Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: blombro on July 31, 2007, 09:19:41 AM
-
Abuse is never justified, and my statements yesterday were abusive and cruel to those of you who have suffered real abuse, and suffered from the same quality of lumping everyone in the same category that I have accused others of.
I will no longer be posting here. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and I need to stop before I go any deeper. I hope those of you who I have hurt can forgive me for being an ass.
-
Mr. Blombro,
If your apology is for referring to me, and other Fornit posters as being CULT MEMBERS, ---then since I requested an apology; I accept your apology, and thank you for apolgizing.
Joyce Harris
-
You sure do seem to stick your foot in your mouth a lot.
-
(http://http://img3.pimp-my-profile.com/i56/9/7/30/bn_21b3a6052c.png)
-
Should have just let him continue to hang himself. The apology, awesome you can accept it Joyce, but his apology won't take down the thread or what he wrote. Bummer.
-
Blombro- apology accepted if sincere. Please keep in mind that when you ask for an opinion here. You will get it. I do find it interesting that when folks get upset when criticized, they loop eveyone here on fornits into an organization. Its an open forum. I don't know about you but I didnt sign up for anything. Please note that there are parents here who have lost children in cruel, horrific ways. Until you have a child yourself you can not imagine what it must be like to lose a child. Especially through abuse. If you can put yourself in their shoes and know you were the one that sent them.. and possibly by transport... thinking you were doing the very best for them .. unknowing that you have just sent your child to a gulag. You trusted the laws you trusted in our country you could not conceive this could be legal. More than likely you were duped into thinking the people working with your children were "experts." In a fight to reform or abolish these types of programs it is unfathomable to work with people who are responsible for putting children in harms way. I think CAFETY may have the right idea to work within the industry. It is a fine line to walk. It will take diligence to make sure your organization is not compromised. Now that you do have information that confirms at least one of your board members is involved with another organization that involves refering to these types of programs .. that is coersive persuation ... abusive residential treatment programs... it is time to act. I hope that CAFETY perservers in there pursuit of this industry. However, I ask that you consider what people have to say. You may not understand but people are trying to help by suggesting there are issues within your organization. No one wants to see it fail.
Personally I have felt you were patronizing fornits posters. I think you would be amazed at how many people in this industry use fornits for information, contacts and resources. I would not be surprised if the GAO peruses this forum.
-
Since it's been a while since I've visited this board, I only recently found out about the controversy involving CAFETY, which I am also a member (not on the board) of. However, my views are not to be taken as a statement by CAFETY, as I haven't had the time to speak to anyone at this point....Yet, I think rather than boycotting an organization that has the same intent, and same core drive as anyone else trying to change this fucked up system to actually help kids (by closure or by regulation) Some basic things need to be clear.
The only thing I'd like to say in regards to this is that, as mentioned, there is a fine line to walk in the path we are going. However, checking that fine line is the only way to actually make any of the changes necessary. As much as nearly all of us (if not all) see the closure of all RTC's as preferable, there is a reality that must be faced. As a survivor of a program, I still understand this reality.....there IS still a base problem that drives most parents to these places. While we can put a lot of blame on the programs for being con artists, parents for being lazy parents, or whatever else, in at least MOST of the cases, the kids did something to get there....I know I did at least. Now, do I agree with the treatment I got? Not at all. I would love to see the people that ran FFS put in jail. Yet, on a basic level, the public, and the politicians needed to make ANY change, whether it be closure or regulation, need to be reached on a middle level. Now, CAFETY can simply cut ties with this organization or that organization, and sooner or later, it would be a job of checking each and every individual survivor to make sure they don't still communicate with any staff at a program. Sorry, but not many people can say that that's a feasible option.
Since working with CAFETY, I've have numerous emails thanking us, Fornits, and other sites for the info they received on where not to send their kids, and even to pull kids out of a program. But, in those same emails, in many cases the parents (and a few of the kids that emailed) are still in a position where some sort of serious change must happen. As much as home treatment would be preferable, the reality is there is no proven solution....on either side.
At some point, arguing from one group to another will only cancel out the effects of each in the long run. Realistically, there is a necessity for a middle ground if anything is going to be accomplished initially. At that point, policy can be changed to fight what is needed then. As fucked as it is, that is how our government works.....first we abolished slavery then decades later got rid of segregation......and it's not like that even cured the racism epidemic.....it takes multiple steps. It's unfortunate, and it's more bullshit than many of us would like to deal with....but it's the reality of the system we live in.
-
Djjon5ny, what you say is valid. On-the-other-hand: once a problem has been identified, and documented; the MIDDLE GROUND no longer exits. The problem is what it is. Then CAFERTY or anyone else needs to take a stand on that particular problem.
That's the issue; not taking some middle-ground while trying to "weed out, and identify problems."
Isabelle Zehnder has admitted that she refers children to Sue Scheff/PURE for placement in programs. The WWASP vs PURE transcripts prove that Scheff continued to refer children to WWASP programs after she started PURE.
Scheff and Zehnder have written the Whitmore Blogs which support the defunct Whitmore Academy and both suppport the prior owners, the Sudweekds, who have been convicted of crimes in 3 countries, Canada, Mexico and the US. These blogs are filled with lies, and they bash parents and their children.
A Cafferty board member, Alex has posted on fornits that he and his organization NYRA--he is the Executive Director of NYRA -- supports Isabelle Zehnder. That's no middle ground. That is support of Zehnder, CAICA.
Copious documentation is available on Fornits, ISAC and CAFETY for you to read.
Blombro has already insulted posters who state their views of Zero Tolerance for referring any child to any program.
Alex has posted his political views.
Zero Tolerance stands, IMO
-
So you are ok with the NYRA linking to CAICA?
-
While we can put a lot of blame on the programs for being con artists, parents for being lazy parents, or whatever else, in at least MOST of the cases, the kids did something to get there....I know I did at least.
What counts as "doing something to get there"? Smoking pot a couple of times with your friends (like a 12 year old girl I was in treatment with)? Buying a pair of pleather pants (13 year old Lulu Corter's crime before spending 13 years at Kids)? Wanting to spend some time with your friends (a girl's story from Hepzibah House)?
I would argue that in MOST cases, the children being incarcerated are just acting as teenagers should. Experimenting, challenging accepted social norms, disagreeing with parents, teachers, et al... These are healthy behaviours in adolescents. As a society we cannot grow without each successive generation challenging that which came before it and trying to do better. Complete lack of conflict is not healthy - it is stagnation.
As the good Frank Zappa said "The more boring a child is, the more the parents, when showing off the child, receive adulation for being good parents - because they have a tame child-creature in their house." We should not be trying to cultivate "tame child-creatures" but rather thinking, independant people who can try to pull us out from the stinking bog we've chosen to build our civilization on.
-
For myself, I disagreed with my mother. That was enough. The fact that I'd smoked pot about ten times and used LSD four times was secondary. I had the audacity to tell my mother she was wrong and a hypocrite. So she had me locked away. Paid for me to be "taught powerlessness" and to be "broken and built back up again" into a more pleasant to be around version of herself. My brain "needed a little washing". And I needed to stop "being in my head" so they took books and school and talking away from me.
-
I missed that part of the post. Good point Rachel.
-
[quote="djjone5ny" While we can put a lot of blame on the programs for being con artists, parents for being lazy parents, or whatever else, in at least MOST of the cases, the kids did something to get there....I know I did at least.
The only thing my daughter "did to get there" to be enrolled at Whitmore Academy was to have the misfortune of spending the first 7 years of her life in an abusive, neglectful Romania orphange; and developing Reactive Attachment Disorder.
Our family was lied to; and Whitmore Academy was misrepresented to us an an " Fully accredited Academic Boarding School which specialized in treating attachment disorder."
I can provide you with the glossy advertising brochures, if you would like to read them.
We may have been "stupid, lazy, mis-informed" parents; or anything else you choose to call us--but we certainly never signed up to have our daughter enrolled in a "FACILITY" where we removed our daughter after 7 weeks amid allegations of child abuse against the owners. Nor did we expect the owner to later cop a plea for the charges against her in the Whitmore Academy criminal case.
NO SIR, the only thing my daughter "did" was trust her parents to find her a proper school and therapy---and we failed her. You may blame me and her father; but you may not blame my daughter.
-
Clearly, your case, as well as others like that are not the ones i'm talking about. As a matter of fact, one kid I was at FFS with was sent when he was 11....had never done drugs, never drank, was basically a little eric cartman.....and being around the kids at FFS made him want to actually be the "bad" kid.....he got shot this past January as a result of trying to be tough...clearly FFS did not help him....it made matters far worse.
On the same side, while i agree that many kids are sent for "just being teenagers" there are those whose options are jail (and a criminal record), or the kids that literally can not get into schools after getting kicked out of too many....that was my case in both aspects. Now, I'm sure sooner or later my parents could have found somewhere else to send me, but at every school (as in private prep school type and public schools) I found ways to get kicked out because I was sick of being away from my friends. Legally, I was in shit for bomb scares, dealing, assault, graffiti, and as much as I hate to admit it, probably would not have stopped had I not been sent away.......BUT
I will also say the program itself still did more harm than good....nightmares led to a long long relapse in the same drugs, dealing to support myself, and still getting arrested prior to military enlisment, and after getting kicked out of the army......eventually, I looked at my life and realized that the shit was getting old and I needed to change.
When my parents ask me this same question and say that I "needed" to change....I still tell them that I think I would have ended up in the same place I am now, just years sooner if I had let it run its course when I was a teen.....but do I know that? No. It's easy to look on it in hindsight and say that things would have been different, because you've gained the wisdom about the hell you've been through and the shit that had to change.
As for cases where kids have no real reason to be sent to ANY program....this is where regulation and checks on the system are necessary. As much as it's hard to believe that there could be good programs, the hypothetical possibility is still there.....I mean, enough GOOD people that wanted to actually create such a place is entirely possible, although power is a dangerous drug.
Anyway, I'm not going to say one person's reasons are more severe than another, because the truth is, each person's story is their own and can be taken in any way. The reality still remains that to simply boycott an organization for looking for the only realistic path to making the general public question this is not helpful either.
For every parent that sends their kid to a program so that they can just take a vacation from parenting, there is another parent that truly sees their child in danger. While I hate to admit it, 3 of my high school friends that I got high with OD'd while I was at FFS......would I have made it 4? Who knows....but that type of possibiltiy is why the general public and politicians will not simply close all RTC's.
-
These CAFETY chaps aren't much on the up and up in the PR game are they?
I say boycott them for being insensitive assholes myself. That alone is enough.
-
That Alex chap basically said everyone was stupid, the Brian chap called everyone a cult member, now this chap is just saying parents are stupid lazy people, or it's the kids' fault. WTF? Why can't they just post to one another on that Caferty site?
-
I cannot believe you are all this deluded. Programs do not work. No amount of regulation will make them work.
There are two types of kids who end up in programs, those who need help and those who don't. Those who don't, we've already discussed. Those who do need help, do not need programs. They need parents who want to help them. They need comprehensive community-based support possibly including therapists, doctors and just sane healthy people to act as role models.
No one needs programs.
-
Rachel just nailed it. Can't top that and I won't try.
-
So you are ok with the NYRA linking to CAICA?
Personally, no I'm not. Just as I stated before when antiwwasp was linking to a referral service. But, just as was said at that time, I still think that in most cases a disclaimer is an option as well.....even if it turns out to need a more severe action.
Now, this isn't entirely relevant, but bear with me. When I left FFS I went to Vassar, where we created a group called PSI (Program for Substance Information), (which is now called The Source for those who want to check it out i think it's still on Vassar's organizations). The mission of this group was to give BOTH sides of the story on drug use. On the one hand, we gave the true effects of drugs that were fun, useful, or whatever positive you want to put for it.....as well as the side effects and legal issues that arise. On the other side, we also had counsellors for addiction, numbers for AA/NA, I or another usually manned the office to answer calls or dorm visits for bad trips and all to talk kids down, provided water and fruit at parties to make sure dehydration wasn't an issue....etc. In the first year I was there, the number of hospital admissions was 10% of what it was each of the 3 years before. Now, from being on campus and doing my share of illicit behaviors, I know this was not from many people staying away from drugs......and I also know quite a few people went into AA/NA realizing they had enough. While the program was started on a Federal Grant our members consisted of both hardcore drug users and dealers, as well as people in recovery and straight edge kids. People trusted us because we gave them ALL the information.
While I personally disagree with CAFETY being involved with NYRA if ties to CAICA are not dropped, I also know Kat, and Brian also, as well as any of those I've spoken to, are not saying that any of the programs we've seen are "middle road". Yet, the fact that, at the very least, exists a need for some sort of external solution (even if it has yet to come along properly).
To be taken seriously while, for many of us, still finding a way to have a job (i.e. not getting arrested for breaking kids out of schools) we may have to walk a path that is not extreme enough for some, and also may be too harsh on programs for others. If people have issues, I know I, nor the others at cafety have an issue communicating with any of these.....but at some point, there will be differences of opinion, a boycott and bashing of cafety is pointless. It's not too hard for a link to be removed, or for people to be taken off the board in whatever case is necessary. Yet, at the same time, taking away people for mere involvement with some of the works of someone who gets money from someone who takes money from said program....eventually becomes a train that serves no purpose. If there is TRULY a conflict of interest, I'm sure it will be taken care of.....as for others, I'm sure it will be discussed. I've got work in the morning, so I'm out..... email djjone5ny@hotmail.com if you have any specific questions, comments, or whatnot. Again, any response is personal....I'm not speaking on behalf of cafety.....I just see no reason to boycott an organization that has still generated much support and worked for change in the same direction as everyone else here.....even if the final destination may not be as far.
-
Same here. We got brochures showing us happy children, in a loving and fun environment, going to school, and getting therapy, all in the name of helping our child, because according to them, we obviously were not doing the right thing, where they were qualified and had a 98% satisfaction rate, and a long list of families willing to tell us how great the programs were, and yes, they were court approved, and had dealt with our situation before.
We didn't have a choice in placing our son, we were ordered to, or else, and keep him there, or else. I, for one, was not a non-participating parent. Nor did I self-impose any punishment on my child, as some people have tried to portray me as doing. I am a loving mother, who had to send her child away and keep him away. And these programs prey on people like me, and others in the same situation.
I lost my husband three years ago to drugs and alcohol, they promised this wouldn't happen to my son if he went to "their" program, I was doing the right thing by saving my childs life. Well there are no guarantees are there?
What I don't get is why courts approve this crap knowing full well, and without disclosing it to the parents, that they can also be deadly and dangerous.
When you are ordered by the court, the schools have you by the balls. If you don't comply, they threaten you with "we will kick your kid out and you're back to court, and your kids probably in juvi until he's 18 or 21, depending on the crime." Nice scare tactics for desperate parents.
You can call me a bad mom too, but I know, and so does everyone else who knows us, that I was, and still am a good mom. There isn't anything I wouldn't do for my son. Even thought about letting him leave the country and go home to family when this all took place, but I know what would have happened had I have done that.
And I would like to ask whoever it is that keeps attacking me to please stop. I have done nothing to you, you don't know my son, and therefore I don't think you have any right to make accusations about me, or comments about him. Thank you in advance.
-
Personally, no I'm not. Just as I stated before when antiwwasp was linking to a referral service. But, just as was said at that time, I still think that in most cases a disclaimer is an option as well.....even if it turns out to need a more severe action.
The only thing of interest at the moment is the link the NYRA has with CAICA.
You also might want to take some objection to two of your board members coming to a public forum and being highly insulting to survivors, parents, and others.
What is the tendency you all seem to have with making this problem bigger than it is?
The only thing I'm concerned with, and not really even that concerned, is the link the NYRA has with CAICA.
The only thing I've taken away is my absolute convicition that I've made the best decisio ever in not becoming a CAFETY member. Seems to me the entire damn board of directors needs a good hose out and Kat needs to get back to the basics with her own organization.
till then its a heap of useless monkey shit.
-
I'm not going to bother arguing....the part where I said programs were CON ARTISTS.....would clearly have fallen under such a category. I didn't blame your daughter either, or anyone elses kid....so apologies if you took it that way. When I say most....I'm speaking of personal experience at the place I was at, with the kids I was there with....most of whom I still speak to and still say they understand why they were sent, although want to burn the place to the ground.
But, like I said...apologies if you misinterpreted what I said. While I believe any parent would be outraged at such treatment as your daughter received, my main point is that in the eyes of a parent that wants nothing but to HELP their child for whatever their child needs help with (heavy drug use, legal issues, suicide, etc) and can't find a solution.....there will ALWAYS exist a motivation for find a place to help.....meaning reform of a totally fucked industry is a lot more likely than it's destruction.
As far as your question about courts, many are just as conned as parents. I know my local judge sent at least 6 kids in one year to mine. Since we got out, he's been removed and the new judge does not refer or sentence if you will, to such places.
Like I said though, while each case of parent, and each case of child, as well as each program, may be individually exclusive and a blanket stereotype is wrong, try to see through the perspective of a parent that has no solution, such as your own where you're forced to send your kid away....or he goes to jail.....if you had the knowledge of what your choices are....you'd make your own decision.
The question I've been asked the most and still have yet to find an actual answer that will suffice is "what do I do when I've tried everything?" there are still parents and kids that fall into this category...not everyone is going to just correct themselves when necessary.
Anyway....for those who feel I attacked them, I apologize if my words were misconstrued. I've been working 20 hours straight and have to work again at 9. Therefore, if my lengthy responses seemed to lose focus and trail into what may have been taken as insult, I'm sorry. Yet, I hope that the points were not lost simply because insult may have been taken when not intended. Again....my email is posted if you wish to comment me directly, or whatnot.....I'm off
-
You're ignoring me. Kindly do take a moment to look over what I posted.
-
Wooo.. 3 for 3 so far..
Not looking very good for Cafety. I hope the next one is a does better.
-
The question I've been asked the most and still have yet to find an actual answer that will suffice is "what do I do when I've tried everything?" there are still parents and kids that fall into this category...not everyone is going to just correct themselves when necessary.
There is also a combo group here too, the court ordered parent who also tried everything prior to it getting that far, and the gilt that goes with both run deep. You can't lump each parent or child into a one-size-fits-all category, and that seems to be the biggest problem here.
-
You're ignoring me. Kindly do take a moment to look over what I posted.
Nope, not ignoring, just responding to the other post.
Like I've said before....I personally would never send my kid to a program...I personally wish they would all catch fire and burn to the ground. While I would hope that parents that love them and want to help, community based care, and everything else would honestly work in every case, the reality is there are still those that unfortunately, all those things won't happen. Now, I still think all these places, as far as I've seen thus far, are worthless shitholes.......but I'm talking about the method to actual change in public opinion and political change.....it's going to take steps or violent revolutions. One way keeps us all out of jail.
And as for those who think I'm simply calling them lazy, or bad parents, or blaming their kids, or whatnot....I did none of the above. If it was taken as such, apologies, but I know what I wrote was not directed at any parent actually trying to help their kids....when i said "lazy parents" I'm talking about the parents that literally got sick of parenting....not people that genuinely care.....I thought that would be obvious. When I said kids that did something to get there.....I was talking about the experience I saw of about 60% at my program having at least substantial reason to be sent by their parents.(even in their own words 10 years later) even though they still have nightmares..NOT EVERYONE IS THE SAME. That's the point I've made already. I know each fall into their own situation.....but EVERYONE needs to look at ALL situations to fix anything.
As for anything else....I don't know how many times it must be said.....my views DO NOT REPRESENT CAFETY. I'm not even on the damn board. If you have an issue....address it with me. As far as the issues with them, they may boot members off the board, but seriously, at some stage a difference of opinion needs to just be left alone unless it's a serious problem.....just because one person may think change is better than destruction does not mean people are not fighting on the same side.....at least they get you half way there.....and then you can move further. I'm done arguing a point that need not be argued. This is seriously just continuing on needlessly, and too much is being misinterpreted.
-
The question I've been asked the most and still have yet to find an actual answer that will suffice is "what do I do when I've tried everything?" there are still parents and kids that fall into this category...not everyone is going to just correct themselves when necessary.
There is also a combo group here too, the court ordered parent who also tried everything prior to it getting that far, and the gilt that goes with both run deep. You can't lump each parent or child into a one-size-fits-all category, and that seems to be the biggest problem here.
I'm not forgetting that group at all...in fact that's exactly the problem. Parents faced with a decision of jail or court ordered program will often choose no jail or criminal record for their kid (if it will stay if they're a minor).....and as much as it may be only a step....regulation is much closer than closure at this point......make it safer for now and then go for abolishment of the entire industry.....or keep fighting trying take em all out....which will likely take longer.....that's why I choose to take a middle ground for now......even if it means people disagree.
-
Djjon5ny,
YES your views do represent CAFETY's because you continue to say "they think this" and "they believe that" bla bla bla......and Kat thinks, believes so-and-so.
IF you don't want to continue apologizing for INSULTING parents, like me, and MUMMIE and any other parents who may be reading your posts--then try thinking before your click "enter."
Your words are insulting and demeaning.
I provided you with documents to read; so you can inform yourself of the ONE ISSUE being discussed here: Cafety linking to NYRA.
The problem being that NYRA links to and supports Isabelle Zehnder/CAICA. Isabelle Zehnder admits she refers children to programs and to Sue Scheff /PURE.
What is it about something that simple that you DO NOT UNDERSTAND?
Please do not quote ME anymore of your middle ground crap, young man; because I do not tolerate being talked down to; or being insulted.
Thank you.
-
Instead of going back and forth about what advocates should and shouldn't be doing, why not just ruin programmies' lives instead and see who gets shut down?
Such as going around their neighborhoods with a stack of leaflets containing their face and the word "PEDOPHILE" and a roll of Scotch tape, and informing everyone within a five (ten? twenty? sky's the limit here) block radius of what they are. Or informing their relatives, co-workers (for the parents), and other associates of what they are. This goes great when the program parent in question is someone else's boss or a major manager. Now the underlings know what she did with her own kid, how do you think they're going to think about her authority now? :lol:
Gas stations are great for this. Gas attendants are usually kids themselves or close to it. Give them a picture of a programmie's face and a couple-page leaflet of the tortures he inflicts and see where he fuels up next.
It's all about creativity.
-
Wow, you're actually comparing program parents to pedophiles? Just when you thought someone couldn't get any lower, and here comes this post.
What's embarassing is you have to leave work every other day to pick your kid up from the back seat of a police car, or from being suspended every other week, and then losing your job because you can't seem to stay there long enough in the work week to be productive, and when you are there, you are so unproductive because you're sitting there worring about the pile of shit your kid is in, and how you're going to get him out of it. The last thing you are worried about are your co-workers and what they think.
I think that post takes the award for the most asslike comment ever to be posted on Fornits.
-
Instead of going back and forth about what advocates should and shouldn't be doing, why not just ruin programmies' lives instead and see who gets shut down?
Such as going around their neighborhoods with a stack of leaflets containing their face and the word "PEDOPHILE" and a roll of Scotch tape, and informing everyone within a five (ten? twenty? sky's the limit here) block radius of what they are. Or informing their relatives, co-workers (for the parents), and other associates of what they are. This goes great when the program parent in question is someone else's boss or a major manager. Now the underlings know what she did with her own kid, how do you think they're going to think about her authority now? :lol:
Gas stations are great for this. Gas attendants are usually kids themselves or close to it. Give them a picture of a programmie's face and a couple-page leaflet of the tortures he inflicts and see where he fuels up next.
It's all about creativity.
Would these pictures work?
(http://http://a815.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/00562/41/89/562979814_l.jpg)
(http://http://a229.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/00484/82/20/484470228_m.jpg)
(http://http://a919.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/00688/81/92/688522918_m.jpg)
-
Wow, you're actually comparing program parents to pedophiles? Just when you thought someone couldn't get any lower, and here comes this post.
What's embarassing is you have to leave work every other day to pick your kid up from the back seat of a police car, or from being suspended every other week, and then losing your job because you can't seem to stay there long enough in the work week to be productive, and when you are there, you are so unproductive because you're sitting there worring about the pile of shit your kid is in, and how you're going to get him out of it. The last thing you are worried about are your co-workers and what they think.
I think that post takes the award for the most asslike comment ever to be posted on Fornits.
Not really that far a comparison. My mother paid someone to emotionally and psychologically destroy me, she knew that. That 's why she sent me there. She wanted a shinier version of myself. What she didn't intend was other more horrific abuses which also occured there. But now that she knows about these things, what does she do? She makes friends with my abusers and blames me for damaging the priceless friendships she's made there.
Now I could get into greater detail and explain precisely why pedophiles and program parents can be so very alike, but I have a tendancy of either throwing up or curling up in the fetal position on the floor when I do.
-
Instead of going back and forth about what advocates should and shouldn't be doing, why not just ruin programmies' lives instead and see who gets shut down?
Such as going around their neighborhoods with a stack of leaflets containing their face and the word "PEDOPHILE" and a roll of Scotch tape, and informing everyone within a five (ten? twenty? sky's the limit here) block radius of what they are. Or informing their relatives, co-workers (for the parents), and other associates of what they are. This goes great when the program parent in question is someone else's boss or a major manager. Now the underlings know what she did with her own kid, how do you think they're going to think about her authority now? :lol:
Gas stations are great for this. Gas attendants are usually kids themselves or close to it. Give them a picture of a programmie's face and a couple-page leaflet of the tortures he inflicts and see where he fuels up next.
It's all about creativity.
Would these pictures work?
Dan are you just grasping for your shit to fling? Get a fucking grip. Ever think about a libel suit? Might wanna rethink your stupidity there "guest"
-
Rachel
I am truly sorry for what happened to you and other children while in the supposed care of that facility. A lot of us here have had something happen to our kids, we didn't know about, and certainly would never have allowed. Not all of us sent our kids to be mini-versions of ourselves, if you can believe that.
And as far as loosing those friends, your mother should be ashamed, move on, and make new ones, just my opinion. That in itself is complete denial on her part, and that's too bad for the both of you, because it doesn't allow you to fully heal. It sounds like she's still blaming you, which is so wrong. Moreover, it sounds like the abuse you endured in the program is still being incubated by her as well.
I wish I could give you a big hug and say it's going to be alright, but that would only happen in the real world...the thing about it being alright, I could still give you a hug.
-
The bashing of parents has already been done by Izzy and Scheff: the Whitmore Blogs. Just not sure if these two have handed them out in the manner of FLIERS, yet. But they may have. Who knows?
-
Instead of going back and forth about what advocates should and shouldn't be doing, why not just ruin programmies' lives instead and see who gets shut down?
Such as going around their neighborhoods with a stack of leaflets containing their face and the word "PEDOPHILE" and a roll of Scotch tape, and informing everyone within a five (ten? twenty? sky's the limit here) block radius of what they are. Or informing their relatives, co-workers (for the parents), and other associates of what they are. This goes great when the program parent in question is someone else's boss or a major manager. Now the underlings know what she did with her own kid, how do you think they're going to think about her authority now? :lol:
Gas stations are great for this. Gas attendants are usually kids themselves or close to it. Give them a picture of a programmie's face and a couple-page leaflet of the tortures he inflicts and see where he fuels up next.
It's all about creativity.
Would these pictures work?
Dan are you just grasping for your shit to fling? Get a fucking grip. Ever think about a libel suit? Might wanna rethink your stupidity there "guest"
Hey asshole, check this out.
Even if you could prove it, which you can't, I find the irony of the pictures posted so utterly hilarious its refreshing for a change.
Why?
Well let us see here.
Your little shit fuck organization, CAFETY, supports the NYRA. They have an alliance with CAICA.
Now Isabelle Zehender, the bitch in charge of CAICA, has been noted to be the publisher of some pretty inflamatory blogs. You remember those blogs right? I did post them on your little shit fuck forum.
Those same blogs that slandered a program mother. Those same blogs that supported an abusive organization named Whitmore.
And you cunts over on your little shit fuck forum called CAFETY didn't have the fucking balls to do anything about it.
Your little asswipe dung heap of a forum and group has known about Alex for quite the while. No a damn thing was done about it either. Your little band of wankers sat in a big circle jerk trying to come up with new names for CAFETY and let old Alex off the hook.
AND YOU KNEW OF IT. ALL OF YOU DID. FROM KAT ON DOWN.
Shame the fuck on all of you. For turning your backs on the hurt and pain of a group of some of the most abused kids in America. Doesn't get more fucked up than Whitmore, and your band of wankers DID NOTHING.
YOU said nothing.. YOU MADE no effort to Distance yourself from CAICA.
YOU ALL knew Alex supported that bitch months ago.
Don't come on here and catch and attitude with me you little sell out piece of shit.
How about this for a change:
You and your little band of fucking sell outs can kiss my hairy white ass.
-
Quite the language tonight, eh TSW?
Point made though.
-
I'm a fucking artiste.. I can't help it.
-
Holy shit...omg..ahah wow
-
Artiste...LOL.
Who are those pictures of?
-
Who are those pictures of?
I'm wondering the same thing.
-
Edited.
-
The first one with the stupid hat is Blombro. That was the point, all three of them are CAFETY boarders.
-
My mistake.
-
I'm a boarder....
A skateboarder :D
-
Nice response.
Let's see if I can sum it up for you.
A group of people decide to try and help kids in abusive residential treatment. They spend lots of time and money trying to get the message out. They get their name out and try to ally with as many other similar organizations as possible (to create a larger voice). One of these organizations happens to link to another organization which has a pretty insane leader.
The original organization will not associate with the insane leader of the 3rd party one. But they don't try to force their views on one of their allies who links to her site, albeit with a warning.
So, now instead of the original organization's members, who have dedicated themselves to helping to fix the problems, being good people who are willing to spend their time helping. All the sudden they are every curse word in the book? Just like that?
You are wrong. And how easy it is to tell. Not only do you need to check yourself and your sense of entitlement on the internet (why is it that people don't usually rant with every curse word they can think of face to face...only on the internet?), but you should be thanking the very people you love to hate so much.
Have fun ranting on fornits... Meanwhile I bet CAFETY will be spending their money to travel to various conferences to start things changing.
Paranoia will get you so far, then it will fuck everything up buddy.
-
The anti-wwasps movement has always been vulnerable to exploitation sinking to an all time low when a few rogue survivors (and so called advocates) decided it was okay to sell kids into programs as long as they weren't WWASPS.
Where and how this mentality developed is a matter of opinion, but most people would probably agree it started around the time PURE showed up on the scene.
Cafety appears to have spun off a couple of anti-wwasps groups (and others) led by survivors which has been a good thing for the most part, even if they don't view orgs like PURE and CAICA as part of the problem, not the solution.
Why not focus on educating these survivor led groups on the "bigger picture" so they can mobilize their efforts on working to abolish the ed con and child-for-profit referral industry?
Expose corruption, exploitation and profiteering wherever you find it and don't ever negotiate with the enemy for to do so is a sign of weakness, not strength.
-
It's very important to understand that people making accusation after accusation have close to zero first hand knowledge of what is actually happening.
As for the last response, CAFETY actually has not spun off of other organizations and they do not collaborate or even really recognize CAICA or PURE. At least I don't think they do, and I would challenge you to find where they do.
There really is no controversy here. The only controversy is from people who, frankly, don't know what they are talking about or who are making paranoid connections where none really exist.
-
My bad, I think I mis-read the above comment. You were saying after cafety, other groups spun off of them? I would agree there has been an influx of organizations popping up lately.
-
Here come old flattop he come grooving up slowly
He got joo-joo eyeball he one holy roller
He got hair down to his knee
Got to be a joker he just do what he please
He wear no shoeshine he got toe-jam football
He got monkey finger he shoot coca-cola
He say "I know you, you know me"
One thing I can tell you is you got to be free
Come together right now over me
He bag production he got walrus gumboot
He got Ono sideboard he one spinal cracker
He got feet down below his knee
Hold you in his armchair you can feel his disease
Come together right now over me
He roller-coaster he got early warning
He got muddy water he one mojo filter
He say "One and one and one is three"
Got to be good-looking 'cause he's so hard to see
Come together right now over me ::peace:: ::heart:: :)
-
It's very important to understand that people making accusation after accusation have close to zero first hand knowledge of what is actually happening.
As for the last response, CAFETY actually has not spun off of other organizations and they do not collaborate or even really recognize CAICA or PURE. At least I don't think they do, and I would challenge you to find where they do.
There really is no controversy here. The only controversy is from people who, frankly, don't know what they are talking about or who are making paranoid connections where none really exist.
Niggah puhlease...
The only thing most of us really want is CAFETY to stop linking with the NYRA.
Stop trying to brush the link between the NYRA and CAICA under the rug. You going to forget about the shit Isabelle pulled with Whitmore on her little blog?
If you want Alex, who is willing to look away from Isabelle shitting all over every kid and parent damaged by the Sudweeks then you are a serious mental lightweight.
-
At least I don't think they do, and I would challenge you to find where they do.
This sounds like a real arguement nice bold statement.....I don't think they do...geeez come up with something that is fact yourself, since you have so much inside information.
-
It's very important to understand that people making accusation after accusation have close to zero first hand knowledge of what is actually happening.
As for the last response, CAFETY actually has not spun off of other organizations and they do not collaborate or even really recognize CAICA or PURE. At least I don't think they do, and I would challenge you to find where they do.
There really is no controversy here. The only controversy is from people who, frankly, don't know what they are talking about or who are making paranoid connections where none really exist.
Man, you are arrogant, and you won't even identify yourself. You're insulting. I'm in contact with A START a lot, and I do know what's going on. Your pompous, windbag attitude is what gets CAFETY slammed.
Sorry we're not mental health professionals like that fount of wisdom Blombro. To say we don't have a clue is bullshit.
Once again: clean up your connections, or you'll end up becoming an embarrassing liability to people trying to end abusive programs. Get off your high horse, CAFETY has never been that important. If it weren't for the A START connection and Dr. Huffine's involvement, CAFETY would be a total joke, a bunch of ineffective whiners.
-
A brief history of CAFETY (as well as the words behind the acronym) please.
-
Zen.. turn on AIM damn it.
-
Oh, yeah, CAFETY must be attending loads of conferences. You're all too busy to notice the almost total lack of activity on the CAFETY forums. It's a graveyard there.
-
I'm sorry?
So it's alright for you to make allegations without being able to back them up, yet when I say I'm pretty sure they don't receive money, I do have to prove it? What should I do, get a financial statement showing that no money was given?
Come on people...
I'm sorry if I come across arrogant, I'm not trying to be. I'm trying to inject some sense of rationality and truth into an argument in which I saw very little of it. You might say that's arrogant, I feel differently. sorry.
I'm not identifying myself because there is no need to. If I do, people will start making accusations based on nothing. I am speaking as truthfully as possible and that's all that's needed in my opinion.
If you are mad that I said you have very little first hand knowledge of the current controversy, I'm sorry but it doesn't appear you do. I can't change that.
-
Why do you keep bringing up this Money deal?
The problem is with the connections between the NYRA and CAICA.
Blombro brought up the part about money. Not any of us.
-
Forums are great to get together and get some people informed. In terms of enacting change within our system, forums have no bearing on an organizations prowess. You seem to be using the faintest of insults to insinuate as many negative thoughts as you can. It's really counterproductive.
-
The money thing was brought up by HEAL in their current boycott release.
If the problems are between NYRA and CAICA, then why is CAFETY so horrible? Merely because of a link?
-
Forums are great to get together and get some people informed. In terms of enacting change within our system, forums have no bearing on an organizations prowess. You seem to be using the faintest of insults to insinuate as many negative thoughts as you can. It's really counterproductive.
You still haven't addressed the problem of the NYRA connection to Isabelle. Particularly the lack of action in regards to the Whitmore blog posted by Isabelle. This happened months ago and CAFETY has sat on its ass ever since about it.
Why are you dodging the question?
-
YES. Take the link down, get yourselves on the referral free list.
-
The NYRA problem would seem to be NYRA's problem.
If you want to throw an organization under the rug because they merely link to someone who links to someone else you don't like, then that's your prerogative. Please let everyone know, though, that that is the sole reason for your boycott.
-
A brief history of CAFETY (as well as the words behind the acronym) please.
//bump\ ...thnx in advance.
-
The NYRA problem would seem to be NYRA's problem.
If you want to throw an organization under the rug because they merely link to someone who links to someone else you don't like, then that's your prerogative. Please let everyone know, though, that that is the sole reason for your boycott.
No the sole reason for my boycott, and I only speak for myself, is CAFETY's unwillingness to deal with a member of their board who belongs to an organization that links with CAICA.
Cafety Links to the NYRA
NYRA links to CAICA...
Isabelle who runs CAICA posted a blog shit talking the survivors and parents of Whitmore Academy.
CAFETY seems willing to ignore that link between the two organizations.
-
The NYRA problem would seem to be NYRA's problem.
If you want to throw an organization under the rug because they merely link to someone who links to someone else you don't like, then that's your prerogative. Please let everyone know, though, that that is the sole reason for your boycott.
PURE should be PURE's problem, but as we've seen with CAICA, the tentacles spread far and wide. Where is Alex in all this?
-
Community Alliance for the Ethical Treatment of Youth.
-
Wish I had a dollar for every acronym on this thread... carry on... ::argue::
-
How much weed could you score for all those dollars?
-
Let's not forget that:
ALEX is on the CAFETY BOARD.
ALEX is the Executive Director of NYRA
ALEX has posted on Fornits that he supports Isabelle Zehnder.CAICA; even tho he has been provided with all documentation on Whitmore Academy; and he is aware of the Whitmore Blog written by Zehnder.
CAFETY Links to NYRA
NYRA Links to and approves of Isabella Zehnder/CAICA.
NOTE: Zehnder/CAICA links to Sue Scheff/PURE
Therefore: CAFETY is indirectly linking to Scheff/PURE.
GET IT?
-
Community Alliance for the Ethical Treatment of Youth.
People's Front of Judea
Judean Peoples' Front...
Any Python fans in the house? This reminds me of Life of Brian, which I guess it kind of is, huh? Right, B.?
-
How much weed could you score for all those dollars?
Not much in Korea.. LOL..
How'd that go, btw?
-
I understand your hesitancy. I don't think it's illegitimate.
I do question, though, the inclination to jump to the worst possible conclusion.
Are you aware of the decision making process that took place?
Have you sent cafety an email asking for a reason behind the actions?
If the decision making process was explained to you, would you then feel more comfortable with the decision?
What I've been reading in these few threads is a sort of all or nothing approach. See it my way, or we boycott. I think that can lead to many more problems which need not arise. Talking trash on Fornits is fun and all, but it seems more people than not are being accused without a good foundation being established first. Do you really want to trash a whole group of dedicated individuals who you would probably get on with just fine in real life and share many of the same values, merely because of a link?
-
Let's not forget that:
ALEX is on the CAFETY BOARD.
ALEX is the Executive Director of NYRA
ALEX has posted on Fornits that he supports Isabelle Zehnder.CAICA; even tho he has been provided with all documentation on Whitmore Academy; and he is aware of the Whitmore Blog written by Zehnder.
CAFETY Links to NYRA
NYRA Links to and approves of Isabella Zehnder/CAICA.
NOTE: Zehnder/CAICA links to Sue Scheff/PURE
Therefore: CAFETY is indirectly linking to Scheff/PURE.
GET IT?
-
There wasn't any hesitancy on my part. I honestly don't give a flying pound of monkey shit why CAFERTY has this link.
It is wrong.
Nothing more nothing less.
They've known about this for months and have refused to do anything about it.
That to me is the deciding factor in why I view CAFERTY in the way I do. They broke the trust with a bunch of abused kids and betrayed parents from Whitmore.
So fuck em.
-
Let's make it simple:
NYRA is to CAFETY as PURE is to CAICA.
We all agree CAICA and Izzy are abominations, so why should CAFETY be viewed differently? After all, Izzy still claims to be an advocate, despite defending the Whitmore and attacking parents.
You need to re-assess yourselves at CAFETY, I think you're in denial. You can't see what's going on if your heads are stuck up your asses.
-
this forum is hosted by fornits
fornits links to amazon.com
if you search amazon.com for Mein Kampf you can buy it.
therefore this argument indirectly supports the rise of the fourth reich.
are you kidding me with that skewed logic?
link to link to link to link
if CAFETY denounces CACA and Izzy(which last time I checked they had quite some time ago)....and Alex stepped down....you all would find another reason to boycott them....because you don't like "the way" they say it.
As for the HEAL argument....if people are going to question members of an organization for EVER working for an RTC....then I think there's members of this boycott that are just as dirty as those they are boycotting...no?
-
I think its very clear what the issue is. NYRA links to CAICA.
I also think that CAFETY has had a whole lot of debate on the subject. I will say that most of CAFETY does not agree with CAICA or PURE and does not want to be associated in any way.
Discussions are happening. It takes a little time to figure out the best course of action. Would it be nice if everyone could get together immediately and decide the best course of action? Sure. That can't happen due to people being spread around the country with various work schedules etc...
If you truly believe boycotting them will make a positive difference, then I applaud your sincerity. I hope it's not based on anything else. You can be sure, though, that most of CAFETY holds your same view but will not act without thorough input and discussion.
-
Are you aware of the decision making process that took place?
No. It obviously wasn't well thought out.
Have you sent cafety an email asking for a reason behind the actions?
No. I'd rather find out from someone I trust, like A START.
If the decision making process was explained to you, would you then feel more comfortable with the decision?
Would that change the fact it's wrong?
What I've been reading in these few threads is a sort of all or nothing approach. See it my way, or we boycott. I think that can lead to many more problems which need not arise. Talking trash on Fornits is fun and all, but it seems more people than not are being accused without a good foundation being established first. Do you really want to trash a whole group of dedicated individuals who you would probably get on with just fine in real life and share many of the same values, merely because of a link?
You contradict yourself. You dismiss any dialog on Fornits as "trash", yet you do seem to take a boycott seriously, perhaps because of the number of registered users here, as opposed to the rather pitiful number on CAFETY.
We keep pointing out the foundation...you keep digging new holes. And who the hell are you?
-
Well get on it Blommie. The quicker you have this discussion the sooner I can change my sig.
-
Cafety could easily solve this matter by denouncing the child-for-profit referral industry and letting people know they will not link to nor endorse any other organzation that tolerates this disgusting practice in any way, shape or form.
How hard is that?
-
Cafety could easily solve this matter by denouncing the child-for-profit referral industry and letting people know they will not link to nor endorse any other organzation that tolerates this disgusting practice in any way, shape or form.
How hard is that?
Exactly. If CAFETY doesn't, why shouldn't they be listed on ISAC's watch list, alongside PURE and CAICA?
-
Pretty damn hard apparently.
Blombro came up here on Fornits and stated that Alex's connection to Isabelle was public knowledge, and they didn't do much about it.
In fact it is also pretty well known that Alex was supporting Isabelle for a lot longer than a couple months.
CAFETY has had plenty of time to clean up their house.
Now all of the sudden it is boycott time and yall are squealing and whining?
Bullshit.. You've all had months, and that is plenty of time to deal with the problem.
Apparently you all have had the balls to do it is what the problem seems to be.
-
Cafety could easily solve this matter by denouncing the child-for-profit referral industry and letting people know they will not link to nor endorse any other organzation that tolerates this disgusting practice in any way, shape or form.
How hard is that?
Cafety has....the only thing that is even still at issue is the connection to another organization that links to another.....and the connection of the chairman of that organization on cafety's board.
the fact that it hasn't happened in a couple days....since people have work schedules to accomodate doesn't mean the issue won't be dealt with further.
calm down and stop jumping to conclusions that have no merit. If no solution is made, or if when a decision is made you still disagree, then do what you want....but merely attacking people that up until recently you had respect for in many regards is just plain stupid.
-
Zen Agent:
Guest wrote:
Are you aware of the decision making process that took place?
No. It obviously wasn't well thought out.
Guest wrote:
Have you sent cafety an email asking for a reason behind the actions?
No. I'd rather find out from someone I trust, like A START.
Guest wrote:
If the decision making process was explained to you, would you then feel more comfortable with the decision?
Would that change the fact it's wrong?
Guest wrote:
What I've been reading in these few threads is a sort of all or nothing approach. See it my way, or we boycott. I think that can lead to many more problems which need not arise. Talking trash on Fornits is fun and all, but it seems more people than not are being accused without a good foundation being established first. Do you really want to trash a whole group of dedicated individuals who you would probably get on with just fine in real life and share many of the same values, merely because of a link?
You contradict yourself. You dismiss any dialog on Fornits as "trash", yet you do seem to take a boycott seriously, perhaps because of the number of registered users here, as opposed to the rather pitiful number on CAFETY.
We keep pointing out the foundation...you keep digging new holes. And who the hell are you?
I would suggest that you talk to them about their decision making process if you are truly concerned enough to boycott them.
You say you don't think the decision making process was well thought out, yet you have no idea what it was/is. How's that work? You don't even know if it's over yet. Is this boycott because CAFETY doesn't work fast enough for you?
You haven't asked cafety why they are doing what they are doing, yet you take the word from organizations like HEAL and random people on Fornits? Something is wrong with that. It's always best to get word first hand before you jump to conclusions.
I did not dismiss any dialog on fornits as trash, I said quote "Talking trash on Fornits is fun and all..." which was intended to the people talking trash...on fornits... I did not say everyone on fornits talks trash. Please do not mince my words.
-
Cafety could easily solve this matter by denouncing the child-for-profit referral industry and letting people know they will not link to nor endorse any other organzation that tolerates this disgusting practice in any way, shape or form.
How hard is that?
Cafety has....the only thing that is even still at issue is the connection to another organization that links to another.....and the connection of the chairman of that organization on cafety's board.
the fact that it hasn't happened in a couple days....since people have work schedules to accomodate doesn't mean the issue won't be dealt with further.
calm down and stop jumping to conclusions that have no merit. If no solution is made, or if when a decision is made you still disagree, then do what you want....but merely attacking people that up until recently you had respect for in many regards is just plain stupid.
Actually I haven't had much respect for CAFETY with their foot dragging over the Kevin August episode.
And this has been ongoing for months, NOT just a couple of days.
Nice try, better luck next time.
-
TS Waygookin
Now all of the sudden it is boycott time and yall are squealing and whining?
Bullshit.. You've all had months, and that is plenty of time to deal with the problem.
Apparently you all have had the balls to do it is what the problem seems to be.
I'm pretty sure this boycott has no bearing on CAFETY. Clearing things up is my motivation for this, not some boycott by a few members on fornits. I appreciate the activist spirit, but CAFETY does not function on donations through its website and it won't stop giving presentations and working to stop the abuse at the facilities. It would be preferable that everyone understood the mission, but it is not necessary to placate every single person, especially if they are being a bit unreasonable.
-
Well if it doesn't affect cafety at all why are you over here doing damage control?
-
Cafety could easily solve this matter by denouncing the child-for-profit referral industry and letting people know they will not link to nor endorse any other organzation that tolerates this disgusting practice in any way, shape or form.
How hard is that?
Cafety has....the only thing that is even still at issue is the connection to another organization that links to another.....and the connection of the chairman of that organization on cafety's board.
the fact that it hasn't happened in a couple days....since people have work schedules to accomodate doesn't mean the issue won't be dealt with further.
calm down and stop jumping to conclusions that have no merit. If no solution is made, or if when a decision is made you still disagree, then do what you want....but merely attacking people that up until recently you had respect for in many regards is just plain stupid.
Actually I haven't had much respect for CAFETY with their foot dragging over the Kevin August episode.
And this has been ongoing for months, NOT just a couple of days.
Nice try, better luck next time.
While I could be wrong, was it not many of the same people you're actually bashing that were on the same offensive with you on the Kevin August issue....ultimately getting the change that was wanted? Maybe some direct communication with those same people would have been the way to start....I'm sure you have their email's rather than expect them to follow each forum rant......might be a faster way to get whatever point you want addressed taken to the board meetings.
Again though...that would involve more than just shit slinging. Might actually be productive...wouldn't want that right?
-
Well if it doesn't affect cafety at all why are you over here doing damage control?
I answered that before you asked it... in case you missed it:
Clearing things up is my motivation for this, not some boycott by a few members on fornits
It should also be known that the many people are of the view that people like Kevin (in the anti-wwasp case) are not inherently wrong, just possibly misguided at the time or made a poor decision. It is in the community's best interest to allow for the person to fix their own issues. In Anti-Wwasp's case, that's exactly what happened. Kevin apologized to everyone and stopped referring. Give it a little time...
-
So repeatedly uttering the fact that CAFETY has for a long time now tolerated a board member's alliance to an organization that refers kids to programs is now shit slinging?
Ok then.
Keep swinging at air chief.
-
Blombro was here posting; and if I recall correctly he called fornits posters CULT MEMBERS among other things. He did apologize. But, that is what he did.
Alex posted, and more-or-less told posters here to kiss-his-ass because he does, and will continue to support Zehnder/CAICA.
So, who else should we talk to?
KAT remains silent on this issue; just as she remained silent on the Kevin August issue. You aske her to return emails, OK?
-
There have been many more accusations besides cafety 'tolerating' someone. If you are trying to act as if you have been an angel in this whole affair, I would refer you to this link:
http://http://wwf.fornits.com/search.php?search_author=TS+Waygookin
-
Zen Agent:
Guest wrote:
Are you aware of the decision making process that took place?
No. It obviously wasn't well thought out.
Guest wrote:
Have you sent cafety an email asking for a reason behind the actions?
No. I'd rather find out from someone I trust, like A START.
Guest wrote:
If the decision making process was explained to you, would you then feel more comfortable with the decision?
Would that change the fact it's wrong?
Guest wrote:
What I've been reading in these few threads is a sort of all or nothing approach. See it my way, or we boycott. I think that can lead to many more problems which need not arise. Talking trash on Fornits is fun and all, but it seems more people than not are being accused without a good foundation being established first. Do you really want to trash a whole group of dedicated individuals who you would probably get on with just fine in real life and share many of the same values, merely because of a link?
You contradict yourself. You dismiss any dialog on Fornits as "trash", yet you do seem to take a boycott seriously, perhaps because of the number of registered users here, as opposed to the rather pitiful number on CAFETY.
We keep pointing out the foundation...you keep digging new holes. And who the hell are you?
I would suggest that you talk to them about their decision making process if you are truly concerned enough to boycott them.
You say you don't think the decision making process was well thought out, yet you have no idea what it was/is. How's that work? You don't even know if it's over yet. Is this boycott because CAFETY doesn't work fast enough for you?
You haven't asked cafety why they are doing what they are doing, yet you take the word from organizations like HEAL and random people on Fornits? Something is wrong with that. It's always best to get word first hand before you jump to conclusions.
I did not dismiss any dialog on fornits as trash, I said quote "Talking trash on Fornits is fun and all..." which was intended to the people talking trash...on fornits... I did not say everyone on fornits talks trash. Please do not mince my words.
I thought I was clear. I know this problem has been apparent for a while. You didn't care then. I would think this would be an easy, black and white decision. If it's still going on, no wonder CAFETY is viewed as a lumbering beast tied up in discussion more than action.
You're really boring, you know that? You're whirling like a dervish and saying nothing.
-
"A lumbering beast tied up in discussion more than action..."
That's almost flattering. I had no idea CAFETY was a "beast." I will say, though, there aren't too many other organizations out there that have had more action taken than CAFETY. As far as not addressing a rather trivial linking issue in accordance with your time frame, I'm sorry that it hasn't been handled to your liking.
-
Months are not a time frame. Taking months to deal with something so academic is a failure.
-
"A lumbering beast tied up in discussion more than action..."
That's almost flattering. I had no idea CAFETY was a "beast." I will say, though, there aren't too many other organizations out there that have had more action taken than CAFETY. As far as not addressing a rather trivial linking issue in accordance with your time frame, I'm sorry that it hasn't been handled to your liking.
It seems a lot of people don't think it's trivial, or you wouldn't be here. Don't be smarmy. I'm not trying to flatter you, you're an obnoxious asshole with a fragile ego. "My liking"? Did you come here to to provoke arguments or explain your "decisions"?
I'll boycott CAFETY simply because of you. Wish you had the balls to at least sign in with your CAFETY handle. Can't expect that from the likes of CAFETY, though.
-
Well if it doesn't affect cafety at all why are you over here doing damage control?
Damned good question....hehehe...
-
Listen Zen, you don't know me and I have said nothing that should upset you personally. For you to try and attack me personally is a bit out of line. I was being lighthearted responding to your attacks. Please stop the noise that doesn't need to be in this conversation.
I have stated my position.
There is a link on NYRA that has a warning above it and it leads to CAICA. CAFETY links to NYRA. CAFETY does not and will not link to CAICA. CAFETY does not approve of CAICA. It is thought that it isn't in the best interest of the community to sever ties with any person or organization that hasn't done anything really wrong without a lot of discussion involved. I'm sorry if you feel it's a black and white issue, but it is not. There are many things to think about.
You have a problem with the indirect link. That is very much understood. I have kindly and rationally laid out what I think of the situation, and you come back with insults.
I'm pretty sure we are done here.
-
Froderick - I have stated my reason for that twice now.
-
Listen Zen, you don't know me and I have said nothing that should upset you personally. For you to try and attack me personally is a bit out of line. I was being lighthearted responding to your attacks. Please stop the noise that doesn't need to be in this conversation.
I have stated my position.
There is a link on NYRA that has a warning above it and it leads to CAICA. CAFETY links to NYRA. CAFETY does not and will not link to CAICA. CAFETY does not approve of CAICA. It is thought that it isn't in the best interest of the community to sever ties with any person or organization that hasn't done anything really wrong without a lot of discussion involved. I'm sorry if you feel it's a black and white issue, but it is not. There are many things to think about.
You have a problem with the indirect link. That is very much understood. I have kindly and rationally laid out what I think of the situation, and you come back with insults.
I'm pretty sure we are done here.
Bye bye now Brian.
-
I'm done for the evening. Anonymous CAFETY shill, you've done an incredible amount of damage to your organization tonight by talking out of your ass.
I know Fornits has a reputation for being profane and juvenile, so I'll close by calling you a worthless douche nozzle. Thanks for sputtering nothing. Take your time with your "decision", by the time you make it nobody will give a shit.
-
This isn't Brian, and I doubt I did anything but help clear up the real issue here. Of course you two have a predisposition of insulting anyone disagreeing with you, so I wouldn't expect kind words.
If the only real insult you have left is that I did nothing but go around in circles, then I can live with that. I hope th others who have read this thread can see what I'm trying to say.
Hope we can agree on something else at some point.
Just out of curiosity, how exactly did I damage CAFETY tonight?
-
I hate anonymous program creeps. Why don't we make them register? I think we should, just for laughs.
-
This isn't Brian, and I doubt I did anything but help clear up the real issue here. Of course you two have a predisposition of insulting anyone disagreeing with you, so I wouldn't expect kind words.
If the only real insult you have left is that I did nothing but go around in circles, then I can live with that. I hope th others who have read this thread can see what I'm trying to say.
Hope we can agree on something else at some point.
Just out of curiosity, how exactly did I damage CAFETY tonight?
By going in circles saying nothing, proving you're a nobody with no input at CAFETY. I guess you're a supporter, but not on the board, otherwise I would hope you would have solid answers and not dodges and accusations.
I would PM you with some more confidential information, but you're an anon.
Don't put on an indignant act, I was returning the insults. If you think I insulted you, you're thin-skinned. I could have (metaphorically) gutted you like a fish and you would have (literally) cried yourself to sleep. I've been reasonably patient considering the mealy-mouthed, snide bullshit you've spouted while pointing fingers and deflecting direct questions. This is your problem. Deal with it any way you want. You can link to WWASP, for all I give a shit, but I'll be damned sure that your position on the industry is brought up with the GAO investigator I speak with. You think everybody on Fornits is talking trash - keep in mind I used to post quite often on CAFETY, with no complaints. You're going to lose support, dry up and blow away like shit dust.
-
I hope you are not referring to me when you say anonymous program creeps. I can empathize with the feeling, unfortunately I'm posting anonymously not because I'm affiliated with any program (which I'm not) but because there is no need for me to post under a fake name and there is no need for me to post under my real name. If I did post under my real name, it appears to me, I would be subjected to harassment that I would rather avoid. My argument stands on its own merits.
As far as posting with a name such as "TheBoy," I don't see how that would help much either.
RE: the program creep accusation... please point out where in my argument I was not on solid footing and behaving/conversing in a rational way. Also please point to where I might be construed as a 'program creep.'
-
I hope you are not referring to me when you say anonymous program creeps. I can empathize with the feeling, unfortunately I'm posting anonymously not because I'm affiliated with any program (which I'm not) but because there is no need for me to post under a fake name and there is no need for me to post under my real name. If I did post under my real name, it appears to me, I would be subjected to harassment that I would rather avoid. My argument stands on its own merits.
As far as posting with a name such as "TheBoy," I don't see how that would help much either.
RE: the program creep accusation... please point out where in my argument I was not on solid footing and behaving/conversing in a rational way. Also please point to where I might be construed as a 'program creep.'
Not really, seems you're getting harassed just as much as an anon. :rofl:
And truthfully, I don't really care if you post anon or not, as i agree with you on those points.
I don't know, call it a hunch.....
-
ZenAgent:
Please show me where I was insulting you...
As far as the going in circles accusation. If I was going in circles, it was based on your responses. I responded to what you said, that's all.
You are free to think of me as you will, but (even if you don't believe me) I have been incarcerated in these programs and was working on the issue before CAFETY was even formed. You are free to believe what you will, but you are incorrect in regards to me insulting you and to my knowledge of the situation.
And once again, I never said everyone on fornits posted trash. I said its fun to talk trash on fornits, not everybody on fornits talks trash. Please understand the difference.
Re: the swarmy comments. If staying level headed and not insulting tit for tat is swarmy, I apologize.
-
I hope you are not referring to me when you say anonymous program creeps. I can empathize with the feeling, unfortunately I'm posting anonymously not because I'm affiliated with any program (which I'm not) but because there is no need for me to post under a fake name and there is no need for me to post under my real name. If I did post under my real name, it appears to me, I would be subjected to harassment that I would rather avoid. My argument stands on its own merits.
As far as posting with a name such as "TheBoy," I don't see how that would help much either.
RE: the program creep accusation... please point out where in my argument I was not on solid footing and behaving/conversing in a rational way. Also please point to where I might be construed as a 'program creep.'
Not really, seems you're getting harassed just as much as an anon. :rofl:
And truthfully, I don't really care if you post anon or not, as i agree with you on those points.
I don't know, call it a hunch.....
Thanks -
-
I hope you are not referring to me when you say anonymous program creeps. I can empathize with the feeling, unfortunately I'm posting anonymously not because I'm affiliated with any program (which I'm not) but because there is no need for me to post under a fake name and there is no need for me to post under my real name. If I did post under my real name, it appears to me, I would be subjected to harassment that I would rather avoid. My argument stands on its own merits.
As far as posting with a name such as "TheBoy," I don't see how that would help much either.
RE: the program creep accusation... please point out where in my argument I was not on solid footing and behaving/conversing in a rational way. Also please point to where I might be construed as a 'program creep.'
Touchy, touchy. My parent's didn't name me Zen Agent, but it keeps postings from being confused with the multitudes of brave anon "guests".
-
I suppose I get pretty irritated with responses sometimes. One way of not taking it too personally is to post anonymously. It helps me keep a level head and not get into the insults game.
-
ZenAgent:
Please show me where I was insulting you...
As far as the going in circles accusation. If I was going in circles, it was based on your responses. I responded to what you said, that's all.
You are free to think of me as you will, but (even if you don't believe me) I have been incarcerated in these programs and was working on the issue before CAFETY was even formed. You are free to believe what you will, but you are incorrect in regards to me insulting you and to my knowledge of the situation.
And once again, I never said everyone on fornits posted trash. I said its fun to talk trash on fornits, not everybody on fornits talks trash. Please understand the difference.
Re: the swarmy comments. If staying level headed and not insulting tit for tat is swarmy, I apologize.
Is that all you're worried about?
As far as not addressing a rather trivial linking issue in accordance with your time frame, I'm sorry that it hasn't been handled to your liking.
Yeah, I'm thin-skinned too, pork sword.
It's not "swarmy", it's smarmy, and you're pompous, obnoxious, and full of shit. It's also not my time frame, and my liking of your decision is not important. You're trying to tag this onto me personally, and I'm not the one who brought the issue up. This is a group of people, not you and me.
Link to PURE, CAICA, WWASP, etc. I really want you to, so CAFETY will finally have a recognizable position.
-
It's not YOU, me or Zen Agent who might get referred to some program by the likes of Isabelle Zehnder either. It's some child who may need real treatment, by a real therapist-- A child who should not be locked up in a program somewhere; just because someone paid Isabelle a damn referral fee!
This is the same Isabelle Zehnder/CAICA that NYRA supports!
-
I thought you said I wasn't part of CAFETY?
If you are now denying that the issue is not with how much time it's taking for CAFETY to make a decision on this issue, I would refer you back to page 10 of this conversation.
I'm not trying to tag this on to you personally, I'm responding to what you say personally.
btw: swarmy is correct too... it's in the urban dictionary =)
-
NYRA doesn't support CAICA... They link to her with a warning attached.
-
I thought you said I wasn't part of CAFETY?
If you are now denying that the issue is not with how much time it's taking for CAFETY to make a decision on this issue, I would refer you back to page 10 of this conversation.
I'm not trying to tag this on to you personally, I'm responding to what you say personally.
btw: swarmy is correct too... it's in the urban dictionary =)
Alright, my swarmy friend. I don't even know who you are, you're anon, remember? You're supporting CAFETY, I've given you that much.
Answer the question, directly: Should CAFETY support NYRA if they link to CAICA, warning or not? No dodging, no nebulous time frames concerning a decision. If you were in a position to decide, what would you do, right now?
-
A "warning?" Then why link at all? Afraid to tell Alex Boy "No?"
-
Well, Zen Agent---guess you got your answer!
No more circle, circle, circle around for this GUEST.
NO DIRECT ANSWER to your question, huh?
-
No, it's NYRA that has a warning.
Personally, I would keep the link to NYRA up. I would strongly suggest the link to CAICA be taken down, and hopefully that would happen. I do feel though, that NYRA's good outweighs its bad by a longshot. So I support NYRA even if I disagree with the link.
-
Can you have an intelligent discussion about Whitmore Academy---it's history, the criminal case and it's outcome? The Sue Scheff/PURE connection to Whitmore Academy? Have you read the Whitmore Blogs written by Isabelle Zehnder and Sue Scheff?
Have you read Isabelle Zehnder's emails posted on Fornits, exposing that she refers children to programs and to Sue Scheff/Pure for placement in programs?
Have you read the WWASP vs PURE transcripts?
If you have this knowlege; and can engage in a discussion about the above: Can you THEN explain why you would accept NYRA linking to CAICA?
-
They've known about it over at CAFETY for a couple of months know about the whole Whitmore situation.
Just go check their archives.
-
Do you hear yourself, guest? Some people even say WWASP programs' "good outweighs its bad." Kids come home from WWASPs programs afraid to misbehave again. These kids are afraid their parents might send them BACK! Does that justify the abuse they suffered in a WWASP program? You are full of shit!
-
Swarmy, you've referred to this as a minor link issue. Let's see how "minor" a link is:
I caught my kid smoking grass, I think he's an addict, I go to the internet for help.
For some reason, I get to the low-traffic CAFETY first.
CAFETY-->NYRA-->CAICA-->PURE = a kid placed in a program.
That's a rather short route. Rethink your position.
-
I accept NYRA for the good it brings and intends to bring. That's all -
-
I accept NYRA for the good it brings and intends to bring. That's all -
CAFETY-->NYRA-->CAICA-->PURE = a kid placed in a program.
You're comfortable with that? Good, because I'm going to edit out every post I made on CAFETY and insert that "map", along with a warning to parents that CAFETY is not a referral free zone.
-
Do you hear yourself, guest? Some people even say WWASP programs' "good outweighs its bad." Kids come home from WWASPs programs afraid to misbehave again. These kids are afraid their parents might send them BACK! Does that justify the abuse they suffered in a WWASP program? You are full of shit!
I'm sorry if you were offended. I think it's a little too harsh to imply I meant it that way, though. I certainly am not justifying a WWASP program. I was in a wwasp program, and I find that quite often a lot of what I say sounds like program speak. I also hear a lot of people around me say things that sound similar. I think its something like getting a car. When you get one you tend to notice similar ones all over the place.
-
CAFETY-->NYRA-->CAICA-->PURE = a kid placed in a program.
Better yet:
FORNITS-->every organization in this industry-->Ed Cons, Transports, NATSAP = kid placed in my program
Have fun with your little civil war kiddies. I'll be laughing all the way to the bank while I continue helping kids. Go knock each other out, please.
-
Nope Zen maps it out better.
Keep swinging at air.
-
Abuse is never justified, and my statements yesterday were abusive and cruel to those of you who have suffered real abuse, and suffered from the same quality of lumping everyone in the same category that I have accused others of.
I will no longer be posting here. The road to hell is paved with good intentions and I need to stop before I go any deeper. I hope those of you who I have hurt can forgive me for being an ass.
Apology accepted if sincere.
-
Cafety could easily solve this matter by denouncing the child-for-profit referral industry and letting people know they will not link to nor endorse any other organzation that tolerates this disgusting practice in any way, shape or form.
How hard is that?
Cafety has....the only thing that is even still at issue is the connection to another organization that links to another.....and the connection of the chairman of that organization on cafety's board.
the fact that it hasn't happened in a couple days....since people have work schedules to accomodate doesn't mean the issue won't be dealt with further.
calm down and stop jumping to conclusions that have no merit. If no solution is made, or if when a decision is made you still disagree, then do what you want....but merely attacking people that up until recently you had respect for in many regards is just plain stupid.
http://businessesales.att.com/products_ ... play.jhtml (http://businessesales.att.com/products_services/teleconferenceproduct_catalogdisplay.jhtml)
Link to AT&T web/conference calling services. Its very easy to set up. Everyone gets a call in number and time and everyone can discuss the issue at hand.
It is more than just a link. A board member is involved with and supports and organization that refers parents to programs. CAICA also supported proram owners after they were charged with child abuse. She even wrote a blog about a parent that had a child abused in the program. I am sure someone here could provided the needed links/documentation if you need it.
There are many informative sites. I asked earlier (twice) and have not recieved a response. It might be something you want to bring up in your meeting. What are the advantages to linking to CAICA? It has been proven that she does and plans to recommend programs. I am sure someone on here could provide you with links to that documentation.
Having said that, I don't agree with HEAL that CAFETY had any other agenda besides trying to prepare for a hearing.
-
well... You idiots at CAFETY can link to CAICA directly or indirectly all you want. For what it's worth, i'd advise against it. Choose to ignore my advise at your own risk. I won't do anything... but the dominoes that have been set in motion will. You'll find out soon enough what a bad decision it was to associate, however indirectly, with CAICA. Consider it fair warning (however cryptic).
-
Wording on the NYRA link:
Coalition Against Institutionalized Child Abuse
CAICA is a strong voice of opposition to behavior modification institutions across the country and employs public education, lobbying, and direct action to bring down these youth gulag schools.
The "warning" is applied above all of the "troubled teen industry" not just CAICA. The statement suggests that IZ is not involved in the troubled teen industry when in fact, she has "teamed up" with Sue Scheff (per her blog). I think if at least the wording was changed on the above link.
I have a few ideas.. but, they arent appropriate.
-
I've had a good relationship with CAFETY and A START over the past year, so I really feel a bit burned by this. If CAFETY was sticking to a middle path and keeping a wary eye on CAICA, they should have smelled the smoke when the Whitmore blogs were posted and the teaming up of Izzy and Sue was made known. Now that it's a blazing inferno, CAFETY wants to defend their indirect link to CAICA. It's more than an embarrassment, it's disgusting.
The mystery CAFETY poster said we're causing the movement to go backwards, but he's wrong. Everyone else has moved forward and shunned CAICA while CAFETY can't seem to make a definite decision to get rid of a connection that should be anathema to them. CAFETY has done a lot of talking, now that there's an opportunity to DO something to move forward, they stumble.
CAFETY stands for "Community Alliance for the Fair and Ethical Treatment of Youth". Izzy has defended the Whitmore, admitted to a partnership with PURE, and dragged an innocent woman through the mud in an attempt to save face. There's nothing fair or ethical in Izzy's actions. CAFETY can't seriously consider it's organization fair and ethical while they remain linked to CAICA.
To the people I know at CAFETY: I'm sorry, I know you mean well, but this is wretched. You need to do the right thing. If the GAO investigation is so important to all of you, don't put yourselves in a compromising position. The industry will use the CAICA connection to discredit you when their time to be heard comes. If for no other reason, don't do this to A START. CAFETY rides on A START's coattails a lot - don't shit on all the things they've done recently by putting them in a bad light because of your poor judgment.
-
Cafety could easily solve this matter by denouncing the child-for-profit referral industry and letting people know they will not link to nor endorse any other organzation that tolerates this disgusting practice in any way, shape or form.
How hard is that?
Cafety has....the only thing that is even still at issue is the connection to another organization that links to another.....and the connection of the chairman of that organization on cafety's board.
the fact that it hasn't happened in a couple days....since people have work schedules to accomodate doesn't mean the issue won't be dealt with further.
calm down and stop jumping to conclusions that have no merit. If no solution is made, or if when a decision is made you still disagree, then do what you want....but merely attacking people that up until recently you had respect for in many regards is just plain stupid.
http://businessesales.att.com/products_ ... play.jhtml (http://businessesales.att.com/products_services/teleconferenceproduct_catalogdisplay.jhtml)
Link to AT&T web/conference calling services. Its very easy to set up. Everyone gets a call in number and time and everyone can discuss the issue at hand.
It is more than just a link. A board member is involved with and supports and organization that refers parents to programs. CAICA also supported proram owners after they were charged with child abuse. She even wrote a blog about a parent that had a child abused in the program. I am sure someone here could provided the needed links/documentation if you need it.
There are many informative sites. I asked earlier (twice) and have not recieved a response. It might be something you want to bring up in your meeting. What are the advantages to linking to CAICA? It has been proven that she does and plans to recommend programs. I am sure someone on here could provide you with links to that documentation.
Having said that, I don't agree with HEAL that CAFETY had any other agenda besides trying to prepare for a hearing.
This is getting surreal.
I'm not a member of CAFETY for a reason. You assclowns have known about this forever and a day. Don't try this death by committee crap and get of the shitter.
-
Really, we are getting to the threat stage? Respect has been lost for anyone making threats in this whole affair.
-
um, what? threat?
-
well... You idiots at CAFETY can link to CAICA directly or indirectly all you want. For what it's worth, i'd advise against it. Choose to ignore my advise at your own risk. I won't do anything... but the dominoes that have been set in motion will. You'll find out soon enough what a bad decision it was to associate, however indirectly, with CAICA. Consider it fair warning (however cryptic).
-
I don't consider that a threat.. a warning that things are going down and anyone associated with Caica/Pure may not look so good.
That is my interpetation.
-
well... You idiots at CAFETY can link to CAICA directly or indirectly all you want. For what it's worth, i'd advise against it. Choose to ignore my advise at your own risk. I won't do anything... but the dominoes that have been set in motion will. You'll find out soon enough what a bad decision it was to associate, however indirectly, with CAICA. Consider it fair warning (however cryptic).
Your taking out of context. This appears to be a warning.. possibly linked to the new information that just came on on the PBC? I don't know.. but, I did not perceive this to be a threat at all.
-
Isabelle Zehnder CAICA refers to Sue Scheff/PURE
Lawsuit just filed against Sue Schef/PURE: GET IT?
LaCASE: CACE07018185
Green Vs. Scheff
Boyd Hooper
Focal Point Academy
Glen Horlacher, etc.
Case Summary
Broward County Case Number: CACE07018185
State Reporting Number: 062007CA018185AXXXCE
Court Type: CIVIL DIVISION - CIRCUIT COURT
Case Type: OTHER CIVIL
Incident Date: N/A Filing Date: 07/31/2007
Court Location: CENTRAL COURTHOUSE
Case Status: OPEN
HELP
Case Parties
Relationship Last Name First Name Middle Name Party Type Sex Race Year of D.O.B. D.O.D. ID Type ID Number
001 LEACOCK DAVID AT BARID 000000963496
001 GREEN SCOTT PL
002 SCHEFF SUSAN L DF
003 GREEN MICHELE PL
004 PARENTS UNIVERSAL RESOURCE DF
006 EXPERTS INC DF
008 FOCAL POINT ACADEMY LLC DF
010 HORLACHER GLEN DF
012 HOOPER BOYD DF
MOE LEROY H JUDGE JUDGE 13
Key Dates - Future Scheduled Events
-
well... You idiots at CAFETY can link to CAICA directly or indirectly all you want. For what it's worth, i'd advise against it. Choose to ignore my advise at your own risk. I won't do anything... but the dominoes that have been set in motion will. You'll find out soon enough what a bad decision it was to associate, however indirectly, with CAICA. Consider it fair warning (however cryptic).
Your taking out of context. This appears to be a warning.. possibly linked to the new information that just came on on the PBC? I don't know.. but, I did not perceive this to be a threat at all.
You are correct. I'd rather see Cafety take out their dirty laundry (rather than be taken out with the dirty laundry)... It wasn't a threat at all.
-
What's with the "threat" word. You people sound like a bunch of babies.
-
What's with the "threat" word. You people sound like a bunch of babies.
Or Sue Scheff.
-
Really, we are getting to the threat stage? Respect has been lost for anyone making threats in this whole affair.
I didn't read that as a threat at all. It sounded to me like sound advice. I mean, come on. Things are crashing in all around them. I think it was more of a warning, heads up as to whats about to hit the fan with all this advertising for programs posing as activism. This is generating some talk outside the field of teen help and the people that are interested in free speech issues are usually the kind who are going to dig a little into the story. First, they're going to see what Sue did to Carey with that bullshit lawsuit. Then they'll see what she's done with Reputation Defender, THEN they'll end up seeing the TTI stuff. Some of them will be interested enough to look a little further.
It all adds up. She's toast.
-
Has CAFETY posted the Sue Scheff /Law Suit on their website?
Surely they have, right?
-
not sure if many updates have been made to the site lately. might be.
-
It's as active as a graveyard. One new poster. CAFETY has always been that way, no activity for ages, then something happens like the Kevin August issue. Heated exchanges involving CAFETY board members defending their connections to hypocrites...um, why am I experiencing deja vu?
Except it's not happening on CAFETY this time, and it shouldn't. We'll see what happens in the next couple of weeks. I don't agree it's a matter of educating them, they should know better. This dismissive attitude of CAFETY's is what's really offensive, especially the remarks about Fornits being a cult. It seems CAFETY thinks the presence of a few mental health professionals makes them the spearhead of the drive to end abusive programs. Everybody on Fornits who was involved with a program can cite psychologists and psychiatrists who had much in common with Dr. Mengele. I'm very suspicious of anyone in the mental health field, they have to prove themselves first.
So practice some hygiene and wash your hands, "professionals".
-
Everybody on Fornits who was involved with a program can cite psychologists and psychiatrists who had much in common with Dr. Mengele. I'm very suspicious of anyone in the mental health field, they have to prove themselves first.
So practice some hygiene and wash your hands, "professionals".
Yep yep.
http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?t=22523 (http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?t=22523)
Yet her psychiatrist didn't rethink his diagnosis. Instead, he sent her to wilderness therapy in Utah, then an aftercare rehab program in Southern California (at a cost of $75,000); even though she wasn't an addict, he thought the treatment would be beneficial. "They tried to psychologically break me down," she said. "They wanted me to say I was a drug addict, and no one believed that I wasn't. I would tell the truth, and they'd be like, 'You're lying, you're a drug addict.' So then I'd say, 'All right, I'm a drug addict,' and make up some story about abusing the drugs I was prescribed, and then everyone would be like, 'Good job.' " This, despite the urine tests that continued to show negative results.
There's much, much more.