months, no sign of a culprit anywhere. But the farmer is patient. One day, he's shootin' the breeze w/ the neighbor over the fencepost. The neighbor asks him if he ever did find out who took that old pig. "Yeah, just now", says the farmer. He'd never told anyone about no missing pig, not even his wife. The better part of valor is?
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.
Chief Sitting Bull, speaking at the Powder River Conference, 1877
-
Discretion of course, amigo. Couldn't have said it better my self. (You know, depending on whatever it is you were saying!)
-
Over your head, maybe?
That it is wrong for a man to say he is certain of the objective truth of a proposition unless he can provide evidence which logically justifies that certainty. This is what agnosticism asserts and in my opinion, is all that is essential to agnosticism.
--Thomas Henry Huxley, English biologist
-
Well the moral of the story is obvious.
Its relevance, like yours, well, not as much.
-
Seriously Antigen, I am actually interested in your story. You are obviously passionate. I think you are provide a great service here. Do you have the backfill on your experience that led you to this place?
I know some about Seed. What was a Seed chicklette? How are you a drug war POW? And what does Apostate mean?
[ This Message was edited by: HydeFan on 2005-10-10 23:02 ]
-
What does it matter if you think I'm irrelevant?
The prestige of government has undoubtedly been lowered considerably by the Prohibition law. For nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced. It is an open secret that the dangerous increase of crime in this country is closely connected with this.
--Albert Einstein, My First Impression of the U.S.A., 1921
-
I think your presence on a Hyde board is irrelevant....or better stated 99% of your posts.
But as arrogant and heartless as you think I am, I posted right from the beginning my strongest sympathies for any Seed survivor. One of my best friends is, and his experience was something that Congress should know about and regulate.
Based on a fairly extensive comparison, however, I found that the Seed (and the extremely abusive programs) are off the charts comparred to Hyde.
I have no doubt Hyde may not work for many. But I also know many that it worked for, and I also know Hyde does not fit many of the definitions of the types of groups that I think are more clearly abusive (LGATs for example). There are similarities, but if you had to map them out, I think depending on when in their history you are talking about, they probably fall closer to the line between actually being wonderfully theraputic for certain people, and abusive for others. People will rave here about how the numbers of benefitted people is tremendously small, but I don't think they have the numbers to really show that.....just that it was bad for them.
Personally, I have no issue with "here's what happened to me, here's what I saw, and here's how it feels to me". I think there is an undeniable truth to that.
To say Hyde is the devil and evil and make all sorts of extrapolations and have everyone nod their head on things like LGATs and articles on Gulags and the like seems to miss the real value here. If they just told their story and let that speak for itself.
For instance the person who keeps claiming Joe Gauld came back in time to insure he would not graduate and it has haunted him to this day, left out the whole story of why that happened. You may not think its relevant. I know the school well enough to know it is likely the nug of the matter.
Antigen, the people on this board love to hate me because it gives them an object to draw fire, but for people who really suffered abuse, even if at the hands of Joe Guald, I could not be more sympathetic. I just don't take innuendo for fact. Its not that hard to camoflague a story enough to Hyde one's identity. And if that person is accurate, their story might be quite powerful. But I also say X number of people leave because they became embroiled in profoundly challenging matters of personal growth and integrity and they quit.
Anyway, your name is not anonymous, and I am presuming as a founder of this board, you have shared your personal story and that it could be used as an example. Believe that if you want....I actually am fairly new to all this and find it relatively shocking (the stuff I read about seeds). I would be interested in knowing more.
[ This Message was edited by: HydeFan on 2005-10-11 08:04 ]
-
Mr Hydefan, you seem to be asking questions about everyone else, but you don't give much info about yourself. What campus do you work at? This would give us a little more insight into you and the school. Possibly your campus is better run than the others?????
-
he's not going to tell u who he is because this is part of his arrogance. I bet he is one of the Gauld Clan!! Sounds like them!
-
Folks, Ginger's name is public. Your, mine, the rest of ours, ain't.
I am actually less concerned with people's names than I am with the backfill of their story that gets left out in the retelling.
And without knowing bias, its hard to assess accuracy of comments, especially subjective ones.
I tried to use some objective statements to show at least some reasonable level of distorion was occurring.
That got twisted to the point of suggesting I support rape. (No doubt the next post will actually accuse me of actually committing rapes.)
Either way, believe it or not, I am very sympathetic to real abuse and am fascinated by what Ginger has started here (not necessarily re: Hyde but the overall theme), and I can only imagine there is a powerful story behind that.
-
To Hydefan,
You should have some understanding for the kids who have had mental health issues treated as character problems by the know-it-alls at Hyde. Do you have any idea how terrible that is? Clinical depression is a horrible, debilitating illness and to have it labled "laziness" or "attitude" is just ignorant and cruel.
Or, how about highly intelligent students whose college prospects get screwed because of the grading system that brings down their average because they aren't considered "leaders" in class?
Try to have some understanding of why people on this board are so angry. It's not just a bunch of malcontents. The place was, and from the comments of some of the posters whose experience was more recent, still is deeply and fundamentally flawed (and even dangerous).
-
On 2005-10-11 08:02:00, HydeFan wrote:
Based on a fairly extensive comparison, however, I found that the Seed (and the extremely abusive programs) are off the charts comparred to Hyde.
Well, your perception that the mindfuck at Hyde is significantly different from the mindfuck at any other Synanon/Lifesprings based program is largely irrelavent.
Here, go over to the Seed Discussion Forum and try telling some of the pro-Seedlings how abusive their program was compared to Hyde. Please, don't take my word for it. Just try it yourself.
I do not consider it an insult, but rather a compliment, to be called an agnostic. I do not pretend to know where many ignorant men are sure.
--Clarence Darrow, American lawyer
-
On 2005-10-30 10:22:00, Antigen wrote:
"
On 2005-10-11 08:02:00, HydeFan wrote:
Based on a fairly extensive comparison, however, I found that the Seed (and the extremely abusive programs) are off the charts comparred to Hyde.
Well, your perception that the mindfuck at Hyde is significantly different from the mindfuck at any other Synanon/Lifesprings based program is largely irrelavent.
Here, go over to the Seed Discussion Forum and try telling some of the pro-Seedlings how abusive their program was compared to Hyde. Please, don't take my word for it. Just try it yourself.
I do not consider it an insult, but rather a compliment, to be called an agnostic. I do not pretend to know where many ignorant men are sure.
--Clarence Darrow, American lawyer
"
You seem to be missing the point. I only know of Seeds what I have read. I know of Hyde from personal experience. My experience was better than many and transformative in my life.
But one thing I would never do is go to the Seeds board and pretend to have insight or input into what really went on there.
You, on the other hand, seem to feel free to kibbitz on the Hyde board and lump Hyde and seeds and all other "abusive schools" together.
I do think Seeds was off the charts compared to Hyde, but that isn't the point. My point was, what motivates you to keep trying to stir the pot and make points about a place you have had no involvement with.
On the face of it, it looks like you have at least a slight conflict of interest in that this is your website, and you have an interest in making it popular probably so you can sell advertising some day or something.
If you want to give disgruntled Hyde people a forum (many smiling zeros, people who didn't get it, and probably a few with legitimate beefs) why not just set that up and let it be. Instead, you keep jumping in pretending to have knowledge and experience with Hyde (implicitly).
That seems fairly duplicitous to me.
-
On 2005-10-30 09:52:00, Lars wrote:
"To Hydefan,
You should have some understanding for the kids who have had mental health issues treated as character problems by the know-it-alls at Hyde. Do you have any idea how terrible that is? Clinical depression is a horrible, debilitating illness and to have it labled "laziness" or "attitude" is just ignorant and cruel.
Or, how about highly intelligent students whose college prospects get screwed because of the grading system that brings down their average because they aren't considered "leaders" in class?
Try to have some understanding of why people on this board are so angry. It's not just a bunch of malcontents. The place was, and from the comments of some of the posters whose experience was more recent, still is deeply and fundamentally flawed (and even dangerous).
"
You're absolutely right, Lars. The fundamental flaws you sensed at Hyde years ago persist. One major difference is that now websites like this one provide a forum to spread the word about Hyde's frequently destructive, arrogant, self-righteous, and hypocritical policies and practices. While some Hyde fans are quick to come to the school's defense (I don't question that some people feel helped by the school), many, many others clearly see through Hyde's duplicitous PR tactics. There are now so many stories about Hyde roaming around the Internet from credible sources. While some Hyde veterans continue to support the school, more and more people are coming out of the woodwork to tell their stories about Hyde's gross mishandling of students' emotional problems and arrogant interactions with both students and parents. I've now heard of many parents who were considering Hyde and, after reading these posts and talking with parents who have left Hyde, have decided to look elsewhere. These postings have alerted many people that they need to look underneath and behind Hyde's slick website and publications, and dig for behind-the-scenes anecdotes.
-
On 2005-10-30 09:52:00, Lars wrote:
"To Hydefan,
You should have some understanding for the kids who have had mental health issues treated as character problems by the know-it-alls at Hyde. Do you have any idea how terrible that is? Clinical depression is a horrible, debilitating illness and to have it labled "laziness" or "attitude" is just ignorant and cruel.
Or, how about highly intelligent students whose college prospects get screwed because of the grading system that brings down their average because they aren't considered "leaders" in class?
Try to have some understanding of why people on this board are so angry. It's not just a bunch of malcontents. The place was, and from the comments of some of the posters whose experience was more recent, still is deeply and fundamentally flawed (and even dangerous).
"
Why don't you rebuttal this, Hydefan? I notice you are very good at "talking the talk" as Hyde says! In fact when I read your posts it is so obvious how brainwashed you are by the way you speak! You use all the "cliches" Hyde teaches the students and parents. "Don't get it", "smiling zero's"???????? You sound EXACTLY like Joe Gauld and the rest of the losers who can't survive in the world as it is, so they Hide behind the compound of Hyde!!
Get a life Hydefan and stop insulting Antigen. At least she is doing a service here by welcoming Hyde's disgruntled families a place to vent! This is certainly more than Hyde offered us! At least we are not censored here or punished for speaking out! It makes me want to vomit even thinking about the chain and ball Hyde had attached to all of us while we were there! Character Boarding School, my ass!!! I hope families considering Hyde come to this site and realize the lies Hyde puts out in their materials!! Cult, Cult, Cult!
-
Why don't you rebuttal this, Hydefan? I notice you are very good at "talking the talk" as Hyde says! In fact when I read your posts it is so obvious how brainwashed you are by the way you speak! You use all the "cliches" Hyde teaches the students and parents. "Don't get it", "smiling zero's"???????? You sound EXACTLY like Joe Gauld and the rest of the losers who can't survive in the world as it is, so they Hide behind the compound of Hyde!!
Get a life Hydefan and stop insulting Antigen. At least she is doing a service here by welcoming Hyde's disgruntled families a place to vent! This is certainly more than Hyde offered us! At least we are not censored here or punished for speaking out! It makes me want to vomit even thinking about the chain and ball Hyde had attached to all of us while we were there! Character Boarding School, my ass!!! I hope families considering Hyde come to this site and realize the lies Hyde puts out in their materials!! Cult, Cult, Cult!"
Why would I rebut Lars? Why rebut anyone? Why do you feel the need to defend Antigen. You don't see any relevance with questioning people's motives? At least mine are clear. I am a Hyde fan. I asked Antigen some nice questions and tried to be sympathetic. Instead she avoided my questions and came back attacking me.
She ways Well, your preception that the mindfuck at Hyde is significantly different from the mindfuck at any other Synanon/Lifesprings-based programs is largely irrelevant
Well, Hyde isn't a Synanon/Lifespring based program, nor is the comparisson irrelevant, when it serves IMHO as Antigens primary raison d'etre.
From what I've read (and I don't presume to know reality of Seeds), Hyde seems like at the other end of the spectrum. I was certainly never locked up at Hyde, like many seem to be at Seeds.
The point is, Antigen keeps posting on the Hyde site implicitly pretending to know something about it. In my book, that makes her a fraud.
That you are drawn to her somehow is also illustrative.
-
On 2005-11-03 12:17:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Why don't you rebuttal this, Hydefan? I notice you are very good at "talking the talk" as Hyde says! In fact when I read your posts it is so obvious how brainwashed you are by the way you speak! You use all the "cliches" Hyde teaches the students and parents. "Don't get it", "smiling zero's"???????? You sound EXACTLY like Joe Gauld and the rest of the losers who can't survive in the world as it is, so they Hide behind the compound of Hyde!!
Get a life Hydefan and stop insulting Antigen. At least she is doing a service here by welcoming Hyde's disgruntled families a place to vent! This is certainly more than Hyde offered us! At least we are not censored here or punished for speaking out! It makes me want to vomit even thinking about the chain and ball Hyde had attached to all of us while we were there! Character Boarding School, my ass!!! I hope families considering Hyde come to this site and realize the lies Hyde puts out in their materials!! Cult, Cult, Cult!"
Why would I rebut Lars? Why rebut anyone? Why do you feel the need to defend Antigen. You don't see any relevance with questioning people's motives? At least mine are clear. I am a Hyde fan. I asked Antigen some nice questions and tried to be sympathetic. Instead she avoided my questions and came back attacking me.
She ways Well, your preception that the mindfuck at Hyde is significantly different from the mindfuck at any other Synanon/Lifesprings-based programs is largely irrelevant
Well, Hyde isn't a Synanon/Lifespring based program, nor is the comparisson irrelevant, when it serves IMHO as Antigens primary raison d'etre.
From what I've read (and I don't presume to know reality of Seeds), Hyde seems like at the other end of the spectrum. I was certainly never locked up at Hyde, like many seem to be at Seeds.
The point is, Antigen keeps posting on the Hyde site implicitly pretending to know something about it. In my book, that makes her a fraud.
That you are drawn to her somehow is also illustrative."
Nice questions? You are sympathetic? I don't think calling someone a fraud is being sympathetic! You my dear friend are the one who should be questioned about your motives!! What Lars is saying is true and this is probably why you have nothing to say!!
-
:smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin:
Not a place upon earth might be so happy as America. Her situation is remote from all the wrangling world, and she has nothing to do but to trade with them.
--Thomas Paine
-
On 2005-11-04 10:11:00, tommyfromhyde1 wrote:
" :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: Not a place upon earth might be so happy as America. Her situation is remote from all the wrangling world, and she has nothing to do but to trade with them.
--Thomas Paine
"
I think it's remarkably, and pathetically, ironic that Joe Gauld is widely know for his put-downs and arrogant, patronizing behavior. Isn't that a typical Hyde paradox? Some senior Hyde staff extol Hyde's "virtues" of integrity and concern and then treat people in ways that are diametrically opposed to these virtues. While not all Hyde staff are this hypocritical, quite a few are.
-
On 2005-11-04 10:11:00, tommyfromhyde1 wrote:
" :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: :smokin: Not a place upon earth might be so happy as America. Her situation is remote from all the wrangling world, and she has nothing to do but to trade with them.
--Thomas Paine
"
Classic example of someone who never got it! TommydudespadedoutatHyde, smiling zero is none of the above.
Smiling zero is for people who walk around being somewhere between "nice" and invisible, skating by on talent that makes them passable to mediocre, when in fact they have potential to be 10x more. Kind of like many rich parents kids. They do enough to get by but nothing more. Certainly their life is not about excellence.
And in general, a smiling zero had NO association with drugs, since by definition the druggies were doing something that called negative attention to themselves, where the whole life's motive of a smiling zero was to stay just inside the rules and just inside the minimal level of performance.
-
Nice questions? You are sympathetic? I don't think calling someone a fraud is being sympathetic! You my dear friend are the one who should be questioned about your motives!! What Lars is saying is true and this is probably why you have nothing to say!!"
Ok, you have trouble reading. What I said was, I was "trying" to be sympathetic. My post was at http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... =60#139743 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=12108&forum=43&start=60#139743)
When she failed to respond directly as before (want me to get the posts?), then I can only conclude her failure to explain why she has relevance on this board when she didn't go to Hyde....but posts here like she has knowledge of it....is fraudulent.
Why don't I respond to Lars? First, it was off-topic to my post, second, his questions were mostly rhetorical, and third, I don't disagree with much of what he says. So what is there to respond to? Ok, I suppose I will, just for you. :smile:
To Hydefan,
You should have some understanding for the kids who have had mental health issues treated as character problems by the know-it-alls at Hyde. Do you have any idea how terrible that is? Clinical depression is a horrible, debilitating illness and to have it labled "laziness" or "attitude" is just ignorant and cruel.
Couldn't agree more.
Or, how about highly intelligent students whose college prospects get screwed because of the grading system that brings down their average because they aren't considered "leaders" in class?
Well, that wasn't my experience. I got a GED and am very successful. Did I have to claw my way to the top? You betcha! But that's what Hyde taught me to do. They were the original Outwit, Outlast, Outplay. If you think you were screwed in life by the time you got to college and Hyde fucked you over, you are a sad-pathetic victim and no ivy league college was every going to save you from your own sorry fate.
The WORST possible case that should have ever happened from the Hyde grading system (which I can make plenty of strong arguments for) is that you go to a crap college for a year, work your ass off, transfer, and if need be, do that again. Then go to grad school. Study in the summers. Be tenacious. Make something of your life. Stop blaming others.
Try to have some understanding of why people on this board are so angry. It's not just a bunch of malcontents. The place was, and from the comments of some of the posters whose experience was more recent, still is deeply and fundamentally flawed (and even dangerous).
I have previously posted that I support the venting of people's personal stories as a way to grieve their childhood. I think the greatest chance for living a more positive future is to accept one will not have a more positive past.
I do take issues, however, with people who (a) lie (which I've previously documented), (b) spout about the school but not themselves, and (c) toss around words like "cult" and "LGATs" etc. and who were otherwise never associated with Hyde.
-
To the Anonymous guy who thinks I'm blaming others,
I appreciate that you're not really trying to rip me or pull the Hyde "you just don't get it" business as to my post. But I do feel compelled to address a few things you said.
Punishing a bright student because they aren't a "leader" in class is downright disgaceful. I never said I was screwed in life by the time I got to college, I was merely pointing that due to an unconscionable grading system, I had fewer options at that time than if they had graded my work simply on its merits. And I have a right to take them to task for it.
Also, my post may have appeared rhetorical in form, but in substance, it wasn't. I was there. These things actually happened.
Of course, the typical Hyde approach is to have the student always blame him or herself. In the real world, that isn't always the case. We have the right to vent our anger when others wrong us, when an institution wrongs us. Hey, I moved on. I worked hard AND played hard in college (a much healthier approach than the grim, all "work" approach that is central to the Hyde experience), got into law school and made a life for myself. I make good money and enjoy kicking the government's butt in court. I have a beautiful wife and two beautiful kids. Life is good. Believe me, I'm not blaming them for anything in my life now.
Those of use who endured that place have a right to vent, and, I believe, a moral duty to warn prospective parents. My parents bought into their bulls*&^ and it was three years of my life that I'll never get back. If anything good came of that, it's that I now thank god for every day I have on this earth that I can live my life the way I should - without having to share my intimate secrets with strangers, without know-it-alls trying to mold me into something I'm not.
What I'm seeing in these discussions is a lot of people like me who had terrible experiences there. And a few of the pro-Hyde folks who respond to our anger by responding the way the school did: you don't get it. It's a free country and as a lawyer who fights every day to uphold the constitution, I think you've got the right to say what you want on these boards. But understand that if you're coming on here to defend the school and in doing so, telling folks that they just don't get it, that they, not Hyde School failed, well, I have to say that you really ought to consider keeping your $.02 to yourself. It's just not appropriate in a forum where people are clearing some of the bile from their souls.
Life is not a Hyde seminar. And neither are these discussions.
-
On 2005-11-04 19:35:00, Lars wrote:
"To the Anonymous guy who thinks I'm blaming others,
I appreciate that you're not really trying to rip me or pull the Hyde "you just don't get it" business as to my post. But I do feel compelled to address a few things you said.
Punishing a bright student because they aren't a "leader" in class is downright disgaceful. I never said I was screwed in life by the time I got to college, I was merely pointing that due to an unconscionable grading system, I had fewer options at that time than if they had graded my work simply on its merits. And I have a right to take them to task for it.
Also, my post may have appeared rhetorical in form, but in substance, it wasn't. I was there. These things actually happened.
Of course, the typical Hyde approach is to have the student always blame him or herself. In the real world, that isn't always the case. We have the right to vent our anger when others wrong us, when an institution wrongs us. Hey, I moved on. I worked hard AND played hard in college (a much healthier approach than the grim, all "work" approach that is central to the Hyde experience), got into law school and made a life for myself. I make good money and enjoy kicking the government's butt in court. I have a beautiful wife and two beautiful kids. Life is good. Believe me, I'm not blaming them for anything in my life now.
Those of use who endured that place have a right to vent, and, I believe, a moral duty to warn prospective parents. My parents bought into their bulls*&^ and it was three years of my life that I'll never get back. If anything good came of that, it's that I now thank god for every day I have on this earth that I can live my life the way I should - without having to share my intimate secrets with strangers, without know-it-alls trying to mold me into something I'm not.
What I'm seeing in these discussions is a lot of people like me who had terrible experiences there. And a few of the pro-Hyde folks who respond to our anger by responding the way the school did: you don't get it. It's a free country and as a lawyer who fights every day to uphold the constitution, I think you've got the right to say what you want on these boards. But understand that if you're coming on here to defend the school and in doing so, telling folks that they just don't get it, that they, not Hyde School failed, well, I have to say that you really ought to consider keeping your $.02 to yourself. It's just not appropriate in a forum where people are clearing some of the bile from their souls.
Life is not a Hyde seminar. And neither are these discussions."
Thanks for sharing your experience with us Lars. It does help to vent after all these years! I think many people have said this on the board, but I will repeat it.....at Hyde you are intimidated into censorship because the consequences are so severe that you learn early on to keep you mouth shut and play the game! Not only do kids have to do this, the parents do as well.
For those of you who don't know how Hyde operates, there are regional meetings that parents are required to attend each month. The indoctorination continues, and when the kids are home on break, they too are required to attend. I saw undo pressure being applied with the parents. I would say that half of the time spent at meetings, and the required family weekends, is all about fundraising. Each region assigns 2 people to lead the fundraising. One for the Bath Campus and one for the Woodstock Campus. This person is suppose to get 100% participation and if someone does not "donate" then psychological pressure is put on in different ways. The entire region WILL know that you did not donate. You cannot imagine the looks and comments one gets for not participating. This of course is expected from you even after paying $35,000 to attend Hyde, plus all the expenses for travel back and forth and other required activities. Basically one has to be very rich to attend this "program." You would think Hyde would have some professional staff on hand for all this money, but guess what folks????? These are very low paid young teachers and staff, other than the "family circle" of Gaulds, etc.
I think what many people are trying to get across on this board is the following:
1. Hyde is not a school! Hyde is a "program" which does not have professional staff on board to deal with psychological problems.
2. Hyde has a lousy education system. Most teachers do not have good qualifications, only stay for a couple of years at most, are young and inexperienced, and many are Hyde "graduates" who come back to the school because they cannot make it in the real world. The "successes" at Hyde are ones who buy into the program and want to stay in the program!
3. The marketing materials are deceiving. Hyde is NOT a boarding prep school! There are some very bright kids who have gone through Hyde but will not be accepted into a good college because of Hyde's grading system which is not acceptable at most schools. Hyde markets themselves as a school where 99% of graduates are accepted to college. There are a very small percentage of kids who start senior year and graduate at the end of senior year. Of those who do graduate most are accepted into community colleges and other four year institutions that are not the top in the country. Of those who do graduate and do go to college, there is a high dropout rate and some never step foot on campus! If you are impressed by this then by all means, go ahead and attend Hyde.
4. Both parents and kids WILL be expected to tell all the dirty details of your life. If a parent has ever smoked pot, cheated on a wife, stole candy, slept with several partners, you will be pressured to bring it up in front of not only your child who attends Hyde, but your other kids who are with you in seminar as well as a room full of perfect strangers. These same strangers will give you the advice THEY feel you need!!
5. Parents are NOT allowed to miss regional meetings each month. Should you miss one, you are reported to the school. Also, the group leaders in your region send a report to the school about the meetings, participation, concerns about certain parents, etc. Nothing is regarded as private at Hyde. Their saying, "what's said in the room, stays in the room" only applies to parents who do not hold a post at the school. The regional leader many times discusses your private conversations with the school under the guise of being "concerned." There are also "concern meetings" if you are considered "off track." If you don't buy into the program, you are "offtrack."
6. If you are smart enough to see that you have joined a Cult rather than a school, forget about getting your money back. Consider your $35,000 plus, plus, gone!!
7. The reason you will not see many posters here or hear about the school from people who leave, is that there is a big sense of embarassment. I see parents who become very close during the school year yet when away from that environment they are too ashamed to be friends with someone who knows EVERYTHIHG aboutthem. Seldom do any parents stay in touch with each other after leaving Hyde other than the "inner circle" who never leaves Hyde. I am one of those who is not in touch with anyone through Hyde even though I liked many of the students. When I myself was a "hyde fan" I would preach about the school to my friends. My friends would tell me it sounded like a cult and I would dispute this. I now say NOTHING about my experience at Hyde because I am too ashamed to admit they were right and I was caught up in a Cult.
As far as Hydefan. It is obvious that he is a member of the school or should I say a member of the Cult at Hyde. It truly amazes me how anyone who "buys into Hyde" talks EXACTLY the same way. The lingo is all the same! This is certainly signs of a Cult and I don't think even THEY realize how deeply involved they are in the indoctorination! If you read these posts, go to Amazon.com and look at the "reviews" for the school book, you will see that the "Hydettes" all talk the same! You might think some of it is all the same person, but it isn't. All Hyde people who "buy into the program" are programmed to speak the same!
I think it is important for parents considering Hyde to read through ALL these posts and see that former Hyde parents and students are all saying the same thing! Think twice before signing up for Hyde. There are a few statisfied people, but all in all a higher percentage left Hyde unhappy!
-
As far as Hydefan. It is obvious that he is a member of the school or should I say a member of the Cult at Hyde. It truly amazes me how anyone who "buys into Hyde" talks EXACTLY the same way. The lingo is all the same! This is certainly signs of a Cult and I don't think even THEY realize how deeply involved they are in the indoctorination! If you read these posts, go to Amazon.com and look at the "reviews" for the school book, you will see that the "Hydettes" all talk the same! You might think some of it is all the same person, but it isn't. All Hyde people who "buy into the program" are programmed to speak the same!
As far as Lars and Antigen and TommyFromHyde, it truly amazes me how anyone who didn't buy into Hyde talks EXACTLY the same way. The lingo is all the same. They use words like Cult and indoctorination. If you read these posts, you will see that the "non-Hydettes" all talk the same! You might think some of it is all the same person--and it just might be!
-
On 2005-11-06 01:36:00, Anonymous wrote:
"As far as Hydefan. It is obvious that he is a member of the school or should I say a member of the Cult at Hyde. It truly amazes me how anyone who "buys into Hyde" talks EXACTLY the same way. The lingo is all the same! This is certainly signs of a Cult and I don't think even THEY realize how deeply involved they are in the indoctorination! If you read these posts, go to Amazon.com and look at the "reviews" for the school book, you will see that the "Hydettes" all talk the same! You might think some of it is all the same person, but it isn't. All Hyde people who "buy into the program" are programmed to speak the same!
As far as Lars and Antigen and TommyFromHyde, it truly amazes me how anyone who didn't buy into Hyde talks EXACTLY the same way. The lingo is all the same. They use words like Cult and indoctorination. If you read these posts, you will see that the "non-Hydettes" all talk the same! You might think some of it is all the same person--and it just might be!"
Hey Hydefan,
Did you see the words cult or indoctrination in any of my posts? No you didn't, although you're too dense to see that in many ways, these terms are not inappropriate. I'd use words like like overzealous, self-righteous, insensitive, close-minded & sadistic.
Actually, I'd say some of the folks up there meant well and really thought they were helping people. But you know what they say about good intentions. Again, you're being completely insensitive as to why folks on this board are venting and concerned that incoming families aren't getting the real picture.
So I'll say it again in terms that even you can understand: Get lost, Troll!
-
As far as people like Lars, it truly amazes me how anyone who didn't buy into Hyde talks EXACTLY the same way. The lingo is all the same. They use words like overzealous, self-righteous, insensitive, close-minded & sadistic. If you read these posts, you will see that the "non-Hydettes" all talk the same! You might think some of it is all the same person--and it just might be!"
-
On 2005-11-06 12:22:00, Anonymous wrote:
"As far as people like Lars, it truly amazes me how anyone who didn't buy into Hyde talks EXACTLY the same way. The lingo is all the same. They use words like overzealous, self-righteous, insensitive, close-minded & sadistic. If you read these posts, you will see that the "non-Hydettes" all talk the same! You might think some of it is all the same person--and it just might be!"
"
You're a sick motherf^%$#$. You truly belong up in Bath. Go away.
-
I "ditto" that Lars! BTW, does that term, (ditto) sound familiar? This "Hydefan" is definitely arrogant enough to be one of the Gauld family if not one of the Gaulds!! Wonder if Hydefan swings a golf club as well as Joey! Remember those days of him "preaching" and swinging in the air?
-
On 2005-11-06 13:39:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I "ditto" that Lars! BTW, does that term, (ditto) sound familiar? This "Hydefan" is definitely arrogant enough to be one of the Gauld family if not one of the Gaulds!! Wonder if Hydefan swings a golf club as well as Joey! Remember those days of him "preaching" and swinging in the air?"
The first time I attended one of Joe Gauld's presentations (sermon from the mount with a virtual golf swing?) I realized our family was in for a difficult ride. I stared at the man in amazement. Out of one side of his mouth he spoke of Hyde's core virtues. Out of the other side of his mouth he patronized, shamed, and spoke down to parents who were doing their best to get their lives in order. It was so pathetic to see this man spew his arrogant cliches with virtually no insight into the cynicism and skepticism that surrounded him in that room (with the exception of the Hyde fans who lapped it up, so eager were they for wisdom and direction from someone who was willing to tell them how to live their lives -- one of the most unadorned presentations I've seen of cult-like behavior).
-
On 2005-11-06 13:15:00, Lars wrote:
"
On 2005-11-06 12:22:00, Anonymous wrote:
"As far as people like Lars, it truly amazes me how anyone who didn't buy into Hyde talks EXACTLY the same way. The lingo is all the same. They use words like overzealous, self-righteous, insensitive, close-minded & sadistic. If you read these posts, you will see that the "non-Hydettes" all talk the same! You might think some of it is all the same person--and it just might be!"
"
You're a sick motherf^%$#$. You truly belong up in Bath. Go away."
Kind of funny that I am a sick MotherF***** for saying the EXACT same thing as one of your friends here, but just changed the words to show how absurd so many of your statements are.
Go away? Not while there is still a chance to save your soul. I will prey for you Lars. There is still hope.
-
On 2005-11-06 16:33:00, Anonymous wrote:
I will prey for you Lars.
Prey, not pray??? Freudian slip? :eek:
-
I swear this guy, Hydefan is so arrogant that it has to be one of the "higher ups" at Bath. Maybe even the God himself, Joe Gauld!
Many of us are here to vent about our bad experiences. It was impossible to speak out while at the Hyde Program. The kids would suffer the consequences for whatever negative words the parents had to say so we just kept quiet till our kids were out of that hell hole. I can only speak for myself, but I find this board very therapeutic and am glad it exists. This board is not meant for people to fight over right and wrong, these are people expressing their experiences at Hyde. I find most every poster sincere in their expressions and am annoyed at the one person who is trying to invalidate someone's feelings about what they went through.
If Hydefan "got it" he would have some empathy for the people on this board who are hurt and damaged by what happened to them at Hyde. I think it says something about Hydefans character by the way he is behaving and if this is what a "success" is at Hyde, then I sure don't want to be one of the "successes." He is so determined to invalidate what others are saying here, that he spends his entire time disecting every post to find words he can then twist around. I feel more sorry for Hydefan then for the other posters. Why? Because all of the other posters are cleansing their souls on this board and Hydefan seems to be a completely frustrated and arrogant man who needs more help than any of us ever will! We got out of Hyde! Hydefan is still stuck there!!
-
My soul's just fine, thank you. I couldn't care less what a bitter, jealous loser like yourself thinks - my wife & kids' opinions are what's important to me. People are here to vent and tell their stories - you just want to bait people.
In my profession (criminal defense litigation including 5 years as public defender and two in private practice), I've learned that you can't simply judge others and presume to know what's best for their lives and their souls. My clients are some of the biggest knuckleheads you'll ever meet. But I've learned to be understanding, to be a problem solver, to see the light, however small it may be, along with the darkness in people's souls. Hyde didn't teach that - I learned it in the real world. That's what you Hyde fanatics don't understand, that there are greater and deeper truths and values than the drivel preached by the Gaulds.
But I suppose you can keep telling me I don't get it, if it makes you feel better. :lol:
-
On 2005-11-06 17:47:00, Lars wrote:
"I couldn't care less what a bitter, jealous loser like yourself thinks ...
I've learned to be understanding, to be a problem solver, to see the light, however small it may be, along with the darkness in people's souls."
Damn! Would that there was even a little light in my soul, I might not be the bitter, jealous, loser that I am.
-
On 2005-11-06 17:14:00, Anonymous wrote:
Many of us are here to vent about our bad experiences.
I have written on many occasions I support this. But there are two types on here. Those looking for a theraputic vent (go for it) and those looking to influence families decisions about their children. To the extent the latter exists, and to the extent you then do not tolerate positive experiences about Hyde, you become the oppressor.
If Hydefan "got it" he would have some empathy for the people on this board who are hurt and damaged by what happened to them at Hyde.
Many of my posts are empathetic, but y'all make it kinda hard!
He is so determined to invalidate what others are saying here, that he spends his entire time disecting every post to find words he can then twist around.
You can call it "dissecting", but when people make up lies to influence family decisions about a place I care a lot about, I think I have reasonably standing to weigh in.
The truth is, there are a bunch of people here who make unsupported claims intending not to vent, but to influence family decisions.
The most recent one was all of the people yelling and screaming how Hyde students have free speach rights that are being illegally supressed.
That is absurd.
Conceptually, if you don't think character education of children is the responsibility of parents, schools and communities, then yes, we will just have to differ there.
Not being able to even see that there might be a tiny logical problem with suggesting 12 or 14 or 16 year old should be able to say whatever they want to say (except, as I have pointed out in the area of abuse), seems just a tad over-reaching to me.
And thus indicative of the over-zealous nature of many of these posts.
Which, if they were just to vent, I would have no problem with....
But that isn't Antigen's mission. Antigen being the one who posts all about Hyde but who never went there and only knows what she reads from unhappy former students and some families.
Anyway, if you want a site that only allows negative comments, set up a yahoo group or have Antigen boot me. That's not really my concern.
But as long as we all believe in free speech rights of adults, I will do my best to stick to the truth and ask others to be accountable for the same.
So now let's test your Hyde knowledge. What Hyde precept did I just describe?
-
On 2005-11-07 06:29:00, Anonymous wrote:
I have written on many occasions I support this. But there are two types on here. Those looking for a theraputic vent (go for it) and those looking to influence families decisions about their children. To the extent the latter exists, and to the extent you then do not tolerate positive experiences about Hyde, you become the oppressor.
All of your posts are still there. Go check. Nobody's disallowing any viewpoints here.
Many of my posts are empathetic, but y'all make it kinda hard!
No, darlin, it's empathic. "Empathetic" is a non-word made up by some uneducated Synanon follower some decades ago. Evidently, it stuck pretty good. They used the same non-word daily in The Seed and Straight.
You can call it "dissecting", but when people make up lies to influence family decisions about a place I care a lot about, I think I have reasonably standing to weigh in.
Well, there certainly is some dissagreement between you and just about everyone else who's posting here. Most of these people have told us some bit of background about themselves. That helps the reader to better understand the context in which the writer is writing. How about you? What's your interest in Hyde? Were you a student? A parent? Staff? All of the above? Still employed there?
The truth is, there are a bunch of people here who make unsupported claims intending not to vent, but to influence family decisions.
What's your intent?
The most recent one was all of the people yelling and screaming how Hyde students have free speach rights that are being illegally supressed.
That is absurd.
Not according to the courts, it's not.
Conceptually, if you don't think character education of children is the responsibility of parents, schools and communities, then yes, we will just have to differ there.
What? Where'd that come from? Part of good character is having enough backbone to speak for yourself. Are you suggesting that you're teaching these kids character by cowing them into submission? I would suggest that that's a rather warped view of character. What is your definition of character, Hyde Fan?
Not being able to even see that there might be a tiny logical problem with suggesting 12 or 14 or 16 year old should be able to say whatever they want to say (except, as I have pointed out in the area of abuse), seems just a tad over-reaching to me. And thus indicative of the over-zealous nature of many of these posts.
Well, then that opinion puts you at odds with the rest of America. Freedom of expression is a cherished prime tenet of our way of life. Yes, we're all "over zealous", just like those long haired hippy freaks who first revoted against the British Empire.
Which, if they were just to vent, I would have no problem with....
But that isn't Antigen's mission. Antigen being the one who posts all about Hyde but who never went there and only knows what she reads from unhappy former students and some families.
Yeah, typical. "You can say anything you want, so long as it's not important." Actually, I learn quite a bit from the pro-program posters too. For example, you're squirming defense of stiffling dissent and independent opinion. Very informative! Thanks for your contribution.
Anyway, if you want a site that only allows negative comments, set up a yahoo group or have Antigen boot me. That's not really my concern.
Ain't gonna happen. Nobody here wants a one sided, distorted discussion.
But as long as we all believe in free speech rights of adults, I will do my best to stick to the truth and ask others to be accountable for the same.
So now let's test your Hyde knowledge. What Hyde precept did I just describe?
"
I don't know what the Hyde lingo for that concept may be. Maybe someone will fill us in. But you seem to be describing this conversation very well.
Carry on, carry on! :wave: Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet.
--Napoleon Bonaparte, French emperor
-
+I have posted my history fairly extensively. Look it up. I am just a former student who interned there later....and that's a lot more info than the non-info you repeated fail to provide! Why are you a drug war POW?
++Um, empathetic actually is a word that you can find in virtually any dictionary, pre-dates synanon or whatever the program is called, and most psychologists would say that empathy is the cornerstone of a relationship. I was using it in response to one of the dissenters using it. Do you have a real point there, because you kind of lost me!
++As for as I can tell, you are totally wrong about the law and free speech at private schools in Maine. See my posts above that state very clearly why they don't and let me know if you come up with a reference other than your unsupported assertion to the contrary.
(The other comments would take all day. These were the low hanging fruit.)
Have a good one.
-
On 2005-11-07 13:16:00, Anonymous wrote:
(The other comments would take all day. These were the low hanging fruit.)
Just one. What is your intent here, if not to influence the decisions of prospective marks?A Freudian slip is when you say one thing but mean your mother.
--Anonymous
-
On 2005-11-07 13:16:00, Anonymous wrote:
"+I have posted my history fairly extensively. Look it up. I am just a former student who interned there later....and that's a lot more info than the non-info you repeated fail to provide! Why are you a drug war POW?
++Um, empathetic actually is a word that you can find in virtually any dictionary, pre-dates synanon or whatever the program is called, and most psychologists would say that empathy is the cornerstone of a relationship. I was using it in response to one of the dissenters using it. Do you have a real point there, because you kind of lost me!
++As for as I can tell, you are totally wrong about the law and free speech at private schools in Maine. See my posts above that state very clearly why they don't and let me know if you come up with a reference other than your unsupported assertion to the contrary.
(The other comments would take all day. These were the low hanging fruit.)
Have a good one.
"
So you have no affiliation to Hyde anymore? Are you practicing TRUTH??? Maybe leaving out a little bit of the facts on yourself?
As far as you being stuck on kids not being able to have the same rights as adults, I really don't know because I am not going to spend two hours looking up the law. What I don't understand about you is that Hyde teaches something you are very familiar with, which is "truth over harmony." We are taught at Hyde to speak up and speak the truth. What you are saying is that kids don't have the right to speak about certain things. Isn't this a little hypocritical? I am sure you will come up with some excuse for talking out of both sides of your mouth. Hyde can't have it both ways, which is what you are advocating!
-
On 2005-11-07 15:01:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2005-11-07 13:16:00, Anonymous wrote:
"+I have posted my history fairly extensively. Look it up. I am just a former student who interned there later....and that's a lot more info than the non-info you repeated fail to provide! Why are you a drug war POW?
++Um, empathetic actually is a word that you can find in virtually any dictionary, pre-dates synanon or whatever the program is called, and most psychologists would say that empathy is the cornerstone of a relationship. I was using it in response to one of the dissenters using it. Do you have a real point there, because you kind of lost me!
++As for as I can tell, you are totally wrong about the law and free speech at private schools in Maine. See my posts above that state very clearly why they don't and let me know if you come up with a reference other than your unsupported assertion to the contrary.
(The other comments would take all day. These were the low hanging fruit.)
Have a good one.
"
So you have no affiliation to Hyde anymore? Are you practicing TRUTH??? Maybe leaving out a little bit of the facts on yourself?
As far as you being stuck on kids not being able to have the same rights as adults, I really don't know because I am not going to spend two hours looking up the law. What I don't understand about you is that Hyde teaches something you are very familiar with, which is "truth over harmony." We are taught at Hyde to speak up and speak the truth. What you are saying is that kids don't have the right to speak about certain things. Isn't this a little hypocritical? I am sure you will come up with some excuse for talking out of both sides of your mouth. Hyde can't have it both ways, which is what you are advocating!"
Here's a simple, straightforward implementation of Hyde's principle of "truth over harmony": If anyone -- parent or student -- wants to voice critical opinions about Hyde that are truthful (not deliberate lies or misrepresentation) they should express those views, even at the risk of creating some disharmony (e.g., upsetting people at Hyde, reducing admissions and revenue when people leave Hyde or look elsewhere).
People who criticize Hyde should do so responsibly and truthfully. That's living up to Hyde's principle of truth over harmony. ANY effort on Hyde's part to stifle anyone's responsible and truthful expression of opinion -- positive or critical -- is hypocritical.
-
On 2005-11-07 14:01:00, Antigen wrote:
"
On 2005-11-07 13:16:00, Anonymous wrote:
(The other comments would take all day. These were the low hanging fruit.)
Just one. What is your intent here, if not to influence the decisions of prospective marks?A Freudian slip is when you say one thing but mean your mother.
--Anonymous
"
I have never hidden my intent here (that's why the heading of this stream is NOTICE TO POTENTIAL PARENTS). In fact, for the most part I have stayed off other streams (not entirely, but almost), and kept to MY TOPIC that I started. (And that this is so threatening to many folks here I think says something about who is on this board.)
Still, if you want something more direct, my intent here is to (a) (first and foremost) influence prospective students and families by providing an alternative view and correcting blatant mistruths, and (b) to a much lesser degree, to explore the extent Hyde may have been abusive to some.
The problem with the latter part is that its impossible to take people's statements on their face. Denial can last a life-time. If you don't know the back-story, I would argue there is a good chance you don't know the most important part of the story.
Same could be said of me. If you don't know the back story, you don't know why Hyde was good for me and my family.
So instead we all converse at a more superficial level of what's good and evil, instead of what was really going on with a particular student and his/her family. That of course is not really good fodder for the internet nor would any rational person expose him/herself for that sort of debate, whatever their experience.
Hence this is a perfect forum for casting (anonymous) aspursions, insults and complete fabrications. Of course, its also good for catharsis for those who may have really suffered inappropriately at Hyde.
But hopefully no one mistakes any of this for reality.
So now its your turn Antigen. Tell us about you and your intentions here. I at least went to Hyde!
-
So you have no affiliation to Hyde anymore? Are you practicing TRUTH??? Maybe leaving out a little bit of the facts on yourself?
This is almost comical. Well, I don't practice truth, I seek it. And yes, I have no affiliation with Hyde other than as an alum.
As far as you being stuck on kids not being able to have the same rights as adults, I really don't know because I am not going to spend two hours looking up the law.
As much as you may want to think this is all about you, well, its not. It was Antigen and some others who proclaimed that students in private schools in Maine have legal free speech rights, and so as hard as this may be to follow, it is to them that my comments were directed.
My position is, if you are going to make something up, at least make something up people can't research and easily show that you appear to be talking out of the wrong orifice.
What I don't understand about you is that Hyde teaches something you are very familiar with, which is "truth over harmony." We are taught at Hyde to speak up and speak the truth. What you are saying is that kids don't have the right to speak about certain things. Isn't this a little hypocritical? I am sure you will come up with some excuse for talking out of both sides of your mouth. Hyde can't have it both ways, which is what you are advocating!"
I never heard the expression truth over harmony at Hyde, but I think it probably fits--just not in the superficial way you are interpreting it.
Before I get there, I will say I see no hypocracy in challenging the attitude behind any speech. Many of you here seem seriously confused by this, but this isn't about free speech, legally or morally. You can say whatever you want at Hyde (at least when I was there), but you will also be held accountable for what you say at Hyde!
Much of what anyone says in life is a reflection of beliefs and attitudes. Kids and families are at Hyde because they are in trouble. Hyde's approach is to get into the underlying beliefs and attitudes. You can call it tough love, you can call it what you want, but I found it open, honest, and refreshing.
To state it another way, I think where we differ is what truth we are talking about. There is the child's "truth", and then there is Hyde's "truth" about what is going on for that kid and his/her family. If they really use the expression truth over harmony, my guess is it is the latter about which they are talking.
And if you don't like trusting other people with providing that level of input into your lives with the sincere intentions of challenging yours and hopefully making it a LOT better, go someplace else.
Hyde isn't for everyone, but I am damn glad that this school exists because I know of few other places on the planet that seek the truth with such diligence and integrity.
-
On 2005-11-08 00:56:00, Anonymous wrote:
So now its your turn Antigen. Tell us about you and your intentions here. I at least went to Hyde!
Rampant talking out in group. I've said it over and over again. These cults simply can't exist w/o strict controls on communication; among current memebers as well as between current and former members and the public in general.
You may have a technical point on whether or not a private school may set limits on what a student or other may say while involved. However, I dare you to try and defend they ways in which they respond. I think they can kick a kid out, suspend them, give them detention or some other sanction. But force them to move a huge pile of sticks from one spot to the other and back again? No, I don't think that would pass public scrutiny. Hold them up to ridicule and humiliation in an assembly setting? Nope, verbal assault if you get right down to it.
I understand that YOU think this is all perfectly defensible and explainable. But just put it out there in public and see if it stands up.
It only takes a little prescience to understand that we're all fair game for the deeds we condone.
--Antigen
-
Antigen, Hyde thinks nothing of public humiliation, neglect of a minors social and physical needs, or many other abuses. Hyde has rules and regulations that you will never see in another private or public school. I went there and I KNOW!!
Of course the fans of Hyde will defend this by saying that Hyde did not have a LEGAL obligation to report different abuses, and they might be right, but what about a moral obligation? I would hope that Hyde would act more responsible and honor the obligations they have to protect the kids who are in their care.
In my estimation Hyde has no morals or values in spite of all their preaching Truth, Humility, Honesty, and so on. I saw it first hand and although I will not go into every single detail, many are covered on some of these posts.
My fear is that someone is going to be seriously injured one day at this school, but at that point it will be too late and someone could die.
-
On 2005-11-08 13:05:00, Anonymous wrote:
My fear is that someone is going to be seriously injured one day at this school, but at that point it will be too late and someone could die. "
Anon, that almost happened during Summer School in '76 on one of Mr. Warren's infamous dory trips. I was there. On our second day of rowing around Penobscot Bay a Coast Guard cutter hailed the "safety boat" and told the faculty aboard that there was an incoming tropical storm and that we had to get to land NOW. I think that the faculty had to be threatened with arrest before they agreed to bring us into shore. Then the storm hit (downgraded to a gale by that time I think).science is the record of dead religions.
--Oscar Wilde
-
I bet things were a lot worse in your day Tommy!
My belief is that Hyde has had to make some changes because there was pressure put on them. When I was there, Social Services or maybe it was Childrens Services was hanging around the school. No one would talk about it, but there was definitely something going on, and the administrators looked pretty frazzled. I even saw the State Police coming around at that time. It could have had something to do with that whole incident with the sexual assault with Dubinsky. I don't know for sure am not certain.
Hyde usually will make some subtle changes for a while, but good old Joe Gauld still runs the show and we know what that means!! :scared:
-
On 2005-11-08 14:07:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I bet things were a lot worse in your day Tommy!
My belief is that Hyde has had to make some changes because there was pressure put on them. When I was there, Social Services or maybe it was Childrens Services was hanging around the school. No one would talk about it, but there was definitely something going on, and the administrators looked pretty frazzled. I even saw the State Police coming around at that time. It could have had something to do with that whole incident with the sexual assault with Dubinsky. I don't know for sure am not certain.
Hyde usually will make some subtle changes for a while, but good old Joe Gauld still runs the show and we know what that means!! :scared: "
The Hyde staff are masterful when it comes to confronting students and parents about exposing the unpleasant truths in their lives. Hyde staff are equally masterful at covering up their own truths when it suits their purposes, i.e., when there is information circulating about teacher abuse of students, inferior teaching, staff with inadequate training and skills to facilitate FLCs, attrition rates at the school, inadequate services to students with serious emotional problems, graduation rates, and so on. Joe Gauld and company can talk all they want about students' and parents' obligation to favor "truth over harmony." This cliche will continue to be COMPLETELY empty and hypocritical until Hyde comes clean with its own very, very dirty laundry.
-
On 2005-11-08 11:48:00, Antigen wrote:
"
On 2005-11-08 00:56:00, Anonymous wrote:
So now its your turn Antigen. Tell us about you and your intentions here. I at least went to Hyde!
Rampant talking out in group. I've said it over and over again. These cults simply can't exist w/o strict controls on communication; among current memebers as well as between current and former members and the public in general.
You may have a technical point on whether or not a private school may set limits on what a student or other may say while involved. However, I dare you to try and defend they ways in which they respond. I think they can kick a kid out, suspend them, give them detention or some other sanction. But force them to move a huge pile of sticks from one spot to the other and back again? No, I don't think that would pass public scrutiny. Hold them up to ridicule and humiliation in an assembly setting? Nope, verbal assault if you get right down to it.
I understand that YOU think this is all perfectly defensible and explainable. But just put it out there in public and see if it stands up.
It only takes a little prescience to understand that we're all fair game for the deeds we condone.
--Antigen
"
Still deflection by the mistress of distress. Why did you quote me if you weren't going to respond.
And yes, I think moving sticks from A to B and back again, in certain contexts, is totally defensible.
Here's what happened for me: I was a stubborn, strong-willed kid with no clue about feelings or living my life by a moral code, or simply acting responsibly. Those who knew me expected me to be dead or in jail by 20.
Moving logs wore out my body and forced me to look within. It was painful. It was excruciating at times. I couldn't understand it. I was confused and lost.
And every day, sometimes every other, someone from the staff would come and talk with me, or call me to their office, and I would tell them what I was thinking about. And sometimes they would send me back out to move logs again, and I would kick and scream and get pissed and lash out and lash in.
But sometimes they would praise me and say I was on to something and to think more about whatever it was and come back and report again.
In the end, something fairly profound happened to me. I discovered the within. I discovered my feelings. I got in touch with how lonely I was in my family and in the world. And slowly but sure I started the healing work from my family of origin.
Many programs....from Outward Bound to the military (not that the military is the best example)....work on similar concepts.
What I can tell you that as a result of moving logs (for a very short time in my life), I believe I am stronger person than I ever would have been if the system was set up to let me say whatever I wanted, to get high all the time, to lie cheat and steal, and to screw up the rest of my life.
I should note that my guess is that when I was there, more than 1/2 of the school never experienced 2-4 or anything like that. Or if they did it was for one day or something minimal.
Antigen, I have read about how the Seeds program worked, and because everyone here is posting about the bad, I think it would be easy for you to think they were the same. I don't think they were.
And I also think that you owe it to us to tell us your story.
Turnabout is fair-play after all. :smile:
-
On 2005-11-08 13:26:00, tommyfromhyde1 wrote:
"I think that the faculty had to be threatened with arrest before they agreed to bring us into shore."
How authorative. (And how beautiful the web where you can put something out there without really being sure, but close enough to make it look bad.)
Well when I was at Hyde I *think* they made sure to tell the Coast Guard about their trips so they would be on the radar should something happen.
Gee, maybe that's why the Coast Guard came over to alert the "faculty" on one of "Mr. Warren's" trips.
Nah, couldn't be. Its the wild west up there, where kids (and presumably their own) lives are disposable.
What was I thinking.
-
On 2005-11-08 17:48:00, Anonymous wrote:
Antigen, I have read about how the Seeds program worked, and because everyone here is posting about the bad, I think it would be easy for you to think they were the same. I don't think they were.
No, that's exactly how they worked. They'd break you down through various physical, mental and emotional stress techniques till you came to believe what they wanted you to believe about yourself. They'd keep you guessing till you figured it out then give you all sorts of stokes and priviledges for coming to their realization.
Same shit, slightly different wrapper. At least you got to play sports w/ other schools.
Bigot: One fanatically devoted to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and intolerant of those who differ.
Webster's
-
On 2005-11-08 19:24:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2005-11-08 13:26:00, tommyfromhyde1 wrote:
"I think that the faculty had to be threatened with arrest before they agreed to bring us into shore."
How authorative. (And how beautiful the web where you can put something out there without really being sure, but close enough to make it look bad.)
Well when I was at Hyde I *think* they made sure to tell the Coast Guard about their trips so they would be on the radar should something happen.
Gee, maybe that's why the Coast Guard came over to alert the "faculty" on one of "Mr. Warren's" trips.
Nah, couldn't be. Its the wild west up there, where kids (and presumably their own) lives are disposable.
What was I thinking."
To the Anonymous who wrote the above. I REALLY wouldn't "go there." For every one time that Hyde might have done something responsible, there are five times they did something irresponsible and down right dangerous!! That is an argument you DONT want to have! You are looking for negatives to come out on this board when you open that can of worms!!
-
Same shit, slightly different wrapper. At least you got to play sports w/ other schools.
Too funny. That one actually made me laugh. I'm glad that you have a sense of humor, Antigen. :smile:
Anyway, I get most of your points. Personally, I think I needed some breaking down. I think a lot of people need some breaking down. Nothing was going to get through to me without that happening first, so it just worked for me in a lot of ways.
That said, I have seen enough in my life to know it doesn't work and/or isn't appropriate for everyone.
I can also be accomplished with varying degrees of compassion and conscious intention, and I think I attracted more of those types to my life. Without these mentors, I can guess that my experience would have been completely different.
-
To the Anonymous who wrote the above. I REALLY wouldn't "go there." For every one time that Hyde might have done something responsible, there are five times they did something irresponsible and down right dangerous!! That is an argument you DONT want to have! You are looking for negatives to come out on this board when you open that can of worms!!"
Its not about what happened or didn't Anonymous, its about people posting on stuff they don't know about that irks me. Some recent examples include (and I paraphrase):
The Gaulds are rich and funnelling money from the school, just do a "dunn" and bradstreet.
Hyde had a legal obligation to report a rape and didn't.
Hyde uses LGATs and those have been proven invalid by a NIH study.
Students in private schools in Maine have free speech rights.
And then there are a lot of "I think" as in, "I think" the faculty had to be threatened with arrest before they would turn their dory around, or do something that the Coast Guard was telling the to do.
My guess on this last one? It was VERY scary for the students in the boats to learn a storm was coming, and so everyone's anxiety spiked. And more than likely the faculty responded promptly and professionally, if for no other reason that to save their own damn life.
But if he didn't do that, then tell us what you witnessed first hand, not what you heard five monkeys down the high-school-whispering line, in a situation where everyone's anxiety was already spiking.
Look y'all, I don't challenge you because I doubt that there were situations where students were put at greater risk than was appropriate. I lived through one where a student came within inches of his death through the recklessness of the faculty.
What I am a stickler for, however, is the truth, and yes, I dissect the written word because while I am a supporter of Hyde, I also won't quibble with real facts.....but will definitely jump all over gossip, innuendo and provable mistruths, because use of the internet is a great tool for causing damage to peoples lives and reputations all anonymously and sometimes even telling the "truth", even if that truth is slippery. (Not to mention that it also pretty much kills any credibility a poster has and since everyone here pretty much goes by anonymous even if they could have an anonymous alias so as to track who said what and have real conversations, it thus also damages the credibility of the site as well.)
Let me give you an example of what all this means for me. I am card-carrying liberal. A Democrat for most of my life. And I was outraged in the last 8 years at all the emails I got from Republicans which I could prove wrong, invalid or dishonest with a very simple websearch.
One day it dawned on me that I was partaking in forwarding a lot of democratic information that validity of which I hadn't checked. And so I started checking, and I found the dems were just as bad (well, not entirely, but of course that my bias!), and I left the democratic party as a result.
I realized that there were these two machines out there that lived to smear each other....and they could do that extremely well with gossip, innuendo and lies that played into what people already believed and/or wanted to hear.
I think this site suffers from a lot of the same problem. There's a lot of back-slapping and praise for the most outrageous stories, and somehow it looks like people get off on being validated for that. But really, how many of you are critical of the others on here you think have the same views?
I have to say, I've seen nary a challenge among the ranks. Instead, I am the lightning rod and the backslapping goes on.
I would think that should make at least some of you suspicious about the quality of information that gets posted here.
And the fact that I don't see it invokes notions of everything from Lord of the Flies to To Kill a Mockingbird.
Where is the critical thought folks?
-
On 2005-11-09 00:30:00, Anonymous wrote:
" To the Anonymous who wrote the above. I REALLY wouldn't "go there." For every one time that Hyde might have done something responsible, there are five times they did something irresponsible and down right dangerous!! That is an argument you DONT want to have! You are looking for negatives to come out on this board when you open that can of worms!!"
Its not about what happened or didn't Anonymous, its about people posting on stuff they don't know about that irks me. Some recent examples include (and I paraphrase):
The Gaulds are rich and funnelling money from the school, just do a "dunn" and bradstreet.
Hyde had a legal obligation to report a rape and didn't.
Hyde uses LGATs and those have been proven invalid by a NIH study.
Students in private schools in Maine have free speech rights.
And then there are a lot of "I think" as in, "I think" the faculty had to be threatened with arrest before they would turn their dory around, or do something that the Coast Guard was telling the to do.
My guess on this last one? It was VERY scary for the students in the boats to learn a storm was coming, and so everyone's anxiety spiked. And more than likely the faculty responded promptly and professionally, if for no other reason that to save their own damn life.
But if he didn't do that, then tell us what you witnessed first hand, not what you heard five monkeys down the high-school-whispering line, in a situation where everyone's anxiety was already spiking.
Look y'all, I don't challenge you because I doubt that there were situations where students were put at greater risk than was appropriate. I lived through one where a student came within inches of his death through the recklessness of the faculty.
What I am a stickler for, however, is the truth, and yes, I dissect the written word because while I am a supporter of Hyde, I also won't quibble with real facts.....but will definitely jump all over gossip, innuendo and provable mistruths, because use of the internet is a great tool for causing damage to peoples lives and reputations all anonymously and sometimes even telling the "truth", even if that truth is slippery. (Not to mention that it also pretty much kills any credibility a poster has and since everyone here pretty much goes by anonymous even if they could have an anonymous alias so as to track who said what and have real conversations, it thus also damages the credibility of the site as well.)
Let me give you an example of what all this means for me. I am card-carrying liberal. A Democrat for most of my life. And I was outraged in the last 8 years at all the emails I got from Republicans which I could prove wrong, invalid or dishonest with a very simple websearch.
One day it dawned on me that I was partaking in forwarding a lot of democratic information that validity of which I hadn't checked. And so I started checking, and I found the dems were just as bad (well, not entirely, but of course that my bias!), and I left the democratic party as a result.
I realized that there were these two machines out there that lived to smear each other....and they could do that extremely well with gossip, innuendo and lies that played into what people already believed and/or wanted to hear.
I think this site suffers from a lot of the same problem. There's a lot of back-slapping and praise for the most outrageous stories, and somehow it looks like people get off on being validated for that. But really, how many of you are critical of the others on here you think have the same views?
I have to say, I've seen nary a challenge among the ranks. Instead, I am the lightning rod and the backslapping goes on.
I would think that should make at least some of you suspicious about the quality of information that gets posted here.
And the fact that I don't see it invokes notions of everything from Lord of the Flies to To Kill a Mockingbird.
Where is the critical thought folks?"
Here's the plain, unvarnished truth, as I see it:
1. Some Hyde students and parents (current and former) appreciate their Hyde experience and feel as if they've gained from the experience (see HydeFan comments).
2. Some Hyde faculty and staff are earnest, caring, and dedicated.
3. Many Hyde students, parents, and alumni (students and parents) have encountered some Hyde faculty and staff who are abusive, unskilled, unprepared, and ill equipped to provide quality education, constructive supervision, and skillful handling of students' and parents' emotional issues.
4. Some of Hyde's practices are unethical and abusive. Some Hyde faculty and staff behavior is very destructive and hypocritical.
5. Hyde has not been sufficiently forthcoming about these inappropriate, unethical, and hypocritical practices. Hyde has kept some of these serious problems very quiet.
6. There is more ill will expressed about Hyde than about nearly all other boarding schools. Some of the criticism is unwarranted and not thoughtful. Most of the criticism is warranted and thoughtful. This is noteworthy and evidence of serious problems at Hyde.
7. Parents who are considering Hyde should consider all of the postings on this and other websites and decide for themselves whether Hyde is a constructive environment.
8. In my opinion, the negatives at Hyde far outweigh the positives. Parents and educational consultants should not refer kids to Hyde.
-
I could go into extensive detail and I have in other posts, but I'll sum it up this way: I gradutated from Hyde, I've done quite well for myself (with a great career & family), and I would NEVER send my kids there. And I'd advise propesctive parents to look elsewhere.
-
On 2005-11-09 07:17:00, Lars wrote:
"I could go into extensive detail and I have in other posts, but I'll sum it up this way: I gradutated from Hyde, I've done quite well for myself (with a great career & family), and I would NEVER send my kids there. And I'd advise propesctive parents to look elsewhere."
Amen! I concur completely. Any parent who feels the need for a humane, principled, conscientious, fair, and firm setting for his/her child should drive right past Hyde, so to speak, and look at a number of other very impressive schools that are MUCH more appropriate. Parents must look beyond Hyde's glossy public relations material, hype, and glibness. Parents who feel the need to at least check out Hyde should look behind the scenes, under Hyde's rocks, and talk to Hyde veterans and alumni who are willing to be candid and frank.
-
Here's the plain, unvarnished truth, as I see it:
1. Some Hyde students and parents (current and former) appreciate their Hyde experience and feel as if they've gained from the experience (see HydeFan comments).
2. Some Hyde faculty and staff are earnest, caring, and dedicated.
3. Many Hyde students, parents, and alumni (students and parents) have encountered some Hyde faculty and staff who are abusive, unskilled, unprepared, and ill equipped to provide quality education, constructive supervision, and skillful handling of students' and parents' emotional issues.
4. Some of Hyde's practices are unethical and abusive. Some Hyde faculty and staff behavior is very destructive and hypocritical.
5. Hyde has not been sufficiently forthcoming about these inappropriate, unethical, and hypocritical practices. Hyde has kept some of these serious problems very quiet.
6. There is more ill will expressed about Hyde than about nearly all other boarding schools. Some of the criticism is unwarranted and not thoughtful. Most of the criticism is warranted and thoughtful. This is noteworthy and evidence of serious problems at Hyde.
7. Parents who are considering Hyde should consider all of the postings on this and other websites and decide for themselves whether Hyde is a constructive environment.
8. In my opinion, the negatives at Hyde far outweigh the positives. Parents and educational consultants should not refer kids to Hyde.
"
While my experience was positive and so much of this falls outside of what I know, I sincerely appreciate the reasoned and thoughtful nature of this post.
-
On 2005-11-08 19:39:00, Antigen wrote:
Bigot: One fanatically devoted to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and intolerant of those who differ."
This actually dove-tails with my last question, which I want to ask a different way......
Did any of you experience any good, important, powerful or transformative things at Hyde--or was it all bad all the time?
-
So there was nothing good there?
-
On 2005-11-10 15:38:00, Anonymous wrote:
"So there was nothing good there?"
Leaving for college was good. :lol:
-
Yes, there is plenty of good with the Hyde "Concept." The problem is the wrong people are trying to teach this concept. Get rid of Joe Gauld and his entire sick family, and get some good teachers and psychologists at the school! Then and only then can Hyde truly be a character building school. Right now it is simply a great living for the Gauld family!
-
On 2005-11-10 18:55:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Yes, there is plenty of good with the Hyde "Concept." The problem is the wrong people are trying to teach this concept. Get rid of Joe Gauld and his entire sick family, and get some good teachers and psychologists at the school! Then and only then can Hyde truly be a character building school. Right now it is simply a great living for the Gauld family!"
So what is good about the concept to you?
-
My son was at Hyde for one year - last year 2003/2004 - we withdrew him as we finally realized that the "Hyde Ethics" on paper and in Joe Gauld's books were theory - the reality was basically a punitive/unskilled/abusive/cult-like atmosphere - my biggest fear for ANY knew Hyde parents is to understand that the school is "practicing psychotherapy without a license" - the only med staff person on site is an RN who dispenses meds and takes temps, etc. - If there is a calamity, Hyde has no resources to deal with it.
Witness - so horribly tragically - Spring Family Weekend at Woodstock - a father collapsed outside the gym near the girls' dorm - Hyde had NO doctor, Hyde had NO defibrilator - Hyde was NOT there in any way to help this dear father - who died.....
Ambulance from Day-Kimball hospital miles down the road eventually arrived - the kids were distressed - many of these are vulnerable kids - did Hyde have ANYONE to help them?? - NO
After hours of parents arriving for Family Weekend and learning of this death, many parents reached out to help struggling kids. But there was really
no expert, just a lot of common sense.
At the end of the day, the School (Gauld et al) brought Gigi GAULD MacMillan's husband out of his space to talk to some kids. A tragedy!!
Every public school system these days has a strategy to deal with a loss/catastrophe - HYDE had NOTHING in place that day - nor do they on any normal day.
My child suffered through a few years of a catastrophic illness when he was 4-6 years old. ALL the medical paper-work was received/date-stamped by Hyde on his admittance. Yet when he became seriously ill again last January (2005), the "school nurse" didn't have his records/didn't have the emergency advice from our pediatrician, etc. - I drove to Woodstock to take my son to their off-campus doctor, etc. - I got an "apology later"........too late for me. And we ended up in the hospital to sort out necessary medical intervention...........
My son got a phone call last evening from a friend from Hyde who is still there. He called to tell my son that he had just run away again from Hyde, but that Hyde has a new "policy" - If you tell them that you are going to run away, Hyde gives you $50.....- HELLO?????
Enough for now - know that Hyde is a place to put your beloved child if you want to lose their respect - It's an easy placement as they welcome just about anybody and prey on the rich parents who can foot the entire year's bill instantly -
At the end of the day, if you love your kid and can muster the patience to stagger through their sometimes awful behavior, do it close to home - don't send them to this weird place...
-
On 2005-11-16 13:53:00, Anonymous wrote:
"My son was at Hyde for one year - last year 2003/2004 - we withdrew him as we finally realized that the "Hyde Ethics" on paper and in Joe Gauld's books were theory - the reality was basically a punitive/unskilled/abusive/cult-like atmosphere - my biggest fear for ANY knew Hyde parents is to understand that the school is "practicing psychotherapy without a license" - the only med staff person on site is an RN who dispenses meds and takes temps, etc. - If there is a calamity, Hyde has no resources to deal with it.
Witness - so horribly tragically - Spring Family Weekend at Woodstock - a father collapsed outside the gym near the girls' dorm - Hyde had NO doctor, Hyde had NO defibrilator - Hyde was NOT there in any way to help this dear father - who died.....
Ambulance from Day-Kimball hospital miles down the road eventually arrived - the kids were distressed - many of these are vulnerable kids - did Hyde have ANYONE to help them?? - NO
After hours of parents arriving for Family Weekend and learning of this death, many parents reached out to help struggling kids. But there was really
no expert, just a lot of common sense.
At the end of the day, the School (Gauld et al) brought Gigi GAULD MacMillan's husband out of his space to talk to some kids. A tragedy!!
Every public school system these days has a strategy to deal with a loss/catastrophe - HYDE had NOTHING in place that day - nor do they on any normal day.
My child suffered through a few years of a catastrophic illness when he was 4-6 years old. ALL the medical paper-work was received/date-stamped by Hyde on his admittance. Yet when he became seriously ill again last January (2005), the "school nurse" didn't have his records/didn't have the emergency advice from our pediatrician, etc. - I drove to Woodstock to take my son to their off-campus doctor, etc. - I got an "apology later"........too late for me. And we ended up in the hospital to sort out necessary medical intervention...........
My son got a phone call last evening from a friend from Hyde who is still there. He called to tell my son that he had just run away again from Hyde, but that Hyde has a new "policy" - If you tell them that you are going to run away, Hyde gives you $50.....- HELLO?????
Enough for now - know that Hyde is a place to put your beloved child if you want to lose their respect - It's an easy placement as they welcome just about anybody and prey on the rich parents who can foot the entire year's bill instantly -
At the end of the day, if you love your kid and can muster the patience to stagger through their sometimes awful behavior, do it close to home - don't send them to this weird place..."
I'm very distressed to hear about your dreadful Hyde experience. Distressed, yes. Surprised, no. The scenario you describe, where Hyde seemed to be practicing psychotherapy without a license; has no adequate crisis intervention protocol; has no mental health staff to respond to kids' crises and trauma; mishandles health records and information; has kids who run away and mishandles this challenge . . . all of this sounds horribly familiar. Our family now has its own 3-year collection of Hyde horror stories that are in the same ballpark. It amazes us that Hyde remains in business given all of the scary anecdotes that are flying around this and other websites. The steady diet of unskilled, arrogant, and misguided Hyde strategies should scare off ANY parent who considers Hyde for the their child. Our family can't get away from Hyde fast enough. It has taken us a while to learn about the Gauld cult techniques and hypocrisy, but we have finally learned. We are doing our best to spread the word about Hyde (and the now-famous Gauld poison) among educational consultants, therapists, and schools that might refer to Hyde. These postings are fueling our passionate determination to keep people as far from Hyde as possible. We had no idea so many people feel about Hyde the same way we do -- disgusted, angry, resentful, and full of regret.
-
On 2005-11-16 13:53:00, Anonymous wrote:
My son got a phone call last evening from a friend from Hyde who is still there. He called to tell my son that he had just run away again from Hyde, but that Hyde has a new "policy" - If you tell them that you are going to run away, Hyde gives you $50.....- HELLO?????
I could'a used fifty bucks. I could'a bought a bus ticket instead of freezing half to death in a Maine winter. :grin: "Now, I'm a walking dead man," ... "And what bothers me is that I'm dead because I tried to help the kids. And it's all the fault of all those people over there at the DEA." [Dead Man Talking]
--Ben Guillory
-
To the Anonymous who wrote about the father who died of a heart attack;
I am POSITIVE the NEASC who accredits these boarding schools would want to hear about this. They NEED to hear about this to protect others by MAKING Hyde change their policies!!
If you really want to help the kids and parents still at the school, PLEASE let the NEASC know about this!!!
-
On 2005-11-17 15:04:00, Anonymous wrote:
"To the Anonymous who wrote about the father who died of a heart attack;
I am POSITIVE the NEASC who accredits these boarding schools would want to hear about this. They NEED to hear about this to protect others by MAKING Hyde change their policies!!
If you really want to help the kids and parents still at the school, PLEASE let the NEASC know about this!!!"
I agree -- You should inform NEASC about this terrible incident. I've heard that NEASC has been investigating Hyde in response to other complaints. I've looked up the NEASC procedures. Here's the information about filing a complaint with NEASC: http://www.neasc.org/cis/complaints.PDF (http://www.neasc.org/cis/complaints.PDF)
You can write:
William Bennett
NEASC (New England Association of Schools and Colleges)
209 Burlington Road
Bedford, Mass. 01730-1433
-
Thank you for providing the info for NEASC. I still don't understand how Hyde could get accreditation! Is the NEASC that stupid or does Hyde keep all these abuses from coming to the public's attention?
-
Were any of you there when Bruce had a heart attack at Family Weekend?!
There was a staff member on the scene within minutes who is a trained and certified emergency medical technician.
The ambulance made it to the scene within 10 minutes...it's the country folks!!
The school had never had this happen and it didn't have any difibulators on campus...it's not a pleasant way to learn, but now the campus is equipped with defibulators thanks to the generosity of some parents.
If you don't have the facts...do not post!!!!!
-
On 2005-11-18 08:27:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Were any of you there when Bruce had a heart attack at Family Weekend?!
There was a staff member on the scene within minutes who is a trained and certified emergency medical technician.
The ambulance made it to the scene within 10 minutes...it's the country folks!!
The school had never had this happen and it didn't have any difibulators on campus...it's not a pleasant way to learn, but now the campus is equipped with defibulators thanks to the generosity of some parents.
If you don't have the facts...do not post!!!!!"
You seem to have specific knowledge of this event and Hyde's response. I wasn't on campus then and, therefore, cannot comment on what happened (I agree that people who don't know the facts shouldn't reach conclusions about what happened).
Are you a Hyde administrator? If so, I would appreciate it if you would comment on allegations that Hyde School does not employ mental health professionals to help students in this kind of crisis. Is that true? Also, does Hyde school employ mental health professionals to work with the large number of Hyde students I have met who have major mental health issues and diagnoses?
-
Hyde school is and always will be a great school for kids..bottom line, so stop whining all you wierdo's, it isnt a prison for christ sakes.. ::argue:: :scared: :lol:
-
On 2005-11-18 18:25:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Hyde school is and always will be a great school for kids..bottom line, so stop whining all you wierdo's, it isnt a prison for christ sakes.. ::argue:: :scared: :lol: "
Another troll, probably a faculty member.
Listen, troll, it's a lousy excuse for a school. And an abusive cult that, for many kids, might as well be a prison. Now scram!
-
The beauty of this board is that everyone can voice their opinions both negative and positive. I will never tell anyone to "scram" unless they are being abusive towards others. Hyde is abusive enough, we don't need people coming on this board to name call!
In order to serve the public I think it is important to give the facts and let people choose for themselves. I believe Hyde is not only a dangerous place, but a Cult and an abusive program. I would never send my child to this place filled with a bunch of crazy staff!
-
On 2005-11-18 18:25:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Hyde school is and always will be a great school for kids..bottom line, so stop whining all you wierdo's, it isnt a prison for christ sakes.. ::argue:: :scared: :lol: "
This is a typical Hyde response to the many thoughtful, constructive criticisms on this website (granted, there are other less thoughtful and constructive comments too). It defies comprehension that someone could read the hundreds of detailed postings on this website and produce such a simplistic, broad-brush comment about Hyde. This is the kind of naive, impressionable rhetoric parents will find at Hyde if they enroll their kid there. This comment ignores the remarkably detailed list of concerns that many parents have expressed here related to Hyde's well known shortcomings: the emotionally abusive techniques, the cult qualities, the mismanagement of students' serious emotional and mental health problems, the inferior classroom experience, the kids who run away from Hyde, the parents who feel emotionally assaulted during seminars, the incredibly high admission and attrition rate, etc. How could ANYONE read these postings and make such a broad, superficial comment? Welcome to the world of Hyde.
-
Read this post again please. The focus was that Hyde did not have any professionals on campus to help the kids deal with this crisis. What does this have to do with living in the country? It is plain common sense to bring everyone together, talk about what happened and offer assistance to anyone who felt they needed it. This goes back to the one size fits all. Hyde handles everything the same with the tough love approach.
What does living in the country have to do with not keeping proper medical records? This father said he got an apology! Hyde is good at apologies AFTER the fact. It is amazing that in the 30 something years Hyde has been in existance, they are still learning how to become a safe "school."
I laughed when reading about the $50 Hyde is giving kids who want to run away. IF this is true, it would be typical Hyde. Can you picture a 16 year old girl in the middle of the country hitch hiking to town? Bruce won't be the only dead person around Hyde!!
-
On 2005-11-16 13:53:00, Anonymous wrote:
"My son was at Hyde for one year - last year 2003/2004 - we withdrew him as we finally realized that the "Hyde Ethics" on paper and in Joe Gauld's books were theory - the reality was basically a punitive/unskilled/abusive/cult-like atmosphere - my biggest fear for ANY knew Hyde parents is to understand that the school is "practicing psychotherapy without a license" - the only med staff person on site is an RN who dispenses meds and takes temps, etc. - If there is a calamity, Hyde has no resources to deal with it.
Witness - so horribly tragically - Spring Family Weekend at Woodstock - a father collapsed outside the gym near the girls' dorm - Hyde had NO doctor, Hyde had NO defibrilator - Hyde was NOT there in any way to help this dear father - who died.....
Ambulance from Day-Kimball hospital miles down the road eventually arrived - the kids were distressed - many of these are vulnerable kids - did Hyde have ANYONE to help them?? - NO
After hours of parents arriving for Family Weekend and learning of this death, many parents reached out to help struggling kids. But there was really
no expert, just a lot of common sense.
At the end of the day, the School (Gauld et al) brought Gigi GAULD MacMillan's husband out of his space to talk to some kids. A tragedy!!
Every public school system these days has a strategy to deal with a loss/catastrophe - HYDE had NOTHING in place that day - nor do they on any normal day.
My child suffered through a few years of a catastrophic illness when he was 4-6 years old. ALL the medical paper-work was received/date-stamped by Hyde on his admittance. Yet when he became seriously ill again last January (2005), the "school nurse" didn't have his records/didn't have the emergency advice from our pediatrician, etc. - I drove to Woodstock to take my son to their off-campus doctor, etc. - I got an "apology later"........too late for me. And we ended up in the hospital to sort out necessary medical intervention...........
My son got a phone call last evening from a friend from Hyde who is still there. He called to tell my son that he had just run away again from Hyde, but that Hyde has a new "policy" - If you tell them that you are going to run away, Hyde gives you $50.....- HELLO?????
Enough for now - know that Hyde is a place to put your beloved child if you want to lose their respect - It's an easy placement as they welcome just about anybody and prey on the rich parents who can foot the entire year's bill instantly -
At the end of the day, if you love your kid and can muster the patience to stagger through their sometimes awful behavior, do it close to home - don't send them to this weird place..."
Isn't Gigi McMillans husband the one who quit at one point because of plagierism?
-
On 2005-11-18 20:32:00, Anonymous wrote:
"The beauty of this board is that everyone can voice their opinions both negative and positive. I will never tell anyone to "scram" unless they are being abusive towards others. Hyde is abusive enough, we don't need people coming on this board to name call!
You're missing the point, this jerk WAS being abusive. He (or she) was not entitled to a thoughtful & polite response when he called us weirdos (talk about the pot calling the kettle black!).
I've shared some truly painful memories on this board and I have little tolerance for garbage like that.
-
On 2005-11-18 08:27:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Were any of you there when Bruce had a heart attack at Family Weekend?!
There was a staff member on the scene within minutes who is a trained and certified emergency medical technician.
The ambulance made it to the scene within 10 minutes...it's the country folks!!
The school had never had this happen and it didn't have any difibulators on campus...it's not a pleasant way to learn, but now the campus is equipped with defibulators thanks to the generosity of some parents.
If you don't have the facts...do not post!!!!!"
A couple of days ago I posted the following response to your point. I notice you haven't answered the questions. So, I'll repeat them:
You seem to have specific knowledge of this event and Hyde's response. I wasn't on campus then and, therefore, cannot comment on what happened (I agree that people who don't know the facts shouldn't reach conclusions about what happened).
Are you a Hyde administrator? If so, I would appreciate it if you would comment on allegations that Hyde School does not employ mental health professionals to help students in this kind of crisis. Is that true? Also, does Hyde school employ mental health professionals to work with the large number of Hyde students I have met who have major mental health issues and diagnoses?
-
[qauote]A couple of days ago I posted the following response to your point. I notice you haven't answered the questions. So, I'll repeat them: [/quote]
Yes, how rude for this person to not write back to you at all. Especially after you so clearly "noticed" they hadn't answered! The nerve!! Its been a full two days now, and I have to admit, I too am outraged this person has not responded to these and other questions we all suspect, but don't really know for sure. Anonymous, thank you for this timely reminder and even going the extra mile by repeating the questions.
I think the latter will help in particular with moving this right along.
-
Sorry it took me so long (two days?!?) to post...
I don't check this board everyday.
As far as your concern about mental health professionals...it has nothing to do with your post about the heart attack incident, that I responded to.
Hyde is NOT a therapy school. It offers an alternative to a therapy situation. When a family interviews with Hyde, it is made VERY clear that if the family wants to be a part of the Hyde community and wants to work towards change in the Hyde perameter...than they should go for it. It is made VERY clear that Hyde is not a therapy school and does not offer on campus professional mental health counselling, but if they want to augment their Hyde experience with therapy, it is available in town, but doesn't play a part in their actual Hyde experience.
Also...Don MacMillan did NOT leave for plagerism...it was an incident with Paul Hurd, who is still at the school. Don left to get his Masters in Substance Abuse Counseling.
I am a former Hyde parent.
Thank you...Again I apologize for spelling and tardiness
-
On 2005-11-20 15:14:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Sorry it took me so long (two days?!?) to post...
I don't check this board everyday.
As far as your concern about mental health professionals...it has nothing to do with your post about the heart attack incident, that I responded to.
Hyde is NOT a therapy school. It offers an alternative to a therapy situation. When a family interviews with Hyde, it is made VERY clear that if the family wants to be a part of the Hyde community and wants to work towards change in the Hyde perameter...than they should go for it. It is made VERY clear that Hyde is not a therapy school and does not offer on campus professional mental health counselling, but if they want to augment their Hyde experience with therapy, it is available in town, but doesn't play a part in their actual Hyde experience.
Also...Don MacMillan did NOT leave for plagerism...it was an incident with Paul Hurd, who is still at the school. Don left to get his Masters in Substance Abuse Counseling.
I am a former Hyde parent.
Thank you...Again I apologize for spelling and tardiness"
Thank you for your reply; I appreciate it . (I should clarify that I'm the one who asked about Hyde's approach to kids with mental health issues. I did not raise the issue involving Don MacMillan or the heart attack incident. I don't know anything about that.)
With regard to the mental health issues, I certainly understand that Hyde doesn't advertise itself as a therapeutic school. Now that our family has been affiliated with Hyde for more than 2 years, we've learned something we did not know when we enrolled: A VERY significant percentage of Hyde students struggle with major mental health issues. Thus far we've encountered students diagnosed with eating disorders, bipolar disorder, depression, self-harming behavior (cutting), substance abuse, Tourette's syndrome, OCD, borderline personality disorder, etc. We have encountered quite a few students whose struggles at Hyde (behavioral, academic, etc.) clearly seem to be related to their mental health problems. We've talked with a number of parents who are also amazed that Hyde accepts so many of these kids who clearly need a mental health component built into their experience. My spouse and I have now chatted with quite a few parents who are disgusted with Hyde's shortsiighted approach to this portion of the student population.
Yes, some kids have attitude problems that must be addressed. But many Hyde kids have problems that are so much more severe than plain attitude issues; they're dealing with complex mental health problems that interfere with their performance at Hyde. Hyde naively deals with this by imposing 2-4 and sending kids to wilderness. We've also talked with a number of very experienced educational consultants who are equally horrified by Hyde's approach to these very complicated kids.
That's why we've decided to divorce ourselves from Hyde. That's why many families get out, it appears. In our view any parent whose kid struggles with these mental health issues would make a huge mistake if they enroll their kid at Hyde. We've now learned of other schools that have a MUCH more enlightened, thoughtful, approach. That's where we've decided to head
-
There are parents who are seeking help for their child but do not want them in therapy or to see a mental health professional. Maybe it is a stigma of some sort, but there is a school of thought that feels a child can be helped by simply changing their environment (or by removing them from the one they are in). Depends on the parents point of view
-
On 2005-11-20 16:20:00, Anonymous wrote:
"There are parents who are seeking help for their child but do not want them in therapy or to see a mental health professional. Maybe it is a stigma of some sort, but there is a school of thought that feels a child can be helped by simply changing their environment (or by removing them from the one they are in). Depends on the parents point of view"
Obviously some parents seek help for their child that doesn't involve mental health professionals. That's their prerogative. The bottom line, however, is that many Hyde kids do not succeed there (look at the attrition rate and failure-to-graduate rate) and a major reason appears to be that they get "off track" because of their untreated or mistreated mental health issues. For Hyde staff to believe that a kid who has major depression, bipolar disorder, OCD, etc. is struggling only because of an "attitude" problem is incredibly naive. That's a major reason why so many educational consultants refuse to send kids to Hyde.
The Gauld philosophy may work with a narrow range of kids, but it's widely believed that Hyde's high attrition rate is due partly to the mismatch between the school's model and the mental health needs of many kids who start there. Adding to the problem is that Hyde's seminars often involve disclosure of remarkably sensitive, intimate details in groups run by teachers and other staff who have little or no training in the handling of such complicated mental health issues. So, while Hyde says it doesn't do therapy, its clumsy and negligent handling of mental health issues is what is leading to Hyde's controversial and, in many circles, very poor reputation.
-
On 2005-11-20 15:14:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Sorry it took me so long (two days?!?) to post...
I don't check this board everyday.
As far as your concern about mental health professionals...it has nothing to do with your post about the heart attack incident, that I responded to.
Hyde is NOT a therapy school. It offers an alternative to a therapy situation. When a family interviews with Hyde, it is made VERY clear that if the family wants to be a part of the Hyde community and wants to work towards change in the Hyde perameter...than they should go for it. It is made VERY clear that Hyde is not a therapy school and does not offer on campus professional mental health counselling, but if they want to augment their Hyde experience with therapy, it is available in town, but doesn't play a part in their actual Hyde experience.
Also...Don MacMillan did NOT leave for plagerism...it was an incident with Paul Hurd, who is still at the school. Don left to get his Masters in Substance Abuse Counseling.
I am a former Hyde parent.
Thank you...Again I apologize for spelling and tardiness"
What was the plagiarism incident involving Paul Hurd?
-
On 2005-11-20 15:14:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Sorry it took me so long (two days?!?) to post...
I don't check this board everyday.
As far as your concern about mental health professionals...it has nothing to do with your post about the heart attack incident, that I responded to.
Hyde is NOT a therapy school. It offers an alternative to a therapy situation. When a family interviews with Hyde, it is made VERY clear that if the family wants to be a part of the Hyde community and wants to work towards change in the Hyde perameter...than they should go for it. It is made VERY clear that Hyde is not a therapy school and does not offer on campus professional mental health counselling, but if they want to augment their Hyde experience with therapy, it is available in town, but doesn't play a part in their actual Hyde experience.
Also...Don MacMillan did NOT leave for plagerism...it was an incident with Paul Hurd, who is still at the school. Don left to get his Masters in Substance Abuse Counseling.
I am a former Hyde parent.
Thank you...Again I apologize for spelling and tardiness"
I have been reading through the many postings on this website concerning the Hyde School. I am interested in finding out more about this school and its focus on character education. But I am very concerned about some of what I'm reading here. I gather that some people like the school and lots of people don't.
I've noticed a number of comments about scandals at the school (one or two headmasters who resigned, a teacher who had an inappropriate relationship with a student, plagiarism involving an administrator, etc.). I'd like to know more about these incidents if anyone has information. Thanks.
-
You left out the time when one of the Gauld family, (through marriage) attacked a student. I would not doubt if the student provoked it, but I would hope someone in this man's position would be able to keep his cool. He apologized to the school afterwards, but what does this tell you about the quality of the administrators?
-
On 2005-11-20 22:04:00, Anonymous wrote:
"You left out the time when one of the Gauld family, (through marriage) attacked a student. I would not doubt if the student provoked it, but I would hope someone in this man's position would be able to keep his cool. He apologized to the school afterwards, but what does this tell you about the quality of the administrators? "
Since you're a tad short on the facts, not much.
-
I don't think Paul did anything wrong...
Malcolm Gauld gave him a bunch of his old speeches and said..here, these are yours, do what you want with them...so Paul used a portion of one of Malcolm's speeches in a graduation speech and didn't credit him...
Pretty dumb huh?
-
On 2005-11-21 01:37:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2005-11-20 22:04:00, Anonymous wrote:
"You left out the time when one of the Gauld family, (through marriage) attacked a student. I would not doubt if the student provoked it, but I would hope someone in this man's position would be able to keep his cool. He apologized to the school afterwards, but what does this tell you about the quality of the administrators? "
Since you're a tad short on the facts, not much."
So if I am "tad" short on the facts, why don't you clear it up. What justifies an administrator pushing a kid against a wall and choking them?
As far as Paul Hurd not giving Malcolm credit, if he didn't do anything wrong then why did the school send out letters to everyone explaining that he was leaving because of the incident?
I am very happy there is someone on this board who obviously is a part of Hyde. I hope you are willing to clear up what you say are misconceptions.
-
Check out the Hyde Alumni News which I just received in the mail today 11/21/05 (does anyone at Hyde know how to spell Alumni corrctly - do they teach Latin there? - NO)
Anyway, - check out the "alumni news" FROM 1967 to 2005 - it is just four and one half pages...........and if you read this, much of it is "condolences" to fill the pages - and other bits are that a "Gauld" or "someone" attended a reunion" -
If this doesn't get the message to current concerned parents and to those who are even THINKING about Hyde, then nothing else will.
The glossy magazine is 47 pages - all HYPE but for the 4 1/2 pages of FORTY years of "class news"
CAVEAT - just read that Holly Thompson is head of the LEAD program - and that this is special ed help for your child with hands-on help, etc. - for this you spend several EXTRA thousands - WE did and it is nothing but a mandatory study hall in the evenings - No one was there to "tutor" or "help" - there were random staff assigned each night - it was just a hodge-podge of kids thrown into a room because their parents paid for it - there was NO help at all - caveat emptor....
If the Gaulds removed their name from any one of their publications, one would find that the publication was impressively slim and then not worth printing. Their name permeates every publication and "hype" effort - PLEASE don't support this family that is ALREADY living on the millions of dollars given STUPIDLY too their cult!!
-
Millions? Please!! The Gaulds are actually making BILLIONS and I know this as a FACT. Its verifiable too, all you have to do is ask Malcolm. If he says no, since we know everything he says is a lie, well, there you have it. Proof positive.
He's actually not even trying to hide it. Last time I was up there Malcolm was flashing some serious bling and driving a mazerati. (Personally, I thought the cane and cape were a little over the top, but hey, ya gotta allow for personaly discretion in some of these things.)
How shameful.
That and the skant 4.5 pages of alumni news too. Surely they have a bigger font, right? What a collosal blunder to not use it!
Kudos to this poster. Way to keep them on their toes. Your finely honed analysis and rigorous honesty are a testament to the Detractors Of Hyde (aka "DOH").
-
On 2005-11-22 21:27:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Millions? Please!! The Gaulds are actually making BILLIONS and I know this as a FACT. Its verifiable too, all you have to do is ask Malcolm. If he says no, since we know everything he says is a lie, well, there you have it. Proof positive.
He's actually not even trying to hide it. Last time I was up there Malcolm was flashing some serious bling and driving a mazerati. (Personally, I thought the cane and cape were a little over the top, but hey, ya gotta allow for personaly discretion in some of these things.)
How shameful.
That and the skant 4.5 pages of alumni news too. Surely they have a bigger font, right? What a collosal blunder to not use it!
Kudos to this poster. Way to keep them on their toes. Your finely honed analysis and rigorous honesty are a testament to the Detractors Of Hyde (aka "DOH")."
I too think everyone needs to be careful about how they criticize Hyde. I think it's very fair to make comments about Hyde's model and misguided approach to education. On this website there are many fair and thoughtful criticisms about Hyde's cult qualities, unskilled staff (some, not all), terribly negligent handling of students' mental health issues, abusive and destructive seminar format, Joe Gauld's arrogance and hypocrisy, unusually high admission and high attrition rates, and so on.
But, I don't think anyone should be making allegations about the Gaulds' income, the school's fiscal balance, or any other matters about which we don't know the facts. This is unfair and hits below the belt. I would encourage everyone to limit their criticisms to their own personal experiences and observations. Personal opinion is fine so long as it can be backed up with actual experiences and facts. Anything else is pure and unfair speculation and conjecture.
-
On 2005-11-21 08:41:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2005-11-21 01:37:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2005-11-20 22:04:00, Anonymous wrote:
"You left out the time when one of the Gauld family, (through marriage) attacked a student. I would not doubt if the student provoked it, but I would hope someone in this man's position would be able to keep his cool. He apologized to the school afterwards, but what does this tell you about the quality of the administrators? "
Since you're a tad short on the facts, not much."
So if I am "tad" short on the facts, why don't you clear it up. What justifies an administrator pushing a kid against a wall and choking them?
As far as Paul Hurd not giving Malcolm credit, if he didn't do anything wrong then why did the school send out letters to everyone explaining that he was leaving because of the incident?
I am very happy there is someone on this board who obviously is a part of Hyde. I hope you are willing to clear up what you say are misconceptions."
1. Your statement about not knowing if the student provoked it suggests you don't know the details. Without those, your post is meaningless. In your follow on post you add new facts about choking the student. Again, we don't know what led up to it, but if a student is a danger to himself or others, that would certainly justify physical restraint in my book. Beyond that, I would need the details of the incident to evaluate it. Hence my comment that your post is basically meaningless.
2. The Paul Hurd incident was confusing to me. Malcolm's letter said conflicting things. Yes, I gave this stuff to Paul to use as he saw fit. No, he should not have used them and it was plagarism and is being removed (or stepping down). I presume since this was Mal's brother in law, he was just throwing him a bone, but didn't read it all closely enough to think about it more.
As I've written before, the Paul Hurd incident to me is not evidence of Hyde being bad. There is no school in the country not rocked by sexual assault, rape an other outrageous behavior by supervisorial adults. And like the catholic church, many remove the teacher without legal action to avoid scandal. Hyde did not have to deal with this situation so openly....but instead said, hey, we believe in honesty and openness, so we are going to let you in on an embarassing thing that hurts us all, but to be consistent, this is how we must handle it.
They aired their dirty laundry publicly and openly and handled the situation responsibly.
That, to me, is evidence of their integrity.
That, to me, is evidence of Hyde's leadership.
You can spin it how you want, but what didn't happen was Hyde trying to keep it quiet and sweep it under the rug. Instead it sent a letter to the entire alumni community....not just current family and students. Personally, I don't know if I would have ever found out about it, but for their aggressive exemplary behavior. I tipped my hat to Hyde for this one.
-
On 2005-11-24 06:41:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2005-11-21 08:41:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2005-11-21 01:37:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2005-11-20 22:04:00, Anonymous wrote:
"You left out the time when one of the Gauld family, (through marriage) attacked a student. I would not doubt if the student provoked it, but I would hope someone in this man's position would be able to keep his cool. He apologized to the school afterwards, but what does this tell you about the quality of the administrators? "
Since you're a tad short on the facts, not much."
So if I am "tad" short on the facts, why don't you clear it up. What justifies an administrator pushing a kid against a wall and choking them?
As far as Paul Hurd not giving Malcolm credit, if he didn't do anything wrong then why did the school send out letters to everyone explaining that he was leaving because of the incident?
I am very happy there is someone on this board who obviously is a part of Hyde. I hope you are willing to clear up what you say are misconceptions."
1. Your statement about not knowing if the student provoked it suggests you don't know the details. Without those, your post is meaningless. In your follow on post you add new facts about choking the student. Again, we don't know what led up to it, but if a student is a danger to himself or others, that would certainly justify physical restraint in my book. Beyond that, I would need the details of the incident to evaluate it. Hence my comment that your post is basically meaningless.
2. The Paul Hurd incident was confusing to me. Malcolm's letter said conflicting things. Yes, I gave this stuff to Paul to use as he saw fit. No, he should not have used them and it was plagarism and is being removed (or stepping down). I presume since this was Mal's brother in law, he was just throwing him a bone, but didn't read it all closely enough to think about it more.
As I've written before, the Paul Hurd incident to me is not evidence of Hyde being bad. There is no school in the country not rocked by sexual assault, rape an other outrageous behavior by supervisorial adults. And like the catholic church, many remove the teacher without legal action to avoid scandal. Hyde did not have to deal with this situation so openly....but instead said, hey, we believe in honesty and openness, so we are going to let you in on an embarassing thing that hurts us all, but to be consistent, this is how we must handle it.
They aired their dirty laundry publicly and openly and handled the situation responsibly.
That, to me, is evidence of their integrity.
That, to me, is evidence of Hyde's leadership.
You can spin it how you want, but what didn't happen was Hyde trying to keep it quiet and sweep it under the rug. Instead it sent a letter to the entire alumni community....not just current family and students. Personally, I don't know if I would have ever found out about it, but for their aggressive exemplary behavior. I tipped my hat to Hyde for this one."
I agree that Hyde deserves credit for handling the Hurd incident openly. And, I'm sure there are other instances where Hyde deserves similar credit. Fine.
However, there's so much more that Hyde doesn't handle openly, and this is what leads to so much public criticism, controversy and skepticism among educational consultants. For example, to what extent has Hyde openly acknowledged:
1. The number of kids Hyde enrolls who have major mental health and substance abuse issues.
2. The fact that Hyde has not employed mental health professionals to respond to these students' needs (in recent years there's only been a part-time person to facilitate a substance abuse group)
3. Hyde's expectation that parents and students will disclose intimate details in seminars that often lead to major personal distress and conflict, all without any trained professional in the room to help manage some very disturbing incidents.
4. Hyde's attrition rate.
5. The number of kids who run away from Hyde.
6. The academic backgrounds and "qualifications" of Hyde's faculty (some of whom seem to have very uneven, unimpressive academic backgrounds and teaching experience).
-
I think at least some of your questions are relevant and valid.
My concern is the hyperbole that gets regurgitated here.
The first is the continued insinuation that the only people that support Hyde are the Gaulds and members of the "administration" (and a small number of people who drank the cool-aid). You didn't, but the person who responded to my post said:
I am very happy there is someone on this board who obviously is a part of Hyde. I hope you are willing to clear up what you say are misconceptions."
You will notice quotes to this effect through-out, all not-so-subtle-digs that there aren't any legitimate supporters of Hyde (the more overt digs being that we are all cultists who drank the cool-aide).
FOR ME, My experience is there is a large number of supporters and I interact with at least some of them independently and many more at reunions.
Anyway, back to the specific post to which I respond -- in this most recent case, there was the insinuation that something was done inappropriately, but no details were provided.
Personally, I like the quote someone wrote above.....
I too think everyone needs to be careful about how they criticize Hyde. I think it's very fair to make comments about Hyde's model and misguided approach to education. On this website there are many fair and thoughtful criticisms about Hyde's cult qualities, unskilled staff (some, not all), terribly negligent handling of students' mental health issues, abusive and destructive seminar format, Joe Gauld's arrogance and hypocrisy, unusually high admission and high attrition rates, and so on.
But, I don't think anyone should be making allegations about the Gaulds' income, the school's fiscal balance, or any other matters about which we don't know the facts. This is unfair and hits below the belt. I would encourage everyone to limit their criticisms to their own personal experiences and observations. Personal opinion is fine so long as it can be backed up with actual experiences and facts. Anything else is pure and unfair speculation and conjecture.
With regard to your questions, I think its fair to ask them. Without the facts, I don't think its fair to answer them or jump to conclusions about the answers to them.
We don't know attrition rates, run-away rates, how many have mental problems and the like.
We do have people on this site who cite "many, many" and the like, but that, my friends, is conjecture. We simply don't know the numbers and your personal experience, while relevant, is not determinative.
FWIW, I do agree that if certain disclosures aren't made, that they should (for instance, that parents will be pushed to disclose personal information that they may feel is embarassing, but the disclosure of which could also be quite healing and instrumental in exposing the disfunction of the family system that they present), etc.
Similarly, the academic backgrounds of every teacher should be posted on Hyde's website.
Anyway, point is I don't disagree with you on many of your questions and suggestions about disclosures, but that's completely different than the issues to which I responded about the alleged choking and the Paul Hurd incident.
-
On 2005-11-24 06:41:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2005-11-21 08:41:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2005-11-21 01:37:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2005-11-20 22:04:00, Anonymous wrote:
"You left out the time when one of the Gauld family, (through marriage) attacked a student. I would not doubt if the student provoked it, but I would hope someone in this man's position would be able to keep his cool. He apologized to the school afterwards, but what does this tell you about the quality of the administrators? "
Since you're a tad short on the facts, not much."
So if I am "tad" short on the facts, why don't you clear it up. What justifies an administrator pushing a kid against a wall and choking them?
As far as Paul Hurd not giving Malcolm credit, if he didn't do anything wrong then why did the school send out letters to everyone explaining that he was leaving because of the incident?
I am very happy there is someone on this board who obviously is a part of Hyde. I hope you are willing to clear up what you say are misconceptions."
1. Your statement about not knowing if the student provoked it suggests you don't know the details. Without those, your post is meaningless. In your follow on post you add new facts about choking the student. Again, we don't know what led up to it, but if a student is a danger to himself or others, that would certainly justify physical restraint in my book. Beyond that, I would need the details of the incident to evaluate it. Hence my comment that your post is basically meaningless.
2. The Paul Hurd incident was confusing to me. Malcolm's letter said conflicting things. Yes, I gave this stuff to Paul to use as he saw fit. No, he should not have used them and it was plagarism and is being removed (or stepping down). I presume since this was Mal's brother in law, he was just throwing him a bone, but didn't read it all closely enough to think about it more.
As I've written before, the Paul Hurd incident to me is not evidence of Hyde being bad. There is no school in the country not rocked by sexual assault, rape an other outrageous behavior by supervisorial adults. And like the catholic church, many remove the teacher without legal action to avoid scandal. Hyde did not have to deal with this situation so openly....but instead said, hey, we believe in honesty and openness, so we are going to let you in on an embarassing thing that hurts us all, but to be consistent, this is how we must handle it.
They aired their dirty laundry publicly and openly and handled the situation responsibly.
That, to me, is evidence of their integrity.
That, to me, is evidence of Hyde's leadership.
You can spin it how you want, but what didn't happen was Hyde trying to keep it quiet and sweep it under the rug. Instead it sent a letter to the entire alumni community....not just current family and students. Personally, I don't know if I would have ever found out about it, but for their aggressive exemplary behavior. I tipped my hat to Hyde for this one."
Like a few other people who are posting here, I agree that Hyde does some things well. I can't argue with Hyde's efforts to get students to examine their character and attitudes. I don't think it's fair to point out all that is wrong with Hyde (and I think there's a tremendous amount wrong with Hyde) without acknowledging what Hyde does that may have some merit.
But, the unquestionable reality is that what's wrapped around whatever Hyde does well is fundamentally flawed and toxic. There is so much wrong with Hyde (pointed out hundreds of times elsewhere on this website) that what's toxic completely overshadows whatever redeeming features Hyde has.
Here's the best analogy I can think of: Imagine going to a restaurant that serves a very fine, tasty dish. It's perfectly appropriate to acknowledge this impressive, appealing dish. Then you find out that the restaurant's kitchen violates a number of critically important health department regulations and standards. Departmental inspectors have documented that the kitchen is overwhelmed with rodents, staff who prepare food don't wash their hands regularly, a number of ingredients in the refrigerator are spoiled and far beyond their "use" dates, and silverware isn't cleaned properly (low water temp).
If that were the case, would you take your family to eat at that restaurant? Would the restaurant's one impressive dish outweigh all that is wrong with the restaurant? I suspect that any thoughtful person who cared about his or her own health and his or her family's health would get out of that restaurant fast and look for an alternative.
And that's the situation with Hyde. This is what every parent who considers Hyde and what every educational consultant needs to know.
-
Here's the best analogy I can think of: Imagine going to a restaurant that serves a very fine, tasty dish. It's perfectly appropriate to acknowledge this impressive, appealing dish. Then you find out that the restaurant's kitchen violates a number of critically important health department regulations and standards. Departmental inspectors have documented that the kitchen is overwhelmed with rodents, staff who prepare food don't wash their hands regularly, a number of ingredients in the refrigerator are spoiled and far beyond their "use" dates, and silverware isn't cleaned properly (low water temp).
You forgot to add: And many people have gotten violently ill from eating there.
-
I can posit "some" people got ill from it.
I can also posit for "some" people this fish saved them from starvation and whatever other ills associated with it, the cure was worth the pain.
Metaphors aside, I seriously wish there was an easy metric for this sort of thing, because while the attrition and run-away rate is relevant on some level, its never the less an unknown and not necessarily correllated.
People leave Hyde for a wide variety of reasons and the number of posts on a website by anonymous posters does not make the case any more compelling.
There are definitely "some" who seem to have been abused at Hyde. There definitely seem to be "some" who had great experiences at Hyde. Both sides want to claim substantial numbers, but neither side has the ability to back them up.
Should Hyde disclose attrition (including run-aways)? Absolutely! I'll sign up for that request, as for me that's basic consumer information.
But without that data, while there may be many with valid tales to share on this site, any discussion of the numbers being on one side or the other seems fundamentally suspect.
-
On 2005-11-24 15:17:00, Anonymous wrote:
There are definitely "some" who seem to have been abused at Hyde. There definitely seem to be "some" who had great experiences at Hyde.
Do you think those who had a good time might have developed an unhealthy insensitivity to those who were abused? And do you not think that's a kind of damage?You can lead a camel to water but you can't make it stink (any more than it already does)
-- Job
-
On 2005-11-24 15:17:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I can posit "some" people got ill from it.
I can also posit for "some" people this fish saved them from starvation and whatever other ills associated with it, the cure was worth the pain.
Metaphors aside, I seriously wish there was an easy metric for this sort of thing, because while the attrition and run-away rate is relevant on some level, its never the less an unknown and not necessarily correllated.
People leave Hyde for a wide variety of reasons and the number of posts on a website by anonymous posters does not make the case any more compelling.
There are definitely "some" who seem to have been abused at Hyde. There definitely seem to be "some" who had great experiences at Hyde. Both sides want to claim substantial numbers, but neither side has the ability to back them up.
Should Hyde disclose attrition (including run-aways)? Absolutely! I'll sign up for that request, as for me that's basic consumer information.
But without that data, while there may be many with valid tales to share on this site, any discussion of the numbers being on one side or the other seems fundamentally suspect."
As another poster mentioned, the Class Notes section of their bulletin should shed some light on how many viewed their experience positively enough to stay involved. Most people who make it through there never look back. Actual numbers? I couldn't give you an exact percentage for how many give money to the school or return for alumni weekends, for example. But I bet it's pretty low. Most of the people I've stayed in contact with feel the way I do - they're embarassed to admit they went there.
And the posts on this website do make a strong case. I can't speak for others, but I spent three years in Bath and I know what went on there. If one of their "success stories" wouldn't send a kid there in a million years, that should tell you something.
-
On 2005-11-24 15:48:00, Antigen wrote:
"
On 2005-11-24 15:17:00, Anonymous wrote:
There are definitely "some" who seem to have been abused at Hyde. There definitely seem to be "some" who had great experiences at Hyde.
Do you think those who had a good time might have developed an unhealthy insensitivity to those who were abused? And do you not think that's a kind of damage?
On this site I have seen the detractors of Hyde calling people names (cultists, brainwashed, etc. etc). On this site I have seen some pro Hyde people say that many of the people with discipline problems and others who are just detractors didn't get it. Both statements can be seen as invalidating (and thus being insensitive to) others.
That said, many of the anti- and pro- Hyde folks here post thoughtful personal experiences and observations about Hyde.
What I think creates unnecessary acrimony (and at least perceived insensitivitly on both sides) is the format of this website which allows everyone to be anonymous instead of requiring posters to use anonymous but unique pseudonyms that make linear conversations more possible.
If your question is more specific to this stream, then I have to throw it back at you and ask that if you have more direct knowledge about the assault alleged above (but which no one seems to have any real facts) and about why they Paul Hurd situation was not exemplary -- in either case in a fashion that makes the responsive comments insensitive, I think everyone would encourage you to point that insensitivity out more directly.
-
1. Your statement about not knowing if the student provoked it suggests you don't know the details. Without those, your post is meaningless. In your follow on post you add new facts about choking the student. Again, we don't know what led up to it, but if a student is a danger to himself or others, that would certainly justify physical restraint in my book. Beyond that, I would need the details of the incident to evaluate it. Hence my comment that your post is basically meaningless.
As I've written before, the Paul Hurd incident to me is not evidence of Hyde being bad. There is no school in the country not rocked by sexual assault, rape an other outrageous behavior by supervisorial adults. And like the catholic church, many remove the teacher without legal action to avoid scandal. Hyde did not have to deal with this situation so openly....but instead said, hey, we believe in honesty and openness, so we are going to let you in on an embarassing thing that hurts us all, but to be consistent, this is how we must handle it.
They aired their dirty laundry publicly and openly and handled the situation responsibly.
That, to me, is evidence of their integrity.
That, to me, is evidence of Hyde's leadership.
You can spin it how you want, but what didn't happen was Hyde trying to keep it quiet and sweep it under the rug. Instead it sent a letter to the entire alumni community....not just current family and students. Personally, I don't know if I would have ever found out about it, but for their aggressive exemplary behavior. I tipped my hat to Hyde for this one."
**********************************************************************************************
You certainly have put a lot of time and effort into researching all the posts and have articulated YOUR OPINIONS. I give you credit for this. This board is for all posts both positive and negative and you have given us your positive spin on Hyde. This is your right.
My opinion, (which I too am entitled to) difers with yours. I will respond to a couple of the above statements.
I was at the weekend where this incident happened. I was not at the site where it happened, but as you know at Hyde it takes approximately 1 min and 30 seconds for rumors to fly. I was told not only by students, but faculty alike that this boy was with his father when having an arguement with Mr McMillan. The boy spit at Mr McMillan, and he reacted by pinning him against the wall and choking him. You can defend this action all your want, but it is MHO that Mr McMillan should have had enough self control not to react the way he did. He is a top administrator and this is innapropriate behavior.
You state, "There is no school in the country not rocked by sexual assault, rape an other outrageous behavior by supervisorial adults. To me this comment in itself is outrageous. Your inference is that because it is the norm for other schools, it is not so outrageous for it to happen at Hyde. Sorry guy, but I didn't pay $35,000 per year for my daughter to be around this!!
You also state, "As I've written before, the Paul Hurd incident to me is not evidence of Hyde being bad." Who said that this one incident is what makes Hyde bad?? All that potential families need to do is read all the posts where parents and students tell their story! They can judge for themselves!
In this particular incident with Paul Hurd, Hyde did discuss this openly, but in my experience at Hyde this is rare! It is very rare for Hyde to air their dirty laundry.
As I said at the beginning. Everyone on this board is entitled to their own opinion, and this is mine! I would not be so arrogant, (like you) to say I am right and you are wrong. We have two differing opinions!
-
On 2005-11-25 07:53:00, Anonymous wrote:
Again, we don't know what led up to it, but if a student is a danger to himself or others, that would certainly justify physical restraint in my book.
Ok, then how are we defining what is and is not a threat to oneself or others? Speaking from my own experience in a similar program (similar in some ways, not identical) here's how that went and I'll explain why I think it's similar.
In the Seed and Straight, just like the rest of the troubled parent industry, the parents, staff and (to some extent) client group believed they would be deadinsaneorinjail without the Program. I keep hearing that about Hyde, too.
It's hard to say how much a kid actually believed that at any particular time. But that's how it works; if you disagreed and let it slip by word or gesture or posture or facial expression, there would be consequences. I keep hearing that from former Hyde students too.
So it appeared for all the world that everyone but the misbehaver believed that the effective operation of the Program was absolutely as necessary to our individual and group survival as insulin to a diabetic.
So talking out in group, as in mocking the whole stupid program, or just trying to walk away, defying the authority that kept the rest of us sitting ram-rod straight in our chairs or in any way undermining the false consensus or chain of command was deemed a threat to everyone's life. Hell, when my dad asked the Parents group for support for a project of his that was unrelated to the Program, he got reemed out for trying to kill us all by diverting funds and volunteer hours away from us. If they thought they could get away with it, I bet they would have slammed his ass on the floor and sat on him till he decided to work his program again.
I'm hoping Hyde is not quite THAT extreme. And, from all I'm hearing, it's not. But that still leaves the question, and it's a really important question; how does Hyde determine what is and is not a threat to a student's self or peers? Without that crucial bit of information, you (Hyde supporters) sound to me just about like a wife beater saying "The bitch didn't know when to shut up."
Not very compelling. Actually, kind of ugly.
The inspiration of the Bible depends on the ignorance of the person who reads it.
--Robert G. Ingersoll, American politician and lecturer
_________________
Drug war POW
Straight, Sarasota
`80 - `82
-
Is anyone out there capable of doing a Dun and Bradstreet?? This would certainly prove whether it is correct that Hyde and the Gauld Family are well off or whether they are truly doing this out of the goodness of their heart like they say!
-
On 2005-11-25 07:53:00, Anonymous wrote:
In this particular incident with Paul Hurd, Hyde did discuss this openly, but in my experience at Hyde this is rare! It is very rare for Hyde to air their dirty laundry.
Well, here's the problem with that from my point of view. Just like Art Barker (Seed founder) and all the little tin gods who followed his methods and example, the core staff at Hyde seem to believe that they are privy to some special enlightenment that the rest of us poor SOBs just don't have. If anyone disagrees with them, it's never that they're wrong about anything, the entire formula for determining who's right or wrong in that case is "Hyde can't be wrong." That's just not a good formula for reasoning.
And, following that "logic", I'd guess that Hyde has the same problems crop up again and again. And, again and again, they ignore the pattern, toss out a sacrificial lamb and pretend they have properly addressed the problem. I'd guess that anyone involved in Hyde--student, parent or staff--who tried to raise discussion about why these same kinds of abuses seem to keep occuring, or to suggest that the problem may have more to do with the structure of the program than the succession of individuals involved in it would face some pretty harsh responses.
Am I entirely off here?
the war on drugs is but one manifestation, albeit a very dramatic one, of the great moral contests of our age -- the struggle between two diametrically opposed images of man: between man as responsible moral agent, 'condemned' to freedom, benefiting and suffering from the consequences of his actions; and man as irresponsible child, unfit for freedom, 'protected' from its risks by agents of the omnicompetent state.
--Thomas Szasz
-
No, you aren't off at all. Hyde for years will say, "we are growing and learning" whenever they screw up. You would think they would have it right being in existence as many years as they have!!
You are absolutely right that they have a difficult time admitting when they are wrong. Joe Gauld is NEVER wrong. He is G-d like and he will tell you so. In fact I think I have a letter he sent out to the parents referring to himself as above most anyone else in the world and telling the parents that he knows best, (not us) how to handle our kids! I will look for this letter and if I find it I will reprint it on this website.
-
Oh, absolutely! Anybody w/ documents I'd highly recomend that you consider making them public. Just be careful about info that might hurt innocents, like surnames and such. But most of the time, if you are entrusted w/ private communication and there's nothing like the legal confidentiality requirements you'd have w/ a lawyer or doctor, it's fair game at your discretion.
Check w/ a lawyer first, though, if you're not sure.
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway.
Andrew Tannenbaum
-
I wish parents who are considering Hyde could have been a fly on the wall at our home the past two days. My daughter is home for the Thanksgiving break. One of her friends from Hyde is staying with us as well; the friend's family situation is very chaotic and the friend asked whether she could stay with us during the break. We were happy to accommodate her (with her parents' "blessing").
We've now heard quite a few conversations about Hyde from students' perspective. My daughter and her friend are very, very cynical about Hyde and have spoken at length about how many kids there play the Hyde "game" in order to survive (these two girls are not "off track" kids, to use Hyde's terminology). We've heard lots of unsolicited anecdotes that confirm many of the postings on this website. Major themes include the large percentage of Hyde kids who struggle with major mental health problems but do not have access to any professional services on campus; the poor quality of some of the teaching; the extremely inappropriate details the kids have heard during FLCs and other seminars; the number of staff who struggle with issues in their own lives and interact with kids inappropriately (using insulting language, verbal abuse); the kids whose behavior is out of control and who run away; and so forth. Joe Gauld came up a lot during the conversations; I was amazed at how perceptive the kids are. They spoke eloquently about Joe Gauld's pompous, arrogant, and insulting behaviors. The kids seem to see right through the man.
I realize these anecdotes represent only two Hyde students' perceptions. And, I can't verify every one of their reports. But the girls' comments sure are consistent with what I've heard from lots of parents and some other students during the years our family has been connected with Hyde. These conversations convince us more than ever that we made a terribly serious mistake when we enrolled our child at Hyde. We're also convinced that our decision to leave Hyde is the right one.
-
Interesting! On the one hand, yeah, probably not the top notch private boarding school it may be cracked up to be. On the other, these girls felt comfortable talking w/ you about it? I'm guessing you've given enough detail to bust your anonymity w/ Hyde staff. Does that concern you? Please let us know if there's any fallout and what kind.
I don't believe in God. My god is patriotism. Teach a man to be a good citizen and you have solved the problem of life.
--Andrew Carnegie, Scottish-born American industrialist and philanthropist
-
On 2005-11-25 18:52:00, Antigen wrote:
"Interesting! On the one hand, yeah, probably not the top notch private boarding school it may be cracked up to be. On the other, these girls felt comfortable talking w/ you about it? I'm guessing you've given enough detail to bust your anonymity w/ Hyde staff. Does that concern you? Please let us know if there's any fallout and what kind.
I don't believe in God. My god is patriotism. Teach a man to be a good citizen and you have solved the problem of life.
--Andrew Carnegie, Scottish-born American industrialist and philanthropist
"
The fact that these two girls spoke so candidly about their painful Hyde experience is not a tribute to Hyde -- not at all. These girls have such intensely negative feelings about Hyde that they can't hold them in. Their willingness to speak openly about their Hyde experience, and about the patent hypocrisy and flaws at Hyde, reflects their comfort with us. With our daughter we've always had relatively frank, candid conversations. She's used to it. I think my daughter's friend, who is visiting us for the third time, also felt comfortable speaking candidly about Hyde.
Our decision to leave Hyde is not brand new. We're now rather public about it.
-
I am copying part of a letter which went out to parents from Joe Gauld. I remember distinctly that Joe was angry with some of the resistance he was getting during this time! Note how Gauld talks as though we have to turn our children over to him in order to succeed!.....
"Isn't Hyde Ever Wrong?"
"Of course Hyde is sometimes wrong. It is a human institution that requires the constant vigil of students, teachers and parents alike. In fact, Hyde is merely a temporary scaffolding that must be dismantled by graduation, to ensure the student is led in life by conscience and not Hyde-or even parents. If we both "let go" properly, we should be confident that conscience will only take from Hyde-and parents-what it deems worthy.
Howevwer, I think the question implies that maybe the parent and not Hyde knows better about a given situation. Myabe so, but that is DANGEROUS ground that can ultimately lead to students dismissing all of Hyde, both bad-and good. This question simply does not respect the role Hyde is supposed to play in the family structure.
Since kids-and their parents-have been far more immersed in this counter growth culture than has Hyde, Hyde can be far more objective about how to best address the true final judge on growth issues. We are in a better position than parents to determine a student's true best, and further we consider our commitment to help each student realize that best a sacred truth.
So--- Yes, we may be wrong, and thus we appreciate all the input we can get. However in the end, we urge parents that UNTIL GRADUATION to defer to Hyde's judgment not their own. To instead accept their own judgment becomes a clear statement to their children that the Hyde experience is simply an add-on to old family dynamics, and not a new beginning for the entire family.
If you are wise, you don't second-guess your doctor; you simply find another doctor. Similarly, question Hyde, but don't second-guess it, simply find another school."
I am sure the above will blow most people away other than the Hyde Lovers!! It was after this letter that I truly realized these people were off their rockers!! :skull: :skull:
-
On 2005-11-25 20:39:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I am copying part of a letter which went out to parents from Joe Gauld. I remember distinctly that Joe was angry with some of the resistance he was getting during this time! Note how Gauld talks as though we have to turn our children over to him in order to succeed!.....
"Isn't Hyde Ever Wrong?"
"Of course Hyde is sometimes wrong. It is a human institution that requires the constant vigil of students, teachers and parents alike. In fact, Hyde is merely a temporary scaffolding that must be dismantled by graduation, to ensure the student is led in life by conscience and not Hyde-or even parents. If we both "let go" properly, we should be confident that conscience will only take from Hyde-and parents-what it deems worthy.
Howevwer, I think the question implies that maybe the parent and not Hyde knows better about a given situation. Myabe so, but that is DANGEROUS ground that can ultimately lead to students dismissing all of Hyde, both bad-and good. This question simply does not respect the role Hyde is supposed to play in the family structure.
Since kids-and their parents-have been far more immersed in this counter growth culture than has Hyde, Hyde can be far more objective about how to best address the true final judge on growth issues. We are in a better position than parents to determine a student's true best, and further we consider our commitment to help each student realize that best a sacred truth.
So--- Yes, we may be wrong, and thus we appreciate all the input we can get. However in the end, we urge parents that UNTIL GRADUATION to defer to Hyde's judgment not their own. To instead accept their own judgment becomes a clear statement to their children that the Hyde experience is simply an add-on to old family dynamics, and not a new beginning for the entire family.
If you are wise, you don't second-guess your doctor; you simply find another doctor. Similarly, question Hyde, but don't second-guess it, simply find another school."
I am sure the above will blow most people away other than the Hyde Lovers!! It was after this letter that I truly realized these people were off their rockers!! :skull: :skull: "
Gauld asks parents to trust Hyde's judgment. Yes, perhaps some staff at Hyde demonstrate good judgment some of the time and provide a useful counterbalance to whatever dysfunctional family dynamics have surrounded the student. There ARE some good people at Hyde.
But, the cold, hard fact is that too many Hyde staff have a proven record of very poor judgment in many situations. As a number of people have noted in these postings, and as our family can personally attest (along with at least 25-30 other sets of parents with whom we've had detailed conversations and close contact during our Hyde years), Hyde staff have shown exceedingly poor judgment in a variety of situations where staff lost their temper in extreme ways, harassed students, verbally abused kids, shamed and humiliated parents, failed to respond to students' psychiatric needs, etc. The roster of incidents where Hyde's policies and staff members' judgment and behavior were poor and destructive is very long.
Given this context, it seems both comical and insulting (and grandiose) for Joe Gauld to proclaim that Hyde knows best and should be the sole or primary judge. If Joe Gauld only knew how many people "dis" Hyde once they leave (not to mention those who "dis" Hyde while they're there but play the Hyde game to make it through), and how many former Hyde students get into significant trouble once they leave Hyde, perhaps he wouldn't be so arrogant and delusional about Hyde's "wisdom" and "scaffolding." This may work for some at Hyde. But for many, clearly, the Hyde scaffolding is a house of cards.
In his letter Gauld admonishes parents to avoid second-guessing Hyde and to, instead, look for another school if they're concerned about Hyde's approach (much like patients look for another doctor). That's the best and wisest advice contained in Gauld's letter. Parents, find another school. Fast.
-
Well, I think that letter states it pretty clearly. Joe Gauld is in the business of utterly destroying and replacing familial affection, tradition and authority. And it's clear that he thinks that's a good thing, too. Not much different, really, from the DOE mission that most private and religious schools bemoan.
I think "tribute" is probably too strong a word. However, I also think it's important to speak as accurately as possible about these places. Remember they Hyde fan earlier shouting about how nothing I or anyone outside of Hyde has to say could be valid? He/she made the argument that I was only critical of Hyde because I was so confused and resentful, thinking Hyde were anything at all like the notorious Seed or Straight.
Well, I do think it's quite similar in many regards. But not identical. And this is one difference; intensity. I know a lot of kids got pulled from Straight while I was there. I assume that some of them took the risk and talked to their parents beforehand. But not many! Speaking for myself, if my own dad had called a meeting and asked me point blank if I wanted out, I would have lied and said no thinking it were some sort of trap. The paranoia ran that deep and, in some families even all these decades later, still does.
But if you've decided to pull your daughter, why did you send her back? Are you worried they'll take it out on her in some way? We are students of words; we are shut up in schools and colleges and recitation rooms for ten or fifteen years and come out at last with a bag of wind, a memory of words, and do not know a thing.
--Ralph Waldo Emerson
-
On 2005-11-26 07:01:00, Antigen wrote:
"Remember they Hyde fan earlier shouting about how nothing I or anyone outside of Hyde has to say could be valid? He/she made the argument that I was only critical of Hyde because I was so confused and resentful, thinking Hyde were anything at all like the notorious Seed or Straight.
I don't believe I said nothing you had to say was valid, I simply questioned your presence and motives on this site, since you had never been to Hyde and had no personal frame of reference. (And I don't believe I used the words "confused or resentful", so maybe you could find a link to that to refresh our recollection. I could have, but doubt it.)
I have, however, repeatedly supported first-hand experiences that weren't obviously lies or otherwise lacking in enough detail to make an accurate determination about the credibility of the poster. (Tom Allen for example.)
Moreso that likelyhood of your transposing what you think this letter means onto your Seeds experience would seem natural to me, so yes, I still question your presence.
If you look at this letter YES, it comes off as arrogant. But if you put it in context, which is families in crisis, and really read what he's saying, I read it as:
1. Your family is at Hyde because it is in crisis (typically) and thus there is a good chance that whatever you are doing is not working.
2. Hyde has a system. You have to give us some latitude and time to let it work. If you don't or you fight us, our experience is that little in your family will change (unless you find another modality of transformation).
3. The last sentence speaks for itself question Hyde, but don't second-guess it, simply find another school.
In fact, I regularly remember Joe Gauld showing people the door, and challenging them. If they didn't trust, if they weren't open to trying something different, then simply leave. Its as easy as that. No captives. No one is locked in their rooms. The don't (didn't) chase run-aways or have students guarding other students like I heard they did at Seeds (but don't really know).
In any event, you can try and use this letter to validate your presence and claim Hyde=Seeds. Everything I ever heard about Seeds sounded much worse than Hyde, but again, since I don't know Seeds I won't make a comparison, because it lacks any real basis other than some minor reading I have done on that stream.
To that end I also won't go on the Seeds stream and talk about something that I know nothing about.
Antigen, I think your website is important. SERIOUSLY IMPORTANT. I also trust your motives and think you have a good heart. I just don't think its fair (IMHO) to transpose your experience on whatever you think Hyde is about.
-
In fact, I regularly remember Joe Gauld showing people the door, and challenging them. If they didn't trust, if they weren't open to trying something different, then simply leave. Its as easy as that. No captives. No one is locked in their rooms. The don't (didn't) chase run-aways or have students guarding other students like I heard they did at Seeds (but don't really know).
Bulls%^&! Then why do they tell parents whose kids run away to send them back to Hyde or make them live on the streets? They were desperate to keep people there. Oh, and they DID lock me in a room once for several hours in an effort to get me to snitch on others.
-
Last post was mine.
-
And while we're on the topic, I also recall a couple of faculty members getting in my face in a very threatening way, as if they were going to assault me (Don MacMillan & Gary Kent). Totally inappropriate. It wouldn't suprise me to find out that stuff like that still happens.
As for Joe G.? He's a drunken (I smelled it on his breath several times) egomaniac bully. F%^k him and the horse he rode in on!
-
On 2005-11-26 10:52:00, Lars wrote:
"And while we're on the topic, I also recall a couple of faculty members getting in my face in a very threatening way, as if they were going to assault me (Don MacMillan & Gary Kent). Totally inappropriate. It wouldn't suprise me to find out that stuff like that still happens.
As for Joe G.? He's a drunken (I smelled it on his breath several times) egomaniac bully. F%^k him and the horse he rode in on!
"
Lars, when I was there it went further than that. There was a very steep hill from the mansion down to the student union which was covered with ice from October on. One time I was walking down this hill and picking my way down very slowly and carefully to avoid falling. Mr. Milton, the dean, came up behind me and shoved me from behind, (I wasn't moving fast enough to suit him), and sent me sprawling on my face. He then accused me of falling on purpose.Step 1. We came to understand that the government is powerless over people's private use of drugs and that the War on Drugs was making the government's life unmanageable.
--Scott Tillinghast
-
Soemtimes the abuse was more subtle, like many aspects of the sports programs. We've talked about sharking in wrestling. Remember "Bull in the Ring" in football? They'd get one guy and have every other player line up in a circle around him. Each person would be assigned a number. The coach would call out a number and that person would would go in there after the person in the middle. This wasn't so bad until the coach started calling out three numbers at once so you'd have three guys coming at you from different angles. This would go on until the person in the middle was on the ground, completely beat up & unable to defend himself.
-
Actualy, I don't remember that one because I was on cross country that fall. I did get sharked though. The worst thing about the sports was that by the time study hall came around, just before lights out, I was just totally drained. My studies suffered horribly because of it.
Here's freedom to him who would read;
Here's freedom to him who would write;
None ever feared that the truth should be heard,
But them that the truth would indict.
--author unknown (circa 1914)
-
On 2005-11-26 10:31:00, Anonymous wrote:
I don't believe I said nothing you had to say was valid, I simply questioned your presence and motives on this site, since you had never been to Hyde and had no personal frame of reference. (And I don't believe I used the words "confused or resentful", so maybe you could find a link to that to refresh our recollection. I could have, but doubt it.)
Well, I think I've made that pretty clear already. But here goes, once again. I've read about Hyde and find some of it's methods very similar to my own experience. Some ppl from Hyde have read up on other programs and also find some common ground. So, in an effort to learn more and better understand the whole thing, I sometimes like to talk to ppl who know something about Hyde.
Make sense?
If you look at this letter YES, it comes off as arrogant. But if you put it in context, which is families in crisis, and really read what he's saying, I read it as:
1. Your family is at Hyde because it is in crisis (typically) and thus there is a good chance that whatever you are doing is not working.
2. Hyde has a system. You have to give us some latitude and time to let it work. If you don't or you fight us, our experience is that little in your family will change (unless you find another modality of transformation).
3. The last sentence speaks for itself question Hyde, but don't second-guess it, simply find another school.
Uh, yeah, well, even toned down like that, that's pretty fucking arrogant, don't you think? It's easy to believe that all the dissenters go on to lead worthless, failing lives if you shun them and reject everything they have to say. That's yet another way in which Hyde is very similar to the Seed line of programs.
But it's just not the truth, sorry.
In fact, I regularly remember Joe Gauld showing people the door, and challenging them. If they didn't trust, if they weren't open to trying something different, then simply leave. Its as easy as that. No captives. No one is locked in their rooms. The don't (didn't) chase run-aways or have students guarding other students like I heard they did at Seeds (but don't really know).
While, as another poster notes, he's already gotten the kids' family to agree to disown him as a means of coercing compliance in the Program. Gee, now where have I heard that before!
In any event, you can try and use this letter to validate your presence and claim Hyde=Seeds.
Oh, thank you for giving me permission. And w/o having to go through the chain of command, too! I feel special! But that's not exactly what I was going to put in for permission to do. If it's not too much trouble, could you OK my permission to discuss Hyde w/ people (other than you) who have been there? And, now I know this is really pushing it and I don't want consequences, but can I please have permission to form my own opinions?
Thanks in advance
The farmer who you're cussin' w/ your mouth full.
Everything I ever heard about Seeds sounded much worse than Hyde, but again, since I don't know Seeds I won't make a comparison, because it lacks any real basis other than some minor reading I have done on that stream.
To that end I also won't go on the Seeds stream and talk about something that I know nothing about.
:rofl:
Brilliant! Just as long as you keep on avoiding any information, why then you can just go on believing that there's no similarity whatever, must be just all in my over active imagination.
:rofl: Darlin', this may come as a total and utter shock to you, but we have frequent posters on the Seed forum who are just as dedicated and sincere in their support for the Seed and Art as you are in your suppport for Hyde. But there's absolutely no valid similarity, no siree Bob, not at all. Oh, you're gonna laugh so hard when you finally get the punch line! Well, maybe not. But I know some people will probably get a big kick out of it.
Antigen, I think your website is important. SERIOUSLY IMPORTANT. I also trust your motives and think you have a good heart. I just don't think its fair (IMHO) to transpose your experience on whatever you think Hyde is about."
You just keep on telling yourself that instead. A Freudian slip is when you say one thing but mean your mother.
--Anonymous
-
Think what you want, the letter Joe Gauld sent out to parents tells it all!! Cult, Cult, Cult!!
-
On 2005-11-26 12:43:00, Antigen wrote:
"On 2005-11-26 10:31:00, Anonymous wrote:
I don't believe I said nothing you had to say was valid, I simply questioned your presence and motives on this site, since you had never been to Hyde and had no personal frame of reference. (And I don't believe I used the words "confused or resentful", so maybe you could find a link to that to refresh our recollection. I could have, but doubt it.)
You didn't answer the question. Again.
So, in an effort to learn more and better understand the whole thing, I sometimes like to talk to ppl who know something about Hyde.
Make sense?
So let me get this right. Statements like: Joe Guald is in the business of utterly destroyoing and replacing familial affection, tradition and authority.
...aren't really an opinion or advocacy based on chosing which posters you believe or don't believe, this is just and attempt to "learn more and better understand the whole thing"?
Uh, yeah, well, even toned down like that, that's pretty fucking arrogant, don't you think? It's easy to believe that all the dissenters go on to lead worthless, failing lives if you shun them and reject everything they have to say. That's yet another way in which Hyde is very similar to the Seed line of programs.
If you have a system that requires a leap of faith, then you need to motivate people to make that leap. Call it arrogance or whatever you want, but the truth is, for a lot of families, this was the truth.
Moreso the letter says nothing about what will happen to you if you leave ("lead a worthless life" etc.), so your comparrison to Seeds seems misplaced. The creation and dissection of a straw man if you will.
While, as another poster notes, he's already gotten the kids' family to agree to disown him as a means of coercing compliance in the Program. Gee, now where have I heard that before!
Actually, they aren't asked to disown their kids. They are asked to not accept them back into their house and force them to make their own way in the world. It may be the school of hard knocks, but it worked for many (and failed some as well).
Oh, thank you for giving me permission. And w/o having to go through the chain of command, too! I feel special! But that's not exactly what I was going to put in for permission to do. If it's not too much trouble, could you OK my permission to discuss Hyde w/ people (other than you) who have been there?
Discuss away. You have my permission. But when you opine about it, then I would like permission to take issue with you since you weren't there, base your conclusions on whichever anonymous posts you choose to believe, and are otherwise a person who has a vested interest in advocating for the Troubled Teen industry.
And, now I know this is really pushing it and I don't want consequences, but can I please have permission to form my own opinions?
Why go there? Did you really think I was being that patronizing?
Antigen, I think your website is important. SERIOUSLY IMPORTANT. I also trust your motives and think you have a good heart. I just don't think its fair (IMHO) to transpose your experience on whatever you think Hyde is about."
You just keep on telling yourself that instead."
Once again I try and offer an olive branch and acknowledge that this site actually has value....maybe dramatic value....and you see the negative. Whatever Anti. Sorry you are so bitter. Good heart or not, that can't be a fun place to live.
-
On 2005-11-26 10:52:00, Lars wrote:
"And while we're on the topic, I also recall a couple of faculty members getting in my face in a very threatening way, as if they were going to assault me (Don MacMillan & Gary Kent). Totally inappropriate. It wouldn't suprise me to find out that stuff like that still happens.
As for Joe G.? He's a drunken (I smelled it on his breath several times) egomaniac bully. F%^k him and the horse he rode in on!
"
Some things never change Lars. Don McMillan was the same one who around 4 or 5 years ago attacked a student during Family Weekend!! He grabbed him around the neck and pinned him against the wall. It is unbelievable that this man has a history of this type of assaults on students, and yet the school keeps him in a high position.
IMHO Hyde overlooks lots of bad behavior by their staff, especially the ones who are related to the Gauld family or have been friends with them for years. McMillan is one of those! Same thing happened with Mr Dubinsky. Did you know him when you went to Hyde? He is the one someone else wrote about in another post. I complained to one of the advisors at Hyde about Dubinsky, but they put it back in my lap and told me I should tell him he was making me feel uncomfortable. Can you imagine this kind of response? They wouldn't do a thing about him bothering all of us. He was considered "family."
-
On 2005-11-26 16:54:00, Anonymous wrote:
Once again I try and offer an olive branch and acknowledge that this site actually has value....maybe dramatic value....and you see the negative. Whatever Anti. Sorry you are so bitter. Good heart or not, that can't be a fun place to live."
ROFL! And once again you miss the point. This has or has not any value regardless of your opinion. If you're looking for me to agree with you that Hyde is a wonderful, helpful institution; best thing since the natural family, even better! Well, don't hold your breath.
BTW, there was a staffer in St. Pete Straight who was notorious for the choke torture too. Some ppl say he'd hold a kid up against the wall, feet off the floor by the throat till they almost passed out then let up a litte, let them come around and do it again.
Every sensible man, every honorable man, must hold the Christian sect in horror.
--Francois Marie Arouet "Voltaire", French author and playwright
-
On 2005-11-27 13:55:00, Antigen wrote:
"
On 2005-11-26 16:54:00, Anonymous wrote:
Once again I try and offer an olive branch and acknowledge that this site actually has value....maybe dramatic value....and you see the negative. Whatever Anti. Sorry you are so bitter. Good heart or not, that can't be a fun place to live."
ROFL! And once again you miss the point. This has or has not any value regardless of your opinion. If you're looking for me to agree with you that Hyde is a wonderful, helpful institution; best thing since the natural family, even better! Well, don't hold your breath.
BTW, there was a staffer in St. Pete Straight who was notorious for the choke torture too. Some ppl say he'd hold a kid up against the wall, feet off the floor by the throat till they almost passed out then let up a litte, let them come around and do it again.
Every sensible man, every honorable man, must hold the Christian sect in horror.
--Francois Marie Arouet "Voltaire", French author and playwright
"
Was never looking for agreement from you.
Just integrity.
-
And while we're on the topic, I also recall a couple of faculty members getting in my face in a very threatening way, as if they were going to assault me (Don MacMillan & Gary Kent). Totally inappropriate. It wouldn't suprise me to find out that stuff like that still happens.
As for Joe G.? He's a drunken (I smelled it on his breath several times) egomaniac bully. F%^k him and the horse he rode in on!
Off the wagon AGAIN, was he?
-
On 2005-11-24 06:41:00, Anonymous wrote:
On 2005-11-21 08:41:00, Anonymous wrote:
On 2005-11-21 01:37:00, Anonymous wrote:
On 2005-11-20 22:04:00, Anonymous wrote:
You left out the time when one of the Gauld family, (through marriage) attacked a student. I would not doubt if the student provoked it, but I would hope someone in this man's position would be able to keep his cool. He apologized to the school afterwards, but what does this tell you about the quality of the administrators?
Since you're a tad short on the facts, not much.
So if I am "tad" short on the facts, why don't you clear it up. What justifies an administrator pushing a kid against a wall and choking them?
As far as Paul Hurd not giving Malcolm credit, if he didn't do anything wrong then why did the school send out letters to everyone explaining that he was leaving because of the incident?
I am very happy there is someone on this board who obviously is a part of Hyde. I hope you are willing to clear up what you say are misconceptions.
1. Your statement about not knowing if the student provoked it suggests you don't know the details. Without those, your post is meaningless. In your follow on post you add new facts about choking the student. Again, we don't know what led up to it, but if a student is a danger to himself or others, that would certainly justify physical restraint in my book. Beyond that, I would need the details of the incident to evaluate it. Hence my comment that your post is basically meaningless.
2. The Paul Hurd incident was confusing to me. Malcolm's letter said conflicting things. Yes, I gave this stuff to Paul to use as he saw fit. No, he should not have used them and it was plagarism and is being removed (or stepping down). I presume since this was Mal's brother in law, he was just throwing him a bone, but didn't read it all closely enough to think about it more.
As I've written before, the Paul Hurd incident to me is not evidence of Hyde being bad. There is no school in the country not rocked by sexual assault, rape an other outrageous behavior by supervisorial adults. And like the catholic church, many remove the teacher without legal action to avoid scandal. Hyde did not have to deal with this situation so openly....but instead said, hey, we believe in honesty and openness, so we are going to let you in on an embarassing thing that hurts us all, but to be consistent, this is how we must handle it.
They aired their dirty laundry publicly and openly and handled the situation responsibly.
That, to me, is evidence of their integrity.
That, to me, is evidence of Hyde's leadership.
You can spin it how you want, but what didn't happen was Hyde trying to keep it quiet and sweep it under the rug. Instead it sent a letter to the entire alumni community....not just current family and students. Personally, I don't know if I would have ever found out about it, but for their aggressive exemplary behavior. I tipped my hat to Hyde for this one.
PRICELESS. I am SO sorry that I didnt see this earlier. Thanks to whoever resurrected this thread. This must be HydeFan tilting at his/her windmills again.
ASSAULT OF STUDENT BY HYDE SCHOOL FACULTY MEMBER:
Your statement about not knowing if the student provoked it suggests you don't know the details. Without those, your post is meaningless. In your follow on post you add new facts about choking the student. Again, we don't know what led up to it, but if a student is a danger to himself or others, that would certainly justify physical restraint in my book. Beyond that, I would need the details of the incident to evaluate it. Hence my comment that your post is basically meaningless.
WHO assaulted and choked the student? McMillan? Hurd? Gauld? Does it really matter? Get the picture? They ALL ASSAULT the students! Did I miss someone in my little faculty list? I'm sure I did! Would assaulting a student be any MORE or LESS ok if someone ELSE did the assaulting? Why would not knowing which faculty member make the original post "meaningless"? Huh? Are you for REAL?
HYDE SCHOOL'S TREATMENT OF PAUL HURD'S PLAGIARISM:
They aired their dirty laundry publicly and openly and handled the situation responsibly.
That, to me, is evidence of their integrity.
That, to me, is evidence of Hyde's leadership.
You can spin it how you want, but what didn't happen was Hyde trying to keep it quiet and sweep it under the rug. Instead it sent a letter to the entire alumni community....not just current family and students. Personally, I don't know if I would have ever found out about it, but for their aggressive exemplary behavior. I tipped my hat to Hyde for this one.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: I will DIE laughing.
The ONLY time Hyde airs their dirty laundry is when they don't have any OTHER alternative. And you KNOW the entire story is not being told. Some key facts being creatively put together in a different way.
HydeFan, or whoever you are, you get an "A" for school loyalty. You get an "F" for critical thinking, grasp of the "truth", and common sense. In the real world, school loyalty counts for exactly 2% of your grade. Guess what? You FAIL. Sorry. Better luck next time.
-
Paul Hurd has been involved with plagiarism events for as long as he has been involved with Hyde School, probably longer.
-
Paul Hurd has been involved with plagiarism events for as long as he has been involved with Hyde School, probably longer.
See this thread for more discussion of an earlier such (plagiarism) event in Paul's Hyde career:
'For The Love of Paul Hurd'
http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?t=23429 (http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?t=23429)[/list]
-
Your statement about not knowing if the student provoked it suggests you don't know the details. Without those, your post is meaningless. In your follow on post you add new facts about choking the student. Again, we don't know what led up to it, but if a student is a danger to himself or others, that would certainly justify physical restraint in my book.
uh.................................. when does "a danger to himself or others" warrant strangling someone???? ::)
-
The LGAT s listed by "Hyde Fan"
"Current examples of LGAT programs would include Landmark Education, Neuro-Linguistic Programming, Lifespring, Tony Robbins seminars, etc."
These are at best scams at worst dangerous cults.
The reality of Hyde is that Hyde is about Hyde promoting Hyde and Laura Gault branding herself. There are better choices out there. Yes, of course Hyde students get into and attend colleges; they are generally from very wealthy families. I'd wager each student will attend several colleges before graduating.
My daughter went to Hyde. It's all hype and a simple authoritarian process. Send your kid to the military, it's kinder more honest and less expensive.
-
The reality of Hyde is that Hyde is about Hyde promoting Hyde and Laura Gault branding herself. There are better choices out there. Yes, of course Hyde students get into and attend colleges; they are generally from very wealthy families. I'd wager each student will attend several colleges before graduating.
...IF they graduate. Hyde doesn't seem too interested in collecting those statistics.
-
The LGAT s listed by "Hyde Fan"
"Current examples of LGAT programs would include Landmark Education, Neuro-Linguistic Programming, Lifespring, Tony Robbins seminars, etc."
These are at best scams at worst dangerous cults.
Perhaps not surprisingly, Hyde's programming has its origins -- directly or indirectly -- with predecessors of these LGATs, and the toolbox of psychological shortcuts for "self-improvement," that came out of the Human Potential movement (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=28357).
-
Your statement about not knowing if the student provoked it suggests you don't know the details. Without those, your post is meaningless. In your follow on post you add new facts about choking the student. Again, we don't know what led up to it, but if a student is a danger to himself or others, that would certainly justify physical restraint in my book.
uh.................................. when does "a danger to himself or others" warrant strangling someone???? ::)
If the other person is strangling you. If you manage to get your hands around their throat there is a better chance of getting them to let go or if one of you passes out from lack of oxygen then their grip would ease off and you can neutralize the situation.
-
Your statement about not knowing if the student provoked it suggests you don't know the details. Without those, your post is meaningless. In your follow on post you add new facts about choking the student. Again, we don't know what led up to it, but if a student is a danger to himself or others, that would certainly justify physical restraint in my book.
uh.................................. when does "a danger to himself or others" warrant strangling someone???? ::)
If the other person is strangling you. If you manage to get your hands around their throat there is a better chance of getting them to let go or if one of you passes out from lack of oxygen then their grip would ease off and you can neutralize the situation.
I have no idea whether the following refers to the incident discussed above. It appears to fit, but may possibly refer to yet another incident.
From the Sexual assaults and inappropriate behavior by Hyde Staff (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=22969&p=285627#p285627) thread:
"My name is Sverre Tysl, and I was a student at Hyde Bath from 03-06. I was struck in the head, choked out, and slammed against a car by Paul Hurd in Novermber of 2004. I was picked up by him, (after violating an ethic) and the incident occured with no provocation from me, physical or verbal. I was also called a 'faggot' and my health was purposfully threatened by Kevin Folan, in that same year. Doesnt anyone catch onto this crap?"[/list]
-
The LGAT s listed by "Hyde Fan"
"Current examples of LGAT programs would include Landmark Education, Neuro-Linguistic Programming, Lifespring, Tony Robbins seminars, etc."
These are at best scams at worst dangerous cults.
Perhaps not surprisingly, Hyde's programming has its origins -- directly or indirectly -- with predecessors of these LGATs, and the toolbox of psychological shortcuts for "self-improvement," that came out of the Human Potential movement (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=28357).
Joe Gauld's current infatuation with the Hoffman Quadrinity Process (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=26801) brings that home all the more. Of course, Joe's been preaching this kinda stuff all along. But involvement with HQP will be sure to bring some more lingo to the table, that everyone will have to learn for the betterment of their E.Q. (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_intelligence#The_Bar-On_model_of_Emotional-Social_Intelligence_.28ESI.29) and development of their character... :D
According to an interview (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=26801&p=355561#p355561) published last year by the Hoffman Institute, Joe plans on writing another book tying it all together:
ELLIE: What's your vision for the future?
JOEY: I will continue to bring the understanding to our society that the biggest problem we have is an abundance of adverse childhood experiences that we as a whole haven't learned to deal with. With Raz's (Raz Ingrasci, Hoffman's CEO) support, I'm writing a book that I hope will finally make our society aware of how much of the imperfections we experience in life stem from the unaddressed negatives in our childhood -- negatives that Hoffman and Hyde are trying to address.[/list]
For some perspective, here's current Hoffman president Raz Ingrasci's brief bio:
Charles "Raz" Ingrasci (http://http://cache.zoominfo.com/CachedPage/?archive_id=0&page_id=82574885&page_url=%2f%2fwww.quadrinity.org%2fdirectors.html&page_last_updated=5%2f25%2f2002+1%3a16%3a49+AM&firstName=Raz&lastName=Ingrasci), President & CEO San Anselmo, CA
Mr. Ingrasci is President and CEO of the Hoffman Institute and a Quadrinity Process Teacher. He received a BA in Theatre from U.C. Berkeley in 1970. His career commitment has been to developing and disseminating experiential education programs whereby individuals access previously blocked inner knowledge and wisdom, learning from oneself what cannot be taught by another. He has held key executive and training positions in seminar companies throughout his career. A friend of the founder of the Hoffman Quadrinity Process, Bob Hoffman, since 1973, Mr. Ingrasci worked closely with him for eight years from 1989 until his death in 1997.[/list]
Although the Hoffman Institute prefers to be curiously vague about which "seminar companies" Mr. Ingrasci has devoted his executive and training talents to throughout his career, a modicum of research will show you that two of these companies were est (which later evolved into Landmark Education) and Lifespring.