Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Deborah on August 30, 2007, 09:11:27 AM
-
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?p=276757#276757 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?p=276757#276757)
August 21, 2007
The National Association Of Therapeutic Schools and Programs ("NATSAP") members across the United States are saddened by the shocking instance of abuse reported in today's ABC News story entitled "Boot Camp Pastor Charged in Girl's Dragging."
The National Association Of Therapeutic Schools and Programs ("NATSAP") members across the United States are saddened by the shocking instance of abuse reported in the ABC News story entitled "Boot Camp Pastor Charged in Girl's Dragging" (available at http://abcnews.go.com (http://abcnews.go.com)). Jan Moss, Executive Director of NATSAP says this report again points out the need for state licensure and oversight of the programs and schools that serve our struggling young people.
[Why not start with your own programs? So that's where NATSAP draws the line? It's okey dokey to abuse/neglect kids, but no dragging behind a vehicle.... that just crosses the line. Hard to defend. None of the favorite excuses can be applied. In order to be a NATSAP member a program must be more discrete with their abuse. :rofl: ]
"Our association and its members are supportive of all efforts to eliminate every so-called boot camp or other 'tough love' program that does not use a therapeutic milieu in working with adolescents," Moss says. "We continue to work with state and federal lawmakers and agencies to encourage, establish and strengthen state laws and regulations to protect children in need of out-of-home placement."
[Hmm. You advocated for self-regulation in Montana. You lobbied against a law that would protect kids being 'escorted' to programs. Some of the most heinous abuses have happened in your programs' "therapeutic milieus". "Therapeutic" abuse is somehow more acceptable?]
The NATSAP board of directors urges all parents and guardians who are seeking specialized help for their child to visit the organization's website, www.natsap.org (http://www.natsap.org), for important information regarding the selection of a program or school. NATSAP members ascribe to high ethical standards and principles of good practice, in addition to their licensure and accreditation requirements.
[Parents should check at Fornits, ISAC, HEAL, and google the program name for independent blogs where they'll get the 'hard truth' about the program they're considering and the industry in general. Buyer Beware. Your "high ethical standards/principles" are useless and have no teeth. Who investigates/sanctions your members?]
NATSAP extends its sincere sympathies to this young woman and any child or family who have experienced abuse or neglect in a facility reportedly designed to heal.
[NATSAP attempts to set themselves apart from non-member programs and capitalize on this young woman's tragedy.]
-
They're pull'in an Izzy/Sue...
-
They're pull'in an Izzy/Sue...
"NATSAP says this report again points out the need for state licensure and oversight of the programs and schools that serve our struggling young people.
"
I dont understand, isnt it good that we push for oversight? You dont believe that licensing or oversight would have helped this child?
-
They actively fight regulations, they only uses issues like this to self promote their member schools as the answer. Ya see they only want money not change.
-
They actively fight regulations, they only uses issues like this to self promote their member schools as the answer. Ya see they only want money not change.
In theory: What's their problem? We only want change. ::seg::
-
They actively fight regulations, they only uses issues like this to self promote their member schools as the answer. Ya see they only want money not change.
In theory: What's their problem? We only want change. ::seg::
::eek3::
-
They actively fight regulations, they only uses issues like this to self promote their member schools as the answer. Ya see they only want money not change.
Not true Hanzo:
Effective May 1, 2007, all programs applying for membership in NATSAP must meet the
following requirements:
1. www.natsap.org[/url]).
When I worked briefly in contract negotiations when we were trying to offset a “strikeâ€
-
Listen, The Who...
::deal:: ...Let me show you some wilderness property you might be interested in investing in... We've already got 700 acres of back water material up near Eustis, Maine, but we're aiming to buy more. Lichfield's recent financial contributions to the Republican Party have given us tremendous hope that we can make Maine the next great Character Development destination. Tourists have always been great suckers for the pristine, unspoiled wilderness that Maine has to offer. We'd just like to expand of their interpretation of that, Har! Har!
Joe Almighty, The Educator
-
They actively fight regulations, they only uses issues like this to self promote their member schools as the answer. Ya see they only want money not change.
Not true Hanzo:
Effective May 1, 2007, all programs applying for membership in NATSAP must meet the
following requirements:
1. www.natsap.org[/url]).
When I worked briefly in contract negotiations when we were trying to offset a “strikeâ€
-
Listen, The Who...
::deal:: ...Let me show you some wilderness property you might be interested in investing in... We've already got 700 acres of back water material up near Eustis, Maine, but we're aiming to buy more. Lichfield's recent financial contributions to the Republican Party have given us tremendous hope that we can make Maine the next great Character Development destination. Tourists have always been great suckers for the pristine, unspoiled wilderness that Maine has to offer. We'd just like to expand of their interpretation of that, Har! Har!
Joe Almighty, The Educator
(http://http://www.arnoldtrailsnowmobileclub.com/images/not_used/atsc_a.jpg)
Cool, is that where you are from? I fish for Brook trout in Spencer stream which is just south of Flagstaff lake. It may be closer to Bigelow but my brothers place is in Eustis. Ever get down to Rangeley?
Ever drive out to The “Brickyardâ€
-
Cool, is that where you are from? I fish for Brook trout in Spencer stream which is just south of Flagstaff lake. It may be closer to Bigelow but my brothers place is in Eustis. Ever get down to Rangeley?
Ever drive out to The “Brickyardâ€
-
Cool, is that where you are from? I fish for Brook trout in Spencer stream which is just south of Flagstaff lake. It may be closer to Bigelow but my brothers place is in Eustis. Ever get down to Rangeley?
Ever drive out to The “Brickyardâ€
-
They actively fight regulations, they only uses issues like this to self promote their member schools as the answer. Ya see they only want money not change.
Not true Hanzo:
Effective May 1, 2007, all programs applying for membership in NATSAP must meet the
following requirements:
1. http://www.natsap.org/program_details.asp?id=11[/url]
Who enforces those regulations, Who? Benchmark violated them... What are the "consequences."
2. Therapeutic services with www.natsap.org[/url]).[/i]
Compliance is based on the "Honor System."
When I worked briefly in contract negotiations when we were trying to offset a “strikeâ€
-
NATSAP is basically a listing resource, they don’t control what any of the programs do but they strive to make a positive effect on the industry. Earlier this year they raised the bar on membership requiring the schools to be accredited and have oversight. In 20 years who knows maybe schools wont even be able to set up shop without their recommendation but for now they are building on qualifications for membership and starting to grow teeth little by little.
As NATSAP gains more and more credibility they will have more of a say and be able to have more of a positive effect on the industry.
Its not a bad thing to want these schools to be accredited and have oversight. Fornits used to push for this themselves not too long ago. I am still on the fence on this whole oversight/accreditation. It doesn’t seem to improve the state run boot camps at all, but I guess we will see.
-
NATSAP is basically a listing resource, they don’t control what any of the programs do but they strive to cover up as much abuse as they can. Earlier this year they lowered the bar on membership making up accreditations and oversight. In 20 years who knows maybe these hellholes won't fucking exist but for now these idiots are getting as many shitheads as they can for membership while getting their few remaining teeth kicked out by the GAO.
As NATSAP loses more and more credibility they will have less of a say and won't be able to keep covering up abuse.
Its not a bad thing to want these shitpits to be accredited and have oversight, if that's done from real government agencies, but of course I'm not interested in that. Fornits used to push for this themselves until they realized that it was fake as hell. I am still on the fence on this whole oversight/accreditation with a fencepost forced squarely up my ass. It doesn’t seem to improve anything, like I care about that.
LIKE ELIMINATING GILLED CREATURES IN A ROUND WOODEN CONTAINER.
-
NATSAP is basically a listing resource, they don’t control what any of the programs do but they strive to make a positive effect on the industry.
Says who? NATSAP ?!?!?
Earlier this year they raised the bar on membership requiring the schools to be accredited and have oversight.
Not quite. They required schools to TELL THEM that. There is no enforcement. Benchmark is a NATSAP school and is not accredited or licensed as Its not a bad thing to want these schools to be accredited and have oversight. Fornits used to push for this themselves not too long ago. I am still on the fence on this whole oversight/accreditation. It doesn’t seem to improve the state run boot camps at all, but I guess we will see.[/quote]
There will never be oversight because many of these places could not operate (at least not profitably) if they were held to any reasonalbe ethical / therapeutic standard (such as... qualified counselors etc...)
Benchmark, a NATSAP school, employs "counselors" who don't even have high school diplomas. They are not accredited by ANY accrediting agency. They are not licensed as a treatment center even though they advertise themselves as such. They claim to provide "therapy" and yet none of their staff are anywhere near remotely qualified to practice any sort of psychotherapy.
I've told NATSAP about these things. They DON'T CARE !!! I was told Schools are on the "honor system" and basically that all a member school had to do was sign some forms and pay the membership dues. What possible purpose does NATSAP function as aside from providing an illusion of legitimacy to their paying customers.
-
Nothing new, no new bar. They've always claimed to require proper licensing/accreditation - two very different things. From 2005
http://www.strugglingteens.com/news/nat ... iples.html (http://www.strugglingteens.com/news/natsapprinciples.html)
Highlight- 1.0 ADHERENCE TO STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS
The program/school shall adhere to all applicable state and federal laws in conducting the operation, including administration, hiring and employee practices, observance of safety regulations, and the care of program participants.
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?p=88723#88723 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?p=88723#88723)
Yet turn a blind eye when programs are shut down by the state and open with a new classification (private boarding school) to avoid further regulation.
"The new standards require our therapeutic programs and schools to maintain state licensure http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?p=252780#252780[/url]
http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?p=214897#214897 (http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?p=214897#214897)
Don't confuse "issuing white papers in response to critics" as "raising the bar". It's business as usual.
-
Effective May 1, 2007, all programs applying for membership in NATSAP must meet the
following requirements:
1. Licensure by the appropriate state agency authorized to set and oversee standards
of therapeutic and/or behavioral healthcare for youth and adolescents or
accreditation by a mental health accreditation agency.
Effective May 1, 2007 all programs applying for membership. This doesn’t effect existing members, how could they? When you log into fornits for the first time there is a list of rules and provisions you need to agree to. Has all 4,500 people agreed to these? Each time these are upgraded or changed does fornits go back and contact all 4,500 members and require them to sign off before they can log in again?
A program owner who ran his own school for 12 years without a license is on the board of directors. What kind of neutrality is that... Come on. In Montana, NATSAP lobbied AGAINST government oversight.
Doesn’t matter, the president of a company we recently purchased started it without a highschool diploma and built it into a good size company. Before selling he stepped aside an required that his replacement have at least an MBA from a top university and 3 years experience running a medium sized company. There was no way he would turn over his company to some kid who dropped out of highschool. People/situations change over time.
I don’t know the background of the guy you speak of, he may not have needed to have his school licensed. Was it a requirement back then? Were parents asking for the schools to be licensed? I don’t know the back ground.
There will never be oversight because many of these places could not operate (at least not profitably) if they were held to any reasonalbe ethical / therapeutic standard (such as... qualified counselors etc...)
You may be right, lets see what happens and how many schools get added to NATSAP and see if they hold up to what they say.
-
Dear, TheWho.
Lets just say... I am anonymous. Not an anonymous person, no, "anonymous" proper.
You may have heard of me from such youtube videos as "Fox 11 exposé on anonymous!" or "duckroll" or "dear fox news".
Or, you may not. In any event, let me explain what we and I are.
We and are I everyone and no one. We and I are what the regulars here at fornits wish they could do to you, their former captors and abusers, and even a few people who really don't deserve anything to befall them. We and I are what you wish you could do to the people who hurt your business... we and I are the people who actually work at these programs because they enjoy doing what they can to helpless teenagers and children.
We and I are what you wish you could be, and you could never ever be. True to our darkest depths of humanity, our deepest anger, our most deprived sadism.
And you have our attention. Not as a potential target, not as a threat, not as an ally - but we stand in awe of you, TheWho. You are the first to have that distinction.
You have singlehandedly done more to destroy the good works at fornits... to derail conversation and meaningful proceedings to actually improve the state of affairs of the world, the nation, and specifically that of the captive child brainwashing industry, and personally trolled many people here into screaming conniptions of rage and frustration, all by merely posting under your proper name and anonymously here on fornits.
That is quite an astonishing achievement. Usually that requires getting documentation on them, IRL stalking, phone harassment, Credit card fraud, and the like, or even a proper /i/nvasion... but singlehandedly you have derailed countless threads in fornits and obfuscated with your nonsensical diatribes and arguments about semantics while dodging the truth about what is being said and making the (now, sadly, silent) #800 Gorilla sit in the corner.
TheWho, to all the trolls, misanthropists, nihilists, iconoclasts, /i/nsurgents, and general assholes in the world, you stand head and shoulders above all mere "trolls"... you deliver. You have our attention.
And we salute you!
But beware, do not become cocky in your newfound fame and slight us. We are legion, we do not forgive, and we do not forget. Pray you never take one of our own into your industry or you will face our full wrath - or worse. We will infiltrate it and make it tenfold what it is now... and merely for our carnal indulgence without even the pretext of therapy or punishment.
(http://http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/thumb/8/8b/AnonymousBecause.jpg/480px-AnonymousBecause.jpg)
-
I like how ISAC puts it
Beware of "member based" accrediting bodies and as well as accrediting bodies comprised of representatives of the accredited programs.
In our opinion, neither can be viewed as impartial judges of academic worthiness.
Does that not describe NATSAP? Think about the kids!!
-
..... why is it others can intercede at anytime and give their opinion but I am accused of flooding or derailing conversations when I express mine?
It seems you call it trolling because I disagree with the majority here, but I don’t believe anyone would want a forum or conversation where everyone agreed with each other. Offering up differences of opinions is healthy for any discussion.
I don’t know where this came from but if it is the NATSAP conversation and the fact that Benchmark may not be the greatest school out there, this isn’t something NATSAP has control over. The American Medical association cant be held accountable for every quack that is out there just like NATSAP cant. Its an association which set conditions for members to join. If the association gains power and influence then they raise the bar and try to weed out the people who are not moving the cause forward and eventually they will have influence over schools like Benchmark, but in the mean time they can only wield the power that they have, and they are, by setting stricter guidelines.
NATSAP isn’t some evil corporation out to destroy young kids. They don’t sit around the board room trying to figure out how to harm people, like many here would lead us to believe. The new requirements released this year is a big step and a bold step. Not every school will be accepted into their fold which will result in less revenue, but they seem to have a direction they have chosen and are enforcing more stringent requirements to get there.
If you want to hold me up as an example for all that is bad with the industry, that is fine. But my intent here is not to derail or set back any cause. I truly believe it is important to have all sides to an argument invited to the table.
Nice suit, Niles.
-
don't think they like you :cry2: ::rose::
-
I like how ISAC puts it Beware of "member based" accrediting bodies and as well as accrediting bodies comprised of representatives of the accredited programs.
In our opinion, neither can be viewed as impartial judges of academic worthiness.
Hey, I'll happily start a new alternative to NATSAP for half their membership fees. Requirements? Just send me your check. I don't give a shit if you're a "good" program, a bad program or not even a program at all. Just pay your membership dues and I'll post you on my website declaring to all the world that you belong to my organization.
I would call it NUTSACK, but someone already claimed that one. How about NATSASS?
Any takers?
-
Who, seriously- and please answer this- why the fuck, really, are you posting this shit?
Do you think we don't know what NATSAP member programs are capable of? Let's pick one at random.. how about Turn-About Ranch (http://http://www.turnaboutranch.info)? Or how about Youth Care, the topic of this thread? Hmm, they're still on the site. It looks like NATSAP isn't penalizing them for killing kids. I wonder why not?
If NATSAP even gave a remote, itty-bitty shit about any of the kids in any of its programs, they would de-list for offenses. And they never fucking do.. Even you, Who, even YOU are smart enough to figure this out, that any body which actually did pride itself on quality of care would de-list programs for killing kids. And they don't. There is no getting around this, no matter how many times you regurgitate laughable crap.
It's like some sort of gigantic sick joke. Here Fornits is, page after page after kilopage of documented, detailed, abuse and mismanagement- and here you are, yammering about how the facts are biased. Who the hell are you trying to fool? Us? None of the regulars take you seriously. The parents? The parents get on for five minutes and are instantly dogpiled with warnings, dis-recommendations, and the brutality of Anonymous. They sure as shit don't care what you have to say. The GAO? If the GAO is reading this they can do their own homework. They're sure as hell not going to listen to the rantings of some smacktard who calls himself TheWho. So who the fuck are you talking to? If you're trying to confuse us or slow us down, you're only pissing us off, and I've got lots more propaganda attacks on Aspen that I intend to unleash simply because you pissed me off enough. Do you not understand this?
You know what, Who? I think you really are on the board of some program or other, maybe even Bain Capital. You're thick-headed enough to be management.
If you are, here's some sound economic advice. Get the hell out. Sell the land, or build houses on it. Gated communities are at a complete premium, especially when they're located at the ass-end of nowhere. You'll find yourself a lot richer than if you keep pumping money back into the slowly dying child torture industry, and maybe your twisted shred of a conscience, assuming you have any left at all, will find some relief.
Either that or you can blow your brains out.
-
Whoops. My bad. The Youth Care one is another death at another Aspen NATSAP program. This death was one that happened outside of NATSAP, so they pretend to care about it.
-
Or how about Penninsula Village.
@Who: sometimes you're like a neo-nazi talking to a bunch of concentration camp survivors, telling them all about this great thing called the "final solution" and wondering why he gets a hostile reaction..
I recommended un-banning you because i didn't feel you were techincally flooding, but I still detest what you have to say and believe (damn near bordering on know) that you work for the industry (albeit indirectly).
I think Ginger was right. Your stock in trade is bullshit statistics, PR, and spin... frankly, you're worth your weight in fools gold from an industry insider's perspective.
Newcomers coming to fornits fall prey to your "not so bad" spin, and since they rarely have time to read past a few pages, they never discover your logic is really nothing more than an elaborate circle (much like many things in this industry). Like many in marketing, you rely on the short attention span, and buzy lifestyle of parents who might find fornits...
In my opinion, you're an industry shill with a vested interst in at least NATSAP and ASPEN. About the only programs you ever criticize (if any) are WWASP, or the public system. You fit the profile perfectly of an industry member.
Well... Regardless of how hard you try, we're still going to raze your source of income to the ground and sew the earth with salt so nothing will ever grow again. Natsap is about to get it's teeth kicked out.
-
Newcomers coming to fornits fall prey to your "not so bad" spin
You give him way, way too much credit. How many actual newcomers do you know that have actually done this?
-
Newcomers coming to fornits fall prey to your "not so bad" spin
You give him way, way too much credit. How many actual newcomers do you know that have actually done this?
One... But you're right. Not all fall prey to his bullshit.
-
psy wrote:
I think Ginger was right. Your stock in trade is bullshit statistics, PR, and spin... frankly, you're worth your weight in fools gold from an industry insider's perspective.
Could be psy, but long before you came to fornits, the statistics here were down right fabricated. When I asked to see the raw data I got a list of kids whose death was attributed to programs and 2 out of the first 5 that I checked were not even at school at the time. One committed suicide 6 months after being home and the other died in a car accident after graduation. But since they attended a TBS people here felt their death was due to the program and added them to the list. So based on the sample size (extremely small, I agree) 40% of the data was fabricated to meet the needs of the agenda here.
I decided to set up a matrix to capture deaths in TBS and wilderness. As the data started to reveal that programs were far more safe than our local public school system the matrix integrity started to be attacked. In response I asked if anyone wanted to contribute any data that they thought was missing (trying to bring people into the process) and none was offered, apparently because the matrix was accurate, as is, but it went against their personal cause and many posters didn’t want parents to see this.
I may be many things, I may not understand all these schools inside and out and I may not be familiar with individual counselors who have harmed children. But I have been clear on what I know firsthand about the industry and what I don’t, the rest is my opinion.
I think it is important to stick with the truth and present both sides, otherwise people will know or find out that you are not being truthful eventually and there will be no credibility left. If data is being presented, provide links to your sources or back up information, as I did. Many parents emailed me to ask questions and to comment on how easy the information I provided was to read. I didn’t need to defend the data because my sources we easy to check.
I recommended un-banning you because i didn't feel you were techincally flooding, but I still detest what you have to say and believe (damn near bordering on know) that you work for the industry (albeit indirectly).
I understand and thank you for taking the time to review my posts for possible flooding. I don’t really know what flooding means, so wasn’t sure if I was guilty or not. But I do appreciate it and I turned to you because I felt you would be fair and defend the right to free speech regardless of how you felt about my position or me personally. My income does not rise or fall based on how successful programs are or NATSAP. I don’t stand to gain financially from the result of what I write.