Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Anonymous on August 19, 2006, 02:09:21 PM
-
Following is a partial list of organizations and facilities which are known or suspected of unethical activities including neglect, physical and/or mental abuse, torture, rape, homicide, etc., etc.. Some are referral agencies which get paid to refer clients to various programs, many of which are known to be abusive. Many are affiliated or connected in some way to the World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools, also known as WWASP or WWASPS, or the Straight Foundation, Inc. (formerly Straight, Inc.).
Note that this list is not a complete list of all organizations and facilities having a history of child abuse and other unethical practices, nor will it ever be. It is therefore imperative that those seeking help thoroughly investigate any facility they may be interested in, regardless of whether it has been included here.
Some organizations/facilities are duplicated because they are known by more than one name.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
202 Teen Programs
Academy at Ivy Ridge, NY
Academy at Swift River, MA
Adirondack Leadership Expeditions, NY
Alberta Adolescent Recovery Center (AARC), Canada
Appalachian Wilderness Camp, GA
Aspen Achievement Academy, UT
Aspen Ranch, UT
Back to Basics Christian Military Academy
Bay County Sheriff's Office Boot Camp
Bell Academy, CA
Bethel Boys Academy, MS
Bethel Boys Home, MS
Bethel Girls Academy, MS
Boot Camps Advisor
Brightway Hospital, UT
Bromley Brook School, VT
Browning Academy, UT, Does not physically exist
Camas Ranch, MT
Cambridge Academy
Canyon View Park, MT
Carolina Springs Academy, SC
Casa by the Sea, Mexico
Cedars Academy, DE
Central OH Boys Residential Academy (COBRA)
Chad Youth Enhancement Center, TN
Challenger Foundation
Copper Canyon Academy, AZ
Cross Creek Academy, UT
Cross Creek Center, UT
Cross Creek Manor, UT
Cross Creek Programs, UT
Darrington Academy, GA
Discovery Academy, UT
Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE)
Drug Free America Foundation, Inc. (DFAF)
Dundee Ranch Academy, Costa Rica
Eagle Point Christian Academy, MS
Eagle Point Military School
Eagles Nest Ranch & Academy, OH
Elan School, Maine
Escuela Caribe, Dominican Republic
Excel Academy, TX
FamilyFirstAid
Fred D. Jones Youth Center
Focus Adolescent Services
Genesis Ministries, FL
Growing Together
Growing Together, FL
Help My Teen
Hidden Lake Academy, GA
High Impact, Mexico
Horizon Academy, NV
Island View, UT
KIDS
Kids Helping Kids, OH
Lifelines Family Services
Lighthouse Ministries, FL
Living Water Refuge/Christian Boarding School, MO
Lone Star Expeditions, TX
Majestic Ranch Academy, UT
Majestic Ranch, UT
Midwest Academy, IA
Morava Academy, Czech Republic
Mount Bachelor Academy, OR
Mountain Park Baptist Academy, MO
New Beginnings Rebekah Academy, FL
New Haven Residential Treatment Center, UT
New Leaf Academy, NC, OR
NorthStar Center, OR
Oakley School, UT
Oaks Treatment Center, TX
Operation Par, FL
Outback Therapeutic Expeditions, UT
Paradise Cove, Samoa
Parent Teen Guide
Passages to Recovery, UT
Pathway Family Center
Pathway Family Center, IN, MI
Phoenix Adolescent Institute
Phoenix Institute, GA
Pillars of Hope, Costa Rica
Pine Ridge Academy, UT
Pine View Academy, MS
Pine View Christian Academy
Premier Educational Systems
Provo Canyon School, UT
P.U.R.E., Inc., FL
Reality Trek, UT
Red River Academy, Louisiana
Refuge, Operated by Love In Action, TN
Resource Realizations, Inc.
Respect Camp
Royal Peak Academy, CO
SAFE (Substance Abuse and Family Education), FL
Save Our Society From Drugs (SOS)
Second Chance, TN
Sky View Christian Academy, NV
Spring Creek Lodge, MT
Stone Mountain School, NC
Summit Quest Academy, PA
Summit School, NY
Sunhawk Academy, UT
Sunrise Beach, Mexico
SUWS Adolescents Program, ID
SUWS of the Carolinas, NC
SUWS Seasons, NC
SUWS Youth Program
Talisman Summer Camps, NC
Teen Boarding Schools
Teen Help
Teen Solutions
Teens In Crisis
Thayer Learning Center, MO
TLC Boot Camp, MO
Tranquility Bay, Jamaica
The Family Foundation School
TroubledTeenHelp
Turn-About Ranch, UT
Turning Point at the Junction, UT
Turning Point Family Care, UT
Victory Christian Academy, FL
ViewpointMall
Viewpoint Productions, LLC.
Youth Care Inc., UT
Youth Program Central, LLC.
WWASP
WWASPS
Whitmore Academy, UT
Wilderness Programs Info
Woodland Hills Maternity Home, UT
World Wide Association of Specialty Programs
World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools
Link:
http://help-for-teen.com/smf-pub/index. ... ,18.0.html (http://help-for-teen.com/smf-pub/index.php/topic,18.0.html)
-
A few off the top of my head that aren't listed:
Skyline Journey (closed)- operating now at Distant Drums
Crater Lake School- formerly Camp O'Neal where 4 kids and 3 adults died in an unlicensed facility. Owner promised not to reopen, then opened in another state.
http://wwf.avigation.net/viewtopic.php? ... ght=crater (http://wwf.avigation.net/viewtopic.php?t=3880&highlight=crater)
Woodside Trails Wilderness (closed)- currently operating as Eagle Pines Academy
http://wwf.avigation.net/viewtopic.php? ... t=woodside (http://wwf.avigation.net/viewtopic.php?t=6984&highlight=woodside)
-
Is there a list of good schools?
-
A behaviour modification facility works on principles that, even applied carefully and "gently" run contrary to civilised behaviour, and the human/civil rights of a child ergo there are no good behaviour modification facilities.
-
To delete:
Bethel Boys Home, MS (duplicate)
Casa by the Sea, Mexico (0wn3d by Mexican authorities)
Cross Creek Center, UT
Cross Creek Manor, UT
Cross Creek Programs, UT (duplicates)
Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE)
Drug Free America Foundation, Inc. (DFAF) (while offshoots of Straight, these aren't actual abuse camps)
Dundee Ranch Academy, Costa Rica (0wn3d by Costa Ricans. Narvin being prosecuted for this one)
Eagle Point Military School (duplicate?)
Growing Together, FL (duplicate)
Help My Teen (organization name? Not a camp)
High Impact, Mexico (isn't this another name for Casa, that got 0wn3d?)
Majestic Ranch, UT (duplicate)
Morava Academy, Czech Republic (0wn3d by the Czechs. Are we starting to see a pattern here?)
Parent Teen Guide (not a camp)
Pathway Family Center (duplicate)
Phoenix Institute, GA (duplicate)
Pillars of Hope, Costa Rica (Same as Dundee?)
Pine View Christian Academy (duplicate)
P.U.R.E., Inc., FL (not a camp)
Save Our Society From Drugs (SOS) (this isn't a camp, is it?)
Sunrise Beach, Mexico (0wn3d by Mexicans. Same as Casa?)
SUWS Youth Program (duplicate/organization name)
Teen Boarding Schools
Teen Help
Teen Solutions
Teens In Crisis (none of these are camps, are they?)
Viewpoint Productions, LLC. (organization name)
Youth Program Central, LLC. (organization name)
WWASP
WWASPS
World Wide Association of Specialty Programs
World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools (organization name)
-
I did not see Peninsula Village in Knoxville TN on your list. Licensed? Possibly expired.... Regulated? So they say.... Abusive? (quite possibly one of the the MOST abusive programs)
-
Add Alldredge Academy and L. Jay Mitchell to the list. Guilty in both criminal court and civil court for the death of a child. See www.isaccorp.com (http://www.isaccorp.com) for more information.
-
Make that Aldredge/Ayne. They changed their name too, running from the past.
-
KIDS PEACE (Rape?)
Catherine Freer Wilderness (2 Deaths)
Red Rock Ranch (Academy) (1 death)
-
To delete:
Bethel Boys Home, MS (duplicate)
Casa by the Sea, Mexico (0wn3d by Mexican authorities)
Cross Creek Center, UT
Cross Creek Manor, UT
Cross Creek Programs, UT (duplicates)
Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE)
Drug Free America Foundation, Inc. (DFAF) (while offshoots of Straight, these aren't actual abuse camps)
Dundee Ranch Academy, Costa Rica (0wn3d by Costa Ricans. Narvin being prosecuted for this one)
Eagle Point Military School (duplicate?)
Growing Together, FL (duplicate)
Help My Teen (organization name? Not a camp)
High Impact, Mexico (isn't this another name for Casa, that got 0wn3d?)
Majestic Ranch, UT (duplicate)
Morava Academy, Czech Republic (0wn3d by the Czechs. Are we starting to see a pattern here?)
Parent Teen Guide (not a camp)
Pathway Family Center (duplicate)
Phoenix Institute, GA (duplicate)
Pillars of Hope, Costa Rica (Same as Dundee?)
Pine View Christian Academy (duplicate)
P.U.R.E., Inc., FL (not a camp)
Save Our Society From Drugs (SOS) (this isn't a camp, is it?)
Sunrise Beach, Mexico (0wn3d by Mexicans. Same as Casa?)
SUWS Youth Program (duplicate/organization name)
Teen Boarding Schools
Teen Help
Teen Solutions
Teens In Crisis (none of these are camps, are they?)
Viewpoint Productions, LLC. (organization name)
Youth Program Central, LLC. (organization name)
WWASP
WWASPS
World Wide Association of Specialty Programs
World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools (organization name)
MILK - the list maker says some of the listings are referral agencies, not programs
-
KIDS PEACE (Rape?)
Catherine Freer Wilderness (2 Deaths)
Red Rock Ranch (Academy) (1 death)
Catherine Freer Wilderness has had three deaths.
-
Dundee Ranch in Costa Rica was not owned by Costa Ricans. It was a full blown WWASPS facility owned by Narvin!
-
High Impact was not the same as CASA.
-
Maybe MILK meant Owned as in SHUT DOWN?
-
Well, the topic just says "programs". And you can at least get rid of the dupes, and the organizations that only have one program to their name when the program itself is listed. That is if you're going for an accurate count. Be sure to add the ones people have suggested, too.
It should have been obvious that I didn't mean "property of" or "created by", I meant owned in the videogame sense. WWASPS got owned by foreign governments.
-
So your saying that we should all know videogame sense? That "got owned" means they shut them down????
-
This is a great list and needs to be posted where parents can find it. It'd be even better if the parents could click on the school name and read about the complaints and abuses related to that school.
It'd be a lot of work, but I think it would pay off substantially. I know that some of these schools are suffering from reduced enrollment right now which could be indicative of the word getting out on them.
-
http://www.isaccorp.org/watchlist.asp (http://www.isaccorp.org/watchlist.asp)
http://www.caica.org/newsinfo.htm (http://www.caica.org/newsinfo.htm)
http://www.heal-online.org/childtortureusa.htm#flor9 (http://www.heal-online.org/childtortureusa.htm#flor9)
http://kathymoya.com/FICA/deaths.htm (http://kathymoya.com/FICA/deaths.htm)
A few others. Then there is
http://nospank.net/ (http://nospank.net/)
http://www.teenadvocatesusa.org/ (http://www.teenadvocatesusa.org/)
Have I forgotten anyone?
-
Very excellent. And the ones that don't have a link????
-
So your saying that we should all know videogame sense? That "got owned" means they shut them down????
Got owned: idiom. From the internet slang language l33t (pronounced "Leet", from "elite"). To be totally and utterly defeated by another. Implies a particularly humiliating or ignominious defeat. In l33t, "owned" is frequently spelled "pwned." See also: l33t.
No, really. See also: l33t
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L33t_programming_language (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L33t_programming_language)
"Got owned" has long migrated outside l33t and into common online usage.
A lot of people would have understood it from context, but it's no sin to have something go over your head and have to ask.
If you're old enough not to understand "got owned" without asking someone what it means, you're old enough to know better than to whine like you just did.
The language changed and the universe didn't send you a memo. Wah. Grow up.
Julie
-
The only thing that concerns me is that I went to two of the places on that list, HLA and New Haven RTC, and while I absolutely agree with HLA's name on that list, New Haven was an extremely positive experience for me and all the other girls I still keep in contact with via a MySpace Alum group...
I definitely support making information available on abusive or controversial schools, however isn't there a point when its taken too far?? When a good school that has something to offer parents and children is cast into an abusive list just because a few kids had a bad experience or didnt want to get sent away. I know PLENTLY of kids who would say anything about a school and its staff to try and get pulled or manipulate their way out of where they dont want to be. Is this taken into consideration?? How are these "lists" compiled?
Just another point of view.
-
Doesn't New Haven practice behavior mod? Were you there willingly? Just because you may not have been chemically or physically restrained doesn't mean you weren't emotionally abused or that your rights weren't violated.
Glad to hear you support making info available on abusive schools. And I agree with you that there IS a point at which it's taken too far. If the "school" uses behavior mod techniques and holds students captive against their will, then it belongs on this list. That pretty much rules out every "school" to which Ed-Conmen refer parents.
There are plenty of schools that do not belong on the list. They include public schools and most private schools that students attend to get an education, not for "emotional growth." You can recognize them by the fact that students come and go and their human and civil rights are respected.
-
I know PLENTLY of kids who would say anything about a school and its staff to try and get pulled or manipulate their way out of where they dont want to be. Is this taken into consideration?? How are these "lists" compiled?
The fact that you used the word "manipulate" tells me you absorbed a little too much re-programming during the course of your so-called therapy. Only you and a qualified psychologist or psychiatrist can determine if that was mostly from HLA or New Haven, or both. Either way, it seems to me like you might benefit from some therapy. If your parents have any money left, ask them if they will support some real therapy this time, not the behavior mod b.s. you have already been through.
-
I was programmed to throw up every time I hear the M word. Man, mani, manip
Nausea...
-
Are you kidding me??
Manipulate is still a real word, and a real thing that kids do.
Before you jump on me thinking I'm pro-programs, I'm not. Check the HLA thread and see my posts there.
HOWEVER. When a child sits there and tells a parent to just give up on them, quit fucking with their life and let them make their own choices, and its the same child whose making the CHOICE to run away, slice up their arms and be in a relationship with an EXTREMELY physically abusive boyfriend, dont you think that MAYBE their decision making abilities should be taken away?? Until they have the self respect and a sense of worth to do the right things by their own life? You sit there and ask me if I was there against my will. Absolutely. In a heart beat I would have walked right out of those places and walked right back into the EXTREMELY dangerous situations in which I put myself.
Now, I certainly believe that if all this bullshit can be avoided and that a parent can reach their own solution by their child, then the child needs to be the one to choose to make different decisions in their own life. That is and was the only way that my life changed, when I made the simple decision that I was worth more than the fucking disaster I'd turned my life into. And that happened many years after I left these programs, and involved no kind of therapy, meds, or behavior mods or whatever you call it. But. In the years I was institutionalized, at least I can say I wasn't hurting myself like I did at home.
So where do you draw the line? When is a child hurting themselves so badly that they in turn should have their rights (the right to hurt themselves) taken away?
-
I would draw the line for a teen in the same place I'd draw the line for an adult. Institutionalizing someone against their will is an extreme step that should only be taken if the person is in imminent danger of seriously injuring or killing themselves or another, or if the person is in that kind of imminent danger from another person (like an abusive parent, boyfriend, etc.).
There ARE people in that situation, and maybe you were once one of those people. But such institutionallization should be carefully supervised, monitored, regulated and be of the shortest possible duration. Besides obvious concerns about abuse -- which I believe is not very common in quality treatment facilities that employ caring professionals -- the major concern is that the patient needs treatment, and treatment cannot be successful until the patient is stabilized and willing to receive help.
Institutionalization is unfortunate, but can be an effective way to stabilize someone who is at extreme risk of harm. As soon as the patient is stabilized, coercive intervention should be terminated so that real therapy and healing can begin. For many people, I don't believe that starts until some time AFTER they leave their last 'program.' I concede the possibility that some programs may offer genuine therapy, but I think that is pretty rare and it is unlikely in a place that uses behavior mod techniques (points & levels).
-
I would draw the line for a teen in the same place I'd draw the line for an adult. Institutionalizing someone against their will is an extreme step that should only be taken if the person is in imminent danger of seriously injuring or killing themselves or another, or if the person is in that kind of imminent danger from another person (like an abusive parent, boyfriend, etc.).
There ARE people in that situation, and maybe you were once one of those people. But such institutionallization should be carefully supervised, monitored, regulated and be of the shortest possible duration. Besides obvious concerns about abuse -- which I believe is not very common in quality treatment facilities that employ caring professionals -- the major concern is that the patient needs treatment, and treatment cannot be successful until the patient is stabilized and willing to receive help.
Institutionalization is unfortunate, but can be an effective way to stabilize someone who is at extreme risk of harm. As soon as the patient is stabilized, coercive intervention should be terminated so that real therapy and healing can begin. For many people, I don't believe that starts until some time AFTER they leave their last 'program.' I concede the possibility that some programs may offer genuine therapy, but I think that is pretty rare and it is unlikely in a place that uses behavior mod techniques (points & levels).
I completely agree. But the people who blatently condemn schools for the fact that they are labeled as an RTC or TBS, are throwing the baby out with the bath water. What about the schools that CAN do good, and just because a few overly zealous and idealistic fruitcakes think that all children are innocent and just need a hug and some understanding and real "therapy", doesnt mean its true. Bull. Some kids need serious consequenses in their lives to understand the severity of the choices their making. And in my life, those serious consequenses were being sent away and having my rights restrained for a while until I understood the importance of my own self respect and self worth.
-
Shut up, cunt.
-
I'm glad to hear you got something out of it and are content with yourself as you are today. I seriously mean that.
I wish there were real research results and real statistics on this industry, because it's quite possible that you might be the exception rather than the rule. Despite the claims of program administrators or EdCons, there is no real data on how effective or ineffective these program are. There have been no peer-reviewed published studies that follow the progress of RTC/TBS program attendees after they leave the program.
I suspect that some young people derive benefit from some programs, just as we know that some are harmed by some programs. There is no real data on that (the harm) either, but there is some anecdotal evidence -- for example, suicides or other deaths that have occurred in programs or shortly afterward. I doubt there's much debate that a kid who committed suicide did not derive much benefit from the program!
Even the anecdotal evidence from the ST site suggests that there are some kids who go back to "undesirable behaviors" even (or especially) after a long stay at a TBS. Those kids and their parents deserve better than that.
[/b]
-
Maybe the kid would have committed suicide a lot sooner without the program. Maybe the program was worth it for the chance that it might help. Lots of cancer treatments don't save one's life, but the person still goes through the treatment.
-
Maybe the kid would have committed suicide a lot sooner without the program. Maybe the program was worth it for the chance that it might help. Lots of cancer treatments don't save one's life, but the person still goes through the treatment.
Cancer is a disease. Adolescence is not.
Primum non nocere
-
Maybe the kid would have committed suicide a lot sooner without the program. Maybe the program was worth it for the chance that it might help. Lots of cancer treatments don't save one's life, but the person still goes through the treatment.
But my point is still valid about data on the effectiveness of treatment. The parents of kids who committed suicide probably don't think the treatment was very effective...just like the families of cancer patients who die.
I'm not suggesting parents shouldn't try to do something, when something clearly needs to be done. "No guarantees" does not mean "why bother doing anything?"
I think your cancer patient analogy is a good one. If I or a loved one had cancer, I would want some real data on the effectiveness vs. the risks of all the options. Some cancer treatments are more effective than others at putting cancer into remission. Some treatments reduce the quality of one's remaining life more than others.
Cancer patients or their loved ones acting on their behalf can make informed treatment decisions based on genuine data. Teens or parents of teens considering institutionalization for behavioral or emotional issues do not have the same luxury. They have to rely on recommendations, word of mouth, sales people, the internet and their gut instinct. Not exact a sound methodology for selecting health care options.
-
Let's define some terms here. What percentage of kids (ballpark) do you think would legitimately need to be taken out of the home? What would be the criteria? Most of these kids are being sent away for shit that doesn't warrant it. Parents gets scared, buy into the hype and totally believe that their kid is going to DIE if they don't ship them off somewhere.
What sort of kid do you thnk would need to be sent away?
-
Maybe the kid would have committed suicide a lot sooner without the program. Maybe the program was worth it for the chance that it might help. Lots of cancer treatments don't save one's life, but the person still goes through the treatment.
Maybe that woman wouldn't have died of female complaints (ovarian cancer) if she had taken Lydia Pinkham's patent medicine.
Maybe that man wouldn't have died of melanoma if he'd drunk a daily mug of comfrey tea (don't do this, btw--liver damage).
A lot of the alternative treatments some tout are quackery of dubious value whose exclusive use could easily leave a serious medical condition effectively untreated.
However, at least most of the "alternative" treatments have the virtue of not making people's medical problems worse and probably not being harmful if taken in conjunction with remedies that have been proven safe and effective and are prescribed by a real doctor.
Back before the FDA, one of the patent medicines had a hefty dose of radium in it. Many patent medicines contained a heavy dose of cocaine.
The Programs aren't harmless quack treatments. They're quack treatments that do long term and frequently permanent damage to the people subjected to them.
I talked to one more person about the full depth of the problem today. We had had a few conversations before, but I made a bit more impact imparting the depth of the horror, and the breadth of the problem.
It used to be legal for parents to beat their kids at home--even to death. It was considered a family matter. It used to be legal to beat your wife--even to death. It was considered a family matter. It used to be legal to put your kid to work in a sweatshop all through childhood, keeping him out of school. That was considered a family matter, too.
You Programmies will notice that those things are all felonies now.
There's only so much dirt and corruption you can hide, and for only just so long, under a load of political contributions.
Eventually grassroots activism does its job.
It takes awhile to build the infrastructure to channel the outrage of ordinary voters and the rest of society against moneyed interests and big political contributors. Those of us who hate child abuse are tenacious. We may not be patient--not in the face of the harm you do--but we're tenacious as hell. It's a long road, but it's a sure and certain road when the issue is as morally outrageous to any decent person as the Program is.
Programmies, be on notice. We're going to outlaw the Program--the whole kit and kaboodle.
Julie
-
It seems that a great deal of the argument here revolves around where we draw the line, and who in our lives we have seen who have fallen on the wrong side of that line.
For me, that line goes something like this, if a teenager is behaving in a way that most people wouldn't bat an eye at if they were doing it in a frat or sorority house, this includes drinking, recreational drug use, cutting class, staying out late, having 20 sex partners, bulimia, and anything else you can think of, then it's not worthy of institutionalization.
And at least some of the kids who end up in these programs fit into this category. These are the stories that anger me the most.
-
Eventually grassroots activism does its job.
It takes awhile to build the infrastructure to channel the outrage of ordinary voters and the rest of society against moneyed interests and big political contributors. Those of us who hate child abuse are tenacious. We may not be patient--not in the face of the harm you do--but we're tenacious as hell. It's a long road, but it's a sure and certain road when the issue is as morally outrageous to any decent person as the Program is.
Programmies, be on notice. We're going to outlaw the Program--the whole kit and kaboodle.
Exactly.
-
Let's define some terms here. What percentage of kids (ballpark) do you think would legitimately need to be taken out of the home? What would be the criteria? Most of these kids are being sent away for shit that doesn't warrant it. Parents gets scared, buy into the hype and totally believe that their kid is going to DIE if they don't ship them off somewhere.
What sort of kid do you thnk would need to be sent away?
Great question. Why not ask the referral agents and parent advocates who believe in helping parents find "safe" and effective treatment options (translated to mean programs who pay commissions/finder's fees and haven't been charged with abuse or fraud). I'd like to know what kind of kid they think needs to be sent away. I've seen the lame questionaires on their websites and advice on such bad behavioral problems (sic) as ADD, OCD, ADHD, DEFIANCE (that's a disorder too?) etc. The referral agents are the ones doing the selling. They should have all the answers.
-
It seems that a great deal of the argument here revolves around where we draw the line, and who in our lives we have seen who have fallen on the wrong side of that line.
For me, that line goes something like this, if a teenager is behaving in a way that most people wouldn't bat an eye at if they were doing it in a frat or sorority house, this includes drinking, recreational drug use, cutting class, staying out late, having 20 sex partners, bulimia, and anything else you can think of, then it's not worthy of institutionalization.
And at least some of the kids who end up in these programs fit into this category. These are the stories that anger me the most.
I agree with your assessment of "not worthy of institutionalization," but with a big however.
"However" being that some behaviors are a sign of real problems that even the person doing the behavior will eventually regret. Drinking and recreational drug use mean different things to different people. Some people seem to handle it ok, maybe grow out of it later, while for others it marks the beginning of a downward spiral into serious addiction and reduction in the quality of life -- even loss of one's freedom if/when the legal system gets involved. Having 20 sex partners might also be an addictive behavior that's worth looking at, and of course if the sex is unprotected, that's a real health risk that can shorten one's life. Bulimia or other eating disorders are harmful and can be life-threatening.
The point is that some people do some things that their parents, friends or others might consider reckless or stupid, and somehow get through it on their own (or not) to where it doesn't control or ruin their lives. Others have genuine problems with some of the behaviors you mentioned, and could really benefit from some treatment. But "treatment" doesn't often require "institutionalization."
-
More or less agreed, and I will admit that bulimia comment was a flip remark only intended to highlight just how much abnormal adolescent behavior somehow turns into accepted behavior when you get to college.
As a side note, I was at UMD when we won the national championship, over the course of three years about ten "riots" occurred, and only one conviction that I know of related to those riots. Including my favorite, tearing down the goalposts after we won beat Duke in basketball! Stopped traffic on Rt. 1 for miles, destroyed school property, burnt several couches in an open area, no arrests.
But back on point, yes some people grow out of it, some people get addicted, most of the time these kids could benefit from some kind of counseling. And some of them may very well be destroying their lives permanently.
If they commit a crime and are charged for that crime (and I'm not counting status offenses) then deprivation of liberty (not torture and abuse) is legitimate. If you steal someones car or if you break into someone's house, or if you assault someone even under the influence, that's not adolescence.
But until that point, we still live in a society that potential danger to others isn't a crime yet.
-
Programmies, be on notice. We're going to outlaw the Program--the whole kit and kaboodle.
Let us know how that works out for you, Julie.
-
This isn't a binary solution set. What that means, for non-programmers, is that the choices are not no treatment or the Programs.
For drug abuse and delinquency, community based care has better results than anything else.
Right now, the argument seems to be that some kids grow out of highly illegal pranks and stupid stuff, and grow out of drug abuse, and some kids start a lifelong downward spiral. This is true---but it is just as true of kids who have been in the Programs.
Far fewer kids who get community based care, or even no treatment at all, go into that lifelong downward spiral than the Programs would have us believe.
Far more kids who go into the Programs go into that lifelong downward spiral--particularly suicide in a very short life--than the Programs would have us believe.
Truth: Kids with serious mental illnesses, who are an imminent danger to themselves or others, need institutionalization until they can be stabilized---just like adults with the same conditions.
Also Truth: The facility to stabilize dangerously mentally ill teens needs to be a conventional, medical model, mental hospital. Serious mental illnesses are presently incurable, are lifelong, and cannot be sufficiently controlled by alternative treatments if the patient is dangerous.
Beyond that, community based care simply has the best statistical chance of preventing that downward spiral.
The Programs are inappropriate and ineffective for teens who are dangerously mentally ill.
The Programs cannot cure major mental illnesses--there is no cure. Neither can they help. An individualized combination of medications, strictly voluntary therapies like CBT, and some neuroprotective dietary supplements, are the only known effective treatments. Placing a patient with a major mental illness under high stress, like all of the Programs do, is harmful and terribly dangerous.
The Programs are inappropriate for teens with drug problems
As I said above, the treatment with the statistically best chance of preventing that downward sprial is community based care.
The Programs are inappropriate for criminally misbehaving teens
Programs are harsher than teen prisons. Juvenile hall inspects your letters, but doesn't stop them and doesn't tell you who you can and can't write to.
Everyone accused of a crime deserves a fair trial, and, if convicted, a fair sentence. Programs circumvent that fair trial, dramatically increasing the odds that the teen incarcerated in them will actually be innocent of what he's accused of, and dramatically increasing the odds that even if he is guilty, the punishment is far too harsh for the crime.
The Programs are certainly inappropriate for teens who are not seriously mentally ill, are not drug addicted, and are not criminally delinquent
Why the hell would any decent, sane, human being put a basically normal pain in the butt teen in a private jail?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The bottom line is that the Program is a cure in search of a problem.
Julie
-
Programmies, be on notice. We're going to outlaw the Program--the whole kit and kaboodle.
Let us know how that works out for you, Julie.
You'll know it when you see it.
None of this is about me. It's about right and wrong. It's about decent, humane treatment for children versus people who see them as possessions---modelling clay they can do whatever they want with.
It's not about me, but I'm an experienced activist. The other activists in the Program successfully persuaded me that this was a necessary fight. They will persuade others, and I will persuade others, too. A small pebble starts an avalanche.
All we activists persuade regular folks who vote, but don't otherwise get much involved. That's necessary.
The real grassroots gains, though, come when we persuade other activists, and persuade them that the issue is important enough to merit a big chunk of the time they devote to politicking.
I'm a pebble in the avalanche, I'm a cog in the growing grassroots machine. I'm a particularly useful cog because I've done grassroots effectively on other issues, but still just one more cog.
Two kinds of people get into politics. Some get in to be somebody, some get in to do something.
I'm the latter. I really loathe the spotlight--not my thing at all. Too much stress, too tiring.
I won't get the Program outlawed, but we will.
"We" being the folks with a conscience.
When it works out for us, you'll be the first to know.
Julie
-
Programs are harsher than teen prisons.
Many parents don't realize this fact, or the fact that most juvenile detention facilities make some effort to rehabilitate the offenders and all such facilities are monitored and regulated by the state.
The sad reality is that many kids who get sent to programs would be much less harmed if they were sent to "juvie" instead. Unfortunately, kids have to be arrested & convicted of crimes to get sent there. The unsuspecting teen who is doing drugs, 'acting out' or whatever has no idea that the escorts are coming and that the best thing he could do for himself is go out and steal a car so he can get sent to a better prison than the one mom & dad chose for him.
Why the hell would any decent, sane, human being put a basically normal pain in the butt teen in a private jail?
Julie
Ignorance, fear & desperation. But you forget that not all parents are decent, sane human beings. Some of them are incredibly fucked up themselves, and some of them are already abusing their kids and maybe just want to let someone else do it for them for a change.
How many teen girls do you think are in programs right now who were sexually abused by a parent, step-parent or a parent's S.O.? Who do you suppose got them sent them to the program? The abuser, of course. How many of those young victims are today being treated like whores and sluts in a group session? Yes, it's all so very therapeutic...
-
Damn, big slip of the tongue---the other activists in the Program issue, not in the Program.
There isn't a good emoticon for a rueful laugh.
Proofreading is a good thing--when it's remembered.
Yeah, a Freudian slip in a way. Knowing the Programs exist, I can't walk away from the damage to all those kids, knowing it's going on. Not and still be myself. So in that sense, I've been pulled into the world that contains the Programs. I guess I resent that necessity more than I noticed before now.
Can't just walk away from all that hurt.
Julie
-
Programs are harsher than teen prisons.
Many parents don't realize this fact, or the fact that most juvenile detention facilities make some effort to rehabilitate the offenders and all such facilities are monitored and regulated by the state.
The sad reality is that many kids who get sent to programs would be much less harmed if they were sent to "juvie" instead. Unfortunately, kids have to be arrested & convicted of crimes to get sent there. The unsuspecting teen who is doing drugs, 'acting out' or whatever has no idea that the escorts are coming and that the best thing he could do for himself is go out and steal a car so he can get sent to a better prison than the one mom & dad chose for him.
Why the hell would any decent, sane, human being put a basically normal pain in the butt teen in a private jail?
Julie
Ignorance, fear & desperation. But you forget that not all parents are decent, sane human beings. Some of them are incredibly fucked up themselves, and some of them are already abusing their kids and maybe just want to let someone else do it for them for a change.
How many teen girls do you think are in programs right now who were sexually abused by a parent, step-parent or a parent's S.O.? Who do you suppose got them sent them to the program? The abuser, of course. How many of those young victims are today being treated like whores and sluts in a group session? Yes, it's all so very therapeutic...
Yeah, that's what I meant. A lot of the parents who send normal teens to programs aren't sane, and the rest aren't decent.
Julie
-
It's all about you, Julie. It always is.
-
I dont fucking understand people like you, Julie. Your talking about working to preserve the rights of these kids in treatment.
The right to do what, exactly? Not be treated like a "whore" or a "slut" in treatment? To not be held against their will? To not have their "individuality" controlled?
Let me tell you something, and all of this is from PERSONAL experience. I treated myself FAR worse than ANY treatment center, therapist, or couselor EVER did. And I did go to schools lists on you alls little abusive watch list. I did things and thought things about myself that I wouldn't wish on y worst fucking enemy. So tell me. Your trying to give kids back their "rights" when all they would do with that freedom is hurt themselves worse.
And I'm not fucking talking about the kids whose parents dont want to put in the effort to really raise a kid and would rather either stick them on some magic pill or send them away... I'm not referring to kids with "academic issues" or "Oppositional Defiant Disorder" or any of those other bullshit excuses that are thrown around WAY too often. And I'll absolutely agree with anyone on here that intitutionalizing a kid for being a pain in the ass is NOT a real solution.
I AM drawing that line between those kind of kids, and the kind of kids like I was.
The problem is, is that your NOT. You are assuming that all kids who end up in these places are just those annoying little kids who need some parents who know how to take responsibility and accountability for their own kids, or need some real "therapy" (whatever you consider that to be.)
You need to carefully consider where it is that you stand when it comes to those kids with REAL problems who ARE putting themselves in very real danger.
Where do YOU draw the line, and what do you think should be done with those kids with real issues, if treatment isn't an acceptable solution?
-
lacey, i think you got julie all wrong. she's a strong advocate for appropriate placement into appropriate facilities.
she, like you (and me!), believes that "TBS's" and "EG" facilities are complete BS and shouldn't even exist. on the other hand, she does believe in hospitalization IF the threshhold criteria are met.
i think you two got your wires crossed....
-
And I think Lacey's just another troll. Hard to tell.
Here, let's offer a thought experiment. My fourteen-year-old daughter is exhibiting truly uncontrollable suicidal behiavior. Do I send her to:
1. A psychiatric hospital thoroughly regulated by the state, with plenty of oversight and strict adherence to protocol.
2. Peninsula Village or somesuch.
Yeah, that's what I thought too.
-
I dont fucking understand people like you, Julie. Your talking about working to preserve the rights of these kids in treatment.
The right to do what, exactly? Not be treated like a "whore" or a "slut" in treatment? To not be held against their will? To not have their "individuality" controlled?
Let me tell you something, and all of this is from PERSONAL experience. I treated myself FAR worse than ANY treatment center, therapist, or couselor EVER did. And I did go to schools lists on you alls little abusive watch list. I did things and thought things about myself that I wouldn't wish on y worst fucking enemy. So tell me. Your trying to give kids back their "rights" when all they would do with that freedom is hurt themselves worse.
And I'm not fucking talking about the kids whose parents dont want to put in the effort to really raise a kid and would rather either stick them on some magic pill or send them away... I'm not referring to kids with "academic issues" or "Oppositional Defiant Disorder" or any of those other bullshit excuses that are thrown around WAY too often. And I'll absolutely agree with anyone on here that intitutionalizing a kid for being a pain in the ass is NOT a real solution.
I AM drawing that line between those kind of kids, and the kind of kids like I was.
The problem is, is that your NOT. You are assuming that all kids who end up in these places are just those annoying little kids who need some parents who know how to take responsibility and accountability for their own kids, or need some real "therapy" (whatever you consider that to be.)
I want you to carefully consider where it is that you stand when it comes to those kids with REAL problems who ARE putting themselves in very real danger.
Where do YOU draw the line, and what do you think should be done with those kids with real issues, if treatment isn't an acceptable solution?
Why not read your statement there a second time...
"what do you do if treatment isnt a solution".
You're advocating brainwashing and torturing them into submission?
-
Hmm, trying to think of that perfectly self-disrespecting, delinquent, headed for certain death kid, in my experiences.
Ok, now that I have that picture in my head, yeah you know what they probably would lie, manipulate, do whatever they had to do to gain their freedom, and then fuck up some more. And frankly, maybe getting abused and tortured finally would have put them down to size. I call it the "born-again experience".
You tear someone down the point that they have nothing, and then you give them something to fill their soul. It's the psychological process that occurs in AA, in the born-again Christian experience, and in Scientology. It is the process of cults. And in some cases it's damn effective, frankly it can save someone's life.
Call me cruel, but I think I'd rather see someone die or be thrown in jail than be changed like that. Because that person has to cling to their religion, their identity, their program, they have to believe that it will bring salvation to others. It's the only way they can maintain the illusion of their new identity, their new cause.
And the only people it truly has a postive impact on are the sociopaths; the manipulators, the liars, and the theives. But these programs don't cure their sociopathy, they just redirect it. Instead of acting sociopathic for the self, they become sociopathic for the cause, anything beomes justified to support the cause, even torture.
But wait, what about those kids who are the extreme BPD types. How does the last two paragraphs apply to them. Not much. But then I guess my question would be "what exactly is helping them?", "how did you change your way of thinking", "what did make you change your behavior". If the treatment program (whatever it might be) really helped, then those are questions that should easily be answered. So to you Lacey, a question, the New Haven RTC, what about it was actually helpful?
-
As for the "rights" question posed by Lacey. How's about this for a start:
The right to due process - let them make their case before depriving them of liberty, even if such deprivation is in their best interest.
The right to communicate with advocates
The right to communicate with their parents
The right to be free from torture and abuse
The right to be free from undue physical pain
The right to have their case heard periodically - just because in March it's determined that they're A Danger to Themselves or Others (ADTTOO), doesn't mean that in June they shouldn't have an opportunity to show that they are no longer ADTTOO.
The right to treatment - if they're in a "treatment center", then the goal should be treatment, not detention
The right to a sound education - an education that's consistent to what they would be receiving if they were in their home school district.
I'm sure there are a few I've left out here.
Once you can ensure those rights or at the very least make a noble effort (I realize it's hard finding good teachers these days), then we can talk about the relative merits of one facility to another. But failing these criteria, or reasonable facsimile thereof, the program should be on the list (finally getting back to the point of this thread). And please don't tell me how any of these rights are inconsistent with effective treatment (maybe inconsistent with longer treatment durations) I'm not buying it.
-
Lacey, these programs are not effective theraputic treatment for ANY kid- whether they are just a pain in the ass or seriously mentally ill and requiring professional help.
Even a mentally ill, schizo, homicial and suicidal child has rights! Real basic stuff, like the right to not be abused, the right to be fed properly and to maintain uncensored contact with their parents and whoever, and the right to have an advocate.
-
I never said kids shouldnt have those rights. All I'm saying, plain and simple is that not all that bad shit goes on at every treatment center. And the people who have generalized thinking about all schools and think they are ALL wrong are taking away a decent option for parents.
Like ok. Hidden Lake, once again. Totally fits into what all of you are saying. I was there WAYYY to long (23 months)... They exploited everything they could to make that stay as long as possible for their own financial gain... They were completely devoid of any real therapy or conducive environments for any real change to occur. I completely agree. That place should be fucking blinked out of existence. I will never argue with anyone on that.
But what about the 2 places I went before HLA? Walkabout and New Haven? New Haven was 9 months long, and nothing like anything at HLA. Yes, of course there are aspects I would change about any program, because no one is going to get it exactly right. I dont think that they should have restricted my communication with my parents and family. I don't think that the "safety room" (a room with one plexiglass wall that night staff could see into at all times) should have existed. But that place was not a BAD environment. And I did get a bit of a perspective there. There was a staff of caring individuals, I was never restrained for undue cause (the one time I was was when I was sitting there with a knife cutting myself), once you proved they could trust you, you were allowed to venture arond on campus by yourself to have alone time or go play with the various animals (cats, dogs, horses...) that we had, and I did feel like staff cared there. Now if I'd gone right home after that, then I would have said that my experience in treatment wasnt really THAT bad.
However, thats not the way it happened. I went to HLA, and so here I am, sitting on the fence. I don't think all TBS's or RTC's should be shut down simply because of their classification or purpose, but I've also BEEN to an extremely corrupt place, and seen the effects of it on kids, and so I cant sit here and say that I support them completely either.
-
So let's say this, we agree that we should have nothing but comtempt for the corrupt programs, that only exist to make their owners richer.
What about programs that do actually exist to help kids, where there is absolutely no profit motive involved?
Lacey, your last post reminds me of someone trying to defend an ex-boyfriend who beat her in his brief moments of uncontrolled rage, but bought her flowers and did a bunch of other nice things for her, partly because her next ex-boyfriend drugged and raped her repeatedly.
It sounds to me like there are a number of things about the New Haven RTC that could be fixed as you mentioned. Frankly, being restrained for trying to cut yourself (depends on the restraint, physically removing you from the cutting device is one thing, putting you in four points is another) seems a bit extreme.
There are RTC's that are simply out of control and are unsafe because the residents make it that way (Madonna Heights and Lake Grove come to mind here on LI). There are RTC's that are unsafe because the staff make it that way (any number of the TBS's mentioned here). So New Haven was safe in that sense, that much I buy.
But equally, the feeling I get is that New Haven as an institution, didn't view you as a fully human being. Maybe you'll say at that point in your life you didn't deserve that honor. I disagree.
I was speaking to a friend of mine who had been placed everywhere in the Long Island area, including being sent away to Kidspeace. And let's just say that she was misdiagnosed.
For the first six years of her treatment she was labeled a "bad kid", and was sent to places that viewed their residents as "bad kids", then she was correctly diagnosed, and all of a sudden the state started sending her to warm and caring environments. She was all of a sudden a "good kid" with a mental illness.
I realize there are some kids who really are just that bad, but I haven't met many. After briefly being a teacher, I can say that even I did my own little mental arithmetic, you label kids without even realizing it. But it is just this attitude that "these kids are bad", that sets the foundation for all the abuses that occur in all of these facilities, including New Haven.
Theoretically if you could separate the bad apples from the good ones, and create two treatment modules for each group that would great. But let's face it, most facilities have a one size fits all model, and most psychologists aren't that smart or clairvoyant to separate the two out. I would rather take my chances with being lied to and manipulated by the few bad ones, and properly treat the majority who are at their core truly good.
-
Go back and read what I wrote. The Programs are for no one.
The following is a list of serious teen problems along with the appropriate placements:
Seriously mentally ill children--imminent danger of violence towards self and others
Appropriate placement is in a traditional mental hospital, or, if it takes longer to stabilize them, in a medical model RTC.
Drug addicted children
Appropriate placement is community based care.
Community based care has the best statistical chance of getting them well--that's based on federal government reviews of results.
Delinquent children
Appropriate placement is state juvenile facilities.
The state must give the kid due process before locking them up. The state is forbidden from using cruel and unusual punishments. The child has the right, in state facilities, to send and receive mail from whomever they want--although mail may be read by warden or his staff. The child has the right to contact advocates and try to get a guardian ad litem appointed to protect his interests if he feels his parents are not. The child has the right to have said guardian sue in federal court, if necessary, to stop cruel and unusual punishments. There are limits on sentences to fit whatever the child was convicted of.
Combination children
Appropriate placement is a combination of above.
Most imminently dangerous problem handled first. In the case of criminality, the child has a right to mental health care in juvenile facilities and availability of illicit drugs is as limited, if not more, than at Programs. In the case of combination drug addiction and mental illness, one gets the kid non-suicidal and non-homicidal first and then proceeds to community based care.
Children left who need a residential placement
None.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is why I say the Program is for no one. But I'm repeating myself, and you didn't read it when I laid this all out in the first place. You just proceeded to jump to conclusions and jump my shit. Which is your privilege, but because it's a waste of my time to further respond if that's what you choose to do, this is the only reply I will make to you.
Julie
-
Julie, maybe you should wait and see if you would put your own kid in a state run juvenile facility or detention center. See how the rest of the kid's life works out after that. The residential therapeutic schools are a good choice for kids like Lacey who were doing their best to self-destruct but didn't need to be around hardened criminals.
You have such tunnel vision that you just don't get it. There ARE many instances where a good residential program is appropriate and where the kid will be given a chance to mature and work on some issues outside the home. It's really pathetic how judgemental and absolutely wrong you manage to be. This isn't science fiction- it is real parents who care deeply about real kids. I have a friend who went to prison for a white collar crime. He said to do anything possible to keep your kid out of the system. He saw young people in for drugs just lose their complete desire for any kind of life while they were in jail.
-
A recap for people new to Fornits who are reading this:
I have bipolar disorder, and my child has pediatric bipolar disorder. That's one of the two most serious mental illnesses there are.
I know whereof I speak, both from continuing under a doctor's care and staying on top of my medications and my condition, and from having my child fall seriously ill with this life-threatening illness, recognizing it, and getting her appropriate care, continuing under her doctor's care, and staying on top of her medications and her condition.
The only constant in bipolar disorder is change.
She could take a turn for the worse and need hospitalization in a regular hospital, or a medical model RTC, at any time.
So could I.
The criteria for needing inpatient or residential care are the same for both of us.
I also have experience with close family members with bipolar disorder who will not take their meds. How you deal with it is you continue to try to persuade them, soft pedalling it enough not to do more harm than good, and you watch them in case they become an imminent danger to themselves or others. Otherwise, you let them alone and hope they come to realize their quality of life will be much better if they see their doc and take their meds.
The reason I have all this experience with bipolar disorder is that it's highly genetic, and people from bipolar families tend to marry people from bipolar families. This is some unintentional quirk of life. When my husband and I met and fell in love we did not know we were both from bipolar families. We found out later. But us both being from bipolar families means that we see a lot of it, both when it's treated appropriately, when treatment is resisted, and when the best available treatment isn't enough to keep a specific patient stable.
This situation--bipolar disorder running through our whole extended family--is why all of us are so intimately concerned with safe, effective, humane, and dignified treatment for people with serious mental illnesses.
Julie
-
Juvie vs. RTC: From someone who avoided both, but not by much.
What got me into the system was I tried to "blow up" my school using pressurized methane (from sci-lab gas jets) and trash fires. That and some other arson. I was the kid who might have tortured animals if I had one.
I also had Persistent Developmental Disoder (PDD) or what I call Mild Asperger's. I was angry, isolated, and in my own little world. I wasn't able to even comprehend how the actions that I was taken could effect others (inability to empathize, both consistent with Asperger's and anti-soical personality disorder), guess what, one of these is a "good-kid" disorder, the other a "bad-kid" disorder.
Now, I committed a pretty serious crime, so I don't sit here and say I had my rights violated. If I had been placed in a JDC, I suppose that would have been just as appropriate. However, such placement could have very well destroyed my life.
Instead, I was placed in a psych ward for psychiatric evaluation (no prior history of criminal behavior helped) and then transfered to a psychiatric hospital, but in reality it was a state-run RTF.
I was misdiagnosed with A-SPD or the childhood eqivalent, and was viewed as a "bad kid" for the next few months. I would have been sent to Kidspeace but for the fact that halfway through my treatment, I was placed with a new treatment team, who correctly diagnosed my condition.
Placement in either juvenile detention or an RTC wouldn't have helped. Frankly the only thing that did help was the fact that I was away from home for so long, that I was able to realize how serious what I had done, and I committed myself to not getting in trouble again. Being on an anti-depressant, and not dealing with the pressure of having to be perfect probably helped some too.
My point is it's not so much what we call the facility, it's what happens inside the facility. Depending on the conditions a JDC lockup can be just as bad or worse than a for-profit TBS. Honestly, when you're 14, all of these places are prisons, but some are worse than others.
-
I have a friend who went to prison for a white collar crime. He said to do anything possible to keep your kid out of the system. He saw young people in for drugs just lose their complete desire for any kind of life while they were in jail.
Prisons do not have a very high success rate at rehabiliation. Recidivism among those who serve their time and return to society is quite high. Those who do manage to avoid returning to prison often find their biggest motivation to stay straight is "fear of getting sent back to prison," not any sort of therapy, rehab or personal insight they learned while in prison.
The above statements also apply to RTC/TBS behavior mod programs for juveniles. Just substitute "RTC/TBS" for "prison" in the above paragraph.
The juvenile justice system in many states is quite different from the adult system. The primary motivation of the juvenile court and its officers is to rehabilitate juvenile delinquents before they become adult offenders. For most offenses, the juvenile's record can be expunged once he or she turns 18 if he or she has fulfilled the terms of the court's adjudication. The "therapy" may or may not be the best, but some kids are in fact rehabilitated. Again, the same statements apply to RTC/TBS. The biggest difference is that the juvenile court-mandated facilities have government oversight, regulation and accountability. Private RTC/TBS have none, so the potential for abuse or "therapy" that does more harm than good is much higher in the private facilities.
There are states, like Florida, where the juvenile justice system has contracted out some of its adjudication to private companies -- the same types of companies that run abusive for-profit programs. Those are the states in which the juvenile justice system should be avoided.
-
So let's say this, we agree that we should have nothing but comtempt for the corrupt programs, that only exist to make their owners richer.
What about programs that do actually exist to help kids, where there is absolutely no profit motive involved?
Lacey, your last post reminds me of someone trying to defend an ex-boyfriend who beat her in his brief moments of uncontrolled rage, but bought her flowers and did a bunch of other nice things for her, partly because her next ex-boyfriend drugged and raped her repeatedly.
It sounds to me like there are a number of things about the New Haven RTC that could be fixed as you mentioned. Frankly, being restrained for trying to cut yourself (depends on the restraint, physically removing you from the cutting device is one thing, putting you in four points is another) seems a bit extreme.
There are RTC's that are simply out of control and are unsafe because the residents make it that way (Madonna Heights and Lake Grove come to mind here on LI). There are RTC's that are unsafe because the staff make it that way (any number of the TBS's mentioned here). So New Haven was safe in that sense, that much I buy.
But equally, the feeling I get is that New Haven as an institution, didn't view you as a fully human being. Maybe you'll say at that point in your life you didn't deserve that honor. I disagree.
I was speaking to a friend of mine who had been placed everywhere in the Long Island area, including being sent away to Kidspeace. And let's just say that she was misdiagnosed.
For the first six years of her treatment she was labeled a "bad kid", and was sent to places that viewed their residents as "bad kids", then she was correctly diagnosed, and all of a sudden the state started sending her to warm and caring environments. She was all of a sudden a "good kid" with a mental illness.
I realize there are some kids who really are just that bad, but I haven't met many. After briefly being a teacher, I can say that even I did my own little mental arithmetic, you label kids without even realizing it. But it is just this attitude that "these kids are bad", that sets the foundation for all the abuses that occur in all of these facilities, including New Haven.
Theoretically if you could separate the bad apples from the good ones, and create two treatment modules for each group that would great. But let's face it, most facilities have a one size fits all model, and most psychologists aren't that smart or clairvoyant to separate the two out. I would rather take my chances with being lied to and manipulated by the few bad ones, and properly treat the majority who are at their core truly good.
Ok, first off, I have never been in four point restraint. The only place that I was ever at that even had that as an option was the STATE RUN PSYCH WARDS I WENT TO BEFORE TREATMENT.
In all of the longer term treatment centers I went to, that method of restraint wasnt even a part of the program. It was the, like, bucket style holds, and it was just to get the object away from me until they knew I wasnt going to hurt myself.
And I don't know. I guess I do agree with you in the sense that there should be two options, but that the means to determine who needs what still needs to be perfected.
-
You never went to an actual program at all; you're just lying about it and have gone through the trouble of making an artificial personality for it. I'm guessing you're TheWho.
Insert new coin.
-
I can understand your suspicions, but I think you're wrong on this one. I think she's just a tad still washed, that's all.
-
Fair enough, that's why I asked. I hope we can all agree that what you described is one of the few examples of an appropriate use of restraint.
On a side note, I hear a lot of the same things you describe about New Haven attributed to Kidspeace. Caring staff, safe place, saved them from themselves. They've also had deaths due to restraints (albeit in the Pioneer Center, which is a lockup for male sex offenders) and rapes of residents.
If I had a strategy for dealing with Kidspeace, I wouldn't shut it down, becuase god knows these kids would just end up in JDC's and TBS's, but there clearly needs to be some serious reform in the way staff are screened and trained, and what behavioral mod systems are in place.
Here's a crazy thought, if you just have to use a level system, wouldn't make more sense to have everyone at the highest level to begin with, and then demote them accordingly. Isn't that the way it works in the real world? (sorry, off topic)
-
You never went to an actual program at all; you're just lying about it and have gone through the trouble of making an artificial personality for it. I'm guessing you're TheWho.
Insert new coin.
Why would I waste my time doing that? Ive been posting on the HLA thread since 2004 when I graduated. Ask Ginger or whoever about the IP address. They do that shit all the time on HLA thread.
But whatever I dont need to prove anything to you all here. All I was doing was presenting my perspective and having a friendly conversation about it. If you cant handle a different perspective than your own, and need to spring up some idea about me lying, then fine. But I am who I say I am, Sherlock. Try again.
-
Here's a crazy thought, if you just have to use a level system, wouldn't make more sense to have everyone at the highest level to begin with, and then demote them accordingly. Isn't that the way it works in the real world? (sorry, off topic)
I don't think it's off topic. Points and/or levels are part of the behavior modification principles employed by most of these programs. The other part is the rewards and punishments (or "consequences" if you prefer) that go with the points & levels. If you study behavior modification techniques, you will understand why they don't start anyone at the highest level rather than the lowest level.
The thing that really distinguishes what parents and EdCons refer to as a "soft" or "good" program vs. a "bad" one is really just the specifics of the rewards & punishments, not the use of behavior mod techniques on the kids. That is the whole fallacy of the sales pitch behind these programs -- parents are being sold a behavior mod program under the guise of "therapy." I would argue that if one's goal is simply to modify a child's behavior, then the "soft" programs are less effective than the harsher ones like those run by a certain company whose acronym reminds us of a certain stinging insect. But remember that coercing a behavioral change is not the same thing as addressing psychological problems or dealing with their causes. In fact, behavior mod often has the opposite effect, even though outwardly the person's behavior is "better."
To any parent that is considering a BM program for their child, I highly recommend first learning about this subject and it's founder, a controversial Harvard grad named B.F. Skinner. After he finished his experiments with modifying animal behavior by using rewards like food and punishments like electric shocks, he began testing with human subjects. The first human subject was his own daughter.
In the decades since Skinner, his techniques have been improved upon and adapted for use by oppressive governments (especially N. Korea and China), cult leaders, POW commanders and more recently the "Troubled Teen" industry. In colloquial terms, BM is often called "brainwashing." In the hands of a skilled practitioner who has absolute control over another human being, it can be used to make the subject say or do absolutely anything they are physically capable of doing, including things that completely violate the subject's own morals.
When BM techniques are used on another person for a long period of time, they can indeed produce long-lasting behavioral change, even after the subject is removed from the rewards/punishments BM system. This occurs because of what psychologists call cognitive dissonance -- an inherent stress each of us feels when our behavior is inconsistent with our attitudes & beliefs. If you can coerce the behavior change and repetitively reinforce it over a long period of time, eventually the attitudes & beliefs will follow. If for example, rewards & punishments are used to coerce me into eating a food I dislike -- on a regular basis for a long period of time -- my subconcious mind recognizes that I eat this stuff all the time (that is my behavior), therefore it must be true that I enjoy it (attitudes & beliefs).
If you want your child to be broken down and built back up into a different person, BM can do that. If your child has real psychological problems (depression, etc.), BM will not change that -- you just end up with a different person who still has those underlying problems.
To a parent who has read all this and says "yes, that's what I want -- a different child" then I would seriously question your ethics.
-
To a parent who has read all this and says "yes, that's what I want -- a different child" then I would seriously question your ethics.
Wise words,guest. Parents should keep in mind what the U.S. Senate concluded about BM in a bi-partisan study of the Seed program. Sen. Sam Ervins compared the BM techniques as being identical to the "highly refined" brainwashing techniques used by the North Koreans in the fifties. Mao Tse Tung implimented behavior modification in his re-education camps. The Communist methods were identical to the techniques used in teen camps: peer pressure, breaking down of the individual, constant mental and physical stress, high carb, low protein diets. Parents' main responsibility should be ensuring the health and happiness of their child, and behavior modification programs are the antithesis of that. I beg any parent seeking treatment for a troubled child to look beyond an RTC's website propaganda and thoroughly search the internet for info. There are some wonderful, caring facilities out there, like Sheppard Pratt in Maryland. With all the benefits of community-based treatment coming to light, we need to promote the idea of keeping troubled kids in a familiar environment and saving them from the trauma of being removed from their homes by strangers, cut off from family and friends and very possibly suffering horrific abuse, or even death. As the parent of a child in an abusive facility, I can't stand the thought of another child experiencing what my girl is going through. We've been working constantly to get our girl out of a place that is doing so much harm. When we get her out of PV, I won't stop. I want PV shut down, then I'll offer help to anyone or any group taking on this vile industry. I was told by an advocate that I've been "bit", meaning I've been "radicalized". I've never been involved in any causes, but what is going on in these facilities is morally reprehensible and repulsive. I cannot in good conscience allow it to go on. If someone as apolitical as I am can align himself with a grassroots movement like this, it's because I've never seen injustice on such a level. These kids have absolutely no rights and no protection, and every time I read about a sweet child like Angellika Arndt dying, or go to ISAC and see that four kids have died in two months, I'm filled with a maelstrom of emotions. Sadness, anguish, anger, and fear, too, because my own sweet girl is in one of the most abusive programs I know of on U.S. soil
If you love your kids, work with them and work by their sides, don't ship them off to strangers for "tough love". As Aaron Bacon's mom said after her son died tragically in a program, "It wasn't tough love, it was only tough".
-
Juvie sucks---but at least a kid can't get sent there without due process of law.
Juvie sucks--but at least a kid who gets sent there can write to and get letters from anybody he wants, and so isn't cut off from the outside world to the same extent as in a BMF.
Juvie sucks--but at least a kid who gets sent there has the right to have the sentence be proportional to whatever offense he was convicted of.
Juvie sucks--but at least a kid in juvie can cry to a lawyer or advocate if he's being made to suffer cruel and unusual punishment.
Juvie sucks--but at least the warden and guards aren't going to screw around with visiting hours just because the inmate isn't one hundred percent compliant.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If my child was brought up before a family court on charges, I'd hire her the best lawyer we could find. If she needed to be in a mental hospital, I'd have my lawyer try to make that case to family court.
If she got convicted and the judge gave us the option of him sentencing her to juvie locally or putting her in a BMF somewhere, my husband and I would let her go to juvie.
We would also visit as often as possible, call, write, and make arrangements for picking up with her education at wherever she happened to be when she got out.
Which is pretty much the same thing I would do if my husband was brought up on charges, or he would do if I was brought up on charges.
The whole key here is if you don't commit a crime, you're one hell of a lot less likely to be brought up on charges for one.
If someone in your family does commit crimes, then you have your lawyer get them the best deal he can, and you let the justice system run its course.
Sure, Programmies will think I'm "So Wrong"---but the large majority of society agrees with me that juvie is the best way we've got to deal with kids who do something serious enough to be incarcerated. If the large majority of society didn't agree with me about that, we wouldn't have juvie at all, now, would we?
Juvie sucks, but BMFs suck worse than juvie.
Julie
-
Juvenile detention was where my girl's biological father threatened to send her after she "ran away". (She text-messaged my phone every half-hour or so to say 'I'm safe, don't worry' as she drove toward her recently ex boyfriend's college.) She reacted to her dad's threat by attempting suicide. (being the good girl she is, she walked downstairs and told us she'd ingested 10 Lunestas)
We took her straight to the hospital, scared shitless, and I had to help her walk since she was rubber-legged and very, very wasted. There wasn't any time to think about what had suddenly made her suicidal. She and her ex had made peace, so I discounted that notion. While she was in the ER alternating between near-sleep and loud sobs, she told me her father threatened her with juvie...reform school... and she decided she would "rather die than go there,"
She also wrote three suicide notes(perfectionist), expressing her love for her mom and I, her friends, even the dog and the cat. Her biological father was conspicuously absent, which is sad, but it reminds me of TSW's story about a program kid wishing his father would die during his open heart surgery. How much abuse does it take until a kid says "I disown you, and I would be free if you were dead,"
Anyway, her father didn't throw our girl into juvie, he threw her into PV, a thousand times worse. The suicide attempt he was responsible for gave him an opportunity to steal custody. He'll never accept that he's responsible either. I'm ashamed to say it, but I wish he were dead, too.
-
The residential therapeutic schools are a good choice for kids like Lacey who were doing their best to self-destruct but didn't need to be around hardened criminals.
No, they're not. Do you have any research to back that claim up?
There ARE many instances where a good residential program is appropriate and where the kid will be given a chance to mature and work on some issues outside the home.
Name one.
It's really pathetic how judgemental and absolutely wrong you manage to be. This isn't science fiction- it is real parents who care deeply about real kids. I have a friend who went to prison for a white collar crime. He said to do anything possible to keep your kid out of the system. He saw young people in for drugs just lose their complete desire for any kind of life while they were in jail.
I have a couple of friends that have been in both. They all say that they would much rather be in jail/juvie than any RTC or TBS.
-
Yea, at least in juvie you know when you are getting out. They can't keep kids there to milk their parents for every dime they have.
Even adult prison is better than being imprisoned in one of these for profit programs because they know how long their sentence is. They are allowed to use the phone to talk to their lawyer or advocates. These programs hold kids until the folks money supply goes dry. Rich kids are really in trouble if they get sent to one of these teen gulags.