Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => Straight, Inc. and Derivatives => Topic started by: ajax13 on August 11, 2008, 01:48:33 PM
-
The salient points about All About Receiving Cash remain unchallenged by AARColytes.
For anyone interested in the AARC phenomenon, here is a brief run-down:
AARC is the product of a series of US-based socio-religous groups that operated youth substance abuse treatment centres.
The first of these, the Seed, opened in the early seventies, and employed the group confrontation methods used in AARC. Like AARC, the inmates were held against their will and separated from their families, who were also indoctrinated.
The Seed was the subject of an inquiry that led to a Senate report likening the methods used in the Seed to communist brain-washing of UN prisoners from the Korean war.
The Seed was then prohibited from taking in minors. A Seed parent, Mel Sembler, then took the Seed methods and opened Straight. Straight employed the host home model used in AARC, the peer counsellor model, the use of confinement against the prisoners will, isolation from the family until initital indoctrination is complete, and employed the confrontational group attack method still used in AARC.
One Straight parent, Miller Newton, began to work for Straight and became a Director of Straight. Straight was beset with an array of legal problems, from charges against staff for abuse of clients, to fraud, to lawsuits filed against Straight by former prisoners. All of Straight's facilities are now closed, but a number of former Straight employees simply re-opened Straight programs under new names, employing the identical methods.
Miller Newton, beset with many problems himself arising from his time at Straight opened his own Straight-based facility, called Kids.
During the era when Straight operated, Alberta parents had begun sending their offspring to Straight. There is some evidence that the Alberta Government was involved in this operation to some extent. Later, several dozen Albertans send their offspring to Kids.
AARC's Executive Director worked at Kids for approximately a year and a half. Kids attempted to open a Calgary branch called Kids of the Canadian West. Over one million dollars was raised for this project from charity sources and from the Provincial Government of Alberta.
Due to exposure of an array of abuses at Kids from fraud to unlawful confinement, Government support for Kids of the Canadia West was withdrawn. Ministers in the government insisted that some form of official regulation and oversight be in place for such a facility, but the nature of a Straight clone precluded that.
A year or so after the demise of KCW, AARC opened. The Executive Director of AARC had been employed as a Clinical Staff at Kids in the US. Additionally, a number of parents of Kids prisoners were volunteers at AARC. The representative of the Rotary Club who had originally helped arranged for Kids to get $600 000 put his step-son into AARC as one of the first dozen clients.
AARC also employed peer counsellors who were former Kids prisoners.
The host home method of isolating new prisoners was taken directly from Kids. The raps and other confronational elements of the indoctrination procedure were also taken from Kids. The use of former clients with no professional training as peer counsellors was also taken from Kids. A control technique where the new prisoner is under the control of a "trusty", an "oldcomer" who has passed the first stages of indoctrination was also taken from Kids.
Initially there were some professional licensed mental health workers employed at AARC, but over time the staff has been completely replaced with either former clients, client parents, or relatives of the Executive Director.
Several years after opening AARC, the Executive Director obtained a PhD from the Union Institute.
This US-based school will provide a candidate with a PhD without attending classes, and without examinations. A Master's degree was preferred, but not necessary to enter this PhD program.
Miller Newton had two PhDs from this school.
Union Institute faculty and former students provided testimonials for both Kids and AARC. A Union faculty member was a co-author of AARC's self-study, from 2005.
Miller Newton has been sued, successfully, for millions of dollars by former Kids prisoners for abuses suffered in Kids. In addition, he settled with Medicaid for multiple cases of fraud.
Unlawful confinement is routinely used in AARC to keep Newcomers isolated from their families. These Newcomers are not permitted to use the telephone and have contact with their families only under the supervision of AARC employees.
Newcomers are locked into bedrooms at night with their Oldcomers.
AARC charges $50 000 per day per inmate, in spite of the fact that it is located in an industrial park in facilities for which it has received millions of dollars over the years. There is no residency for clients in AARC.
AARC has never had a license for their treatment centre. A number of years ago, the facility was accredited by a non-regulatory body as a crisis nursery.
There is no psyciatrist on AARC's staff. Nor is there a licensed psychologist, nor a registered social worker.
Intake for new prisoners consists of a quiz. There is no physical drug-screen, and the intake is not performerd by a physician.
In spite of the lack of licensing and oversight by a regulatory body, various official have contributed to AARC's income and client base by providing their charges to AARC. This includes a Probation Officer whose husband was AARC staff, and a judge whose husband was a former AARC board member, and the only physician whom AARC clients could see while incarcerated in AARC.
Clients wishing to see this physician had to be accompanied by an AARC staff member.
-
Ajax13 disclaimer:
Warning!! He is a confirmed liar. He has no experience with AARC and is stuck taking care of his wife who has major substance abuse issues. So he comes on fornits to vent his anger towards places which rehabilitate because he wishes his wife had taken her chance more seriously but seems more inclined to blame others for his situation.
If you review the study AARC has one of the highest success rates of the top 5 programs:
85% of the grads are clean and sober after 4 years and
93% are clean and sober after their first 12 months after graduating.
Study – http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0 (http://http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0)
-
Just stop. Really, you're making an ass out of yourself. Ajax has presented valid questions that have never been answered.
None of this has to do with Ajax. It's about Vause and his false claims and bogus "studies" that are nothing more than his yesmen nodding their heads in approval.
-
Confirmed by whom? The Leader?
-
Ajax13 disclaimer:
Warning!! He is a confirmed liar. He has no experience with AARC and is stuck taking care of his wife who has major substance abuse issues. So he comes on fornits to vent his anger towards places which rehabilitate because he wishes his wife had taken her chance more seriously but seems more inclined to blame others for his situation.
If you review the study AARC has one of the highest success rates of the top 5 programs:
85% of the grads are clean and sober after 4 years and
93% are clean and sober after their first 12 months after graduating.
Study – http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0 (http://http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0)
Just stop. Really, you're making an ass out of yourself. Ajax has presented valid questions that have never been answered.
None of this has to do with Ajax. It's about Vause and his false claims and bogus "studies" that are nothing more than his yesmen nodding their heads in approval.
No he has not!! He has lied about shit, people and events without backing up any statements. He lies to make his wife feel good and it is not right. Makes up facts to suit his wifes imagination. Claims people don’t have degrees. When people answer his questions he ignores the answers.
It will continue until he begins to get honest.
-
Sorry, who did you say had confirmed that I was a liar? The guy who keeps news articles posted on is website that say he is a psychologist when he is not?
-
Ajax13 disclaimer:
Warning!! He is a confirmed liar. He has no experience with AARC and is stuck taking care of his wife who has major substance abuse issues. So he comes on fornits to vent his anger towards places which rehabilitate because he wishes his wife had taken her chance more seriously but seems more inclined to blame others for his situation.
If you review the study AARC has one of the highest success rates of the top 5 programs:
85% of the grads are clean and sober after 4 years and
93% are clean and sober after their first 12 months after graduating.
Study – http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0 (http://http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0)
-
It will continue until he begins to get honest.
rtynjk, that cultspeak tells me exactly who I should believe.
-
It will continue until he begins to get honest.
rtynjk, that cultspeak tells me exactly who I should believe.
He claims he was in a cult, but he speaks like everyone else to me.
-
It will continue until he begins to get honest.
rtynjk, that cultspeak tells me exactly who I should believe.
This is one of the reasons why cults and abusive programs are so overstated here on fornits. A person uses a phrase which you believe to be unique to a cult and that person is branded as a cult member when in fact that phrase is used everyday in the business world. I have seen the same thing done when someone talks about getting screamed at or punished in a program then the whole program is considered abusive and any program which employees move to automatically is considered abusive. I believe that abusive programs exist but there are way less than everyone here would have you believe and statements like the one above support this conclusion.
-
Again, the Who shares his sentiments with no supporting facts. Apparently, the Who is still under the impression that readers here are interested in what he believes rather than in reading information on which they can make their own conclusions. Still no information that contradicts anything that I have posted here with regard to All About Reiving Cash.
-
Ajax13 disclaimer:
Warning!! He is a confirmed liar. He has no experience with AARC and is stuck taking care of his wife who has major substance abuse issues. So he comes on fornits to vent his anger towards places which rehabilitate because he wishes his wife had taken her chance more seriously but seems more inclined to blame others for his situation.
If you review the study AARC has one of the highest success rates of the top 5 programs:
85% of the grads are clean and sober after 4 years and
93% are clean and sober after their first 12 months after graduating.
Study – http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0 (http://http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0)
-
The 52% rate of relapse shown by AARC in their 2005 study does not give a precise picture of the population. Individuals in the sample population had widely varying periods since graduation, from a few months up to a few years. Fifteen of the one hundred sequential grads chosen for the study did not take part in the study. Still waiting to hear the name of the psychiatrist on AARC's staff that Friendly/Censored Friendly/Interested/Honouredguest/vin'sfavouriteguest promised us weeks ago.
-
Ajax13 disclaimer:
Warning!! He is a confirmed liar. He has no experience with AARC and is stuck taking care of his wife who has major substance abuse issues. So he comes on fornits to vent his anger towards places which rehabilitate because he wishes his wife had taken her chance more seriously but seems more inclined to blame others for his situation.
If you review the study AARC has one of the highest success rates of the top 5 programs:
85% of the grads are clean and sober after 4 years and
93% are clean and sober after their first 12 months after graduating.
Study – http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0 (http://http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0)
-
Who did you say that psychiatrist is on the AARC staff?
-
Ajax13 disclaimer:
Warning!! He is a confirmed liar. He has no experience with AARC and is stuck taking care of his wife who has major substance abuse issues. So he comes on fornits to vent his anger towards places which rehabilitate because he wishes his wife had taken her chance more seriously but seems more inclined to blame others for his situation.
If you review the study AARC has one of the highest success rates of the top 5 programs:
85% of the grads are clean and sober after 4 years and
93% are clean and sober after their first 12 months after graduating.
Study – http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0 (http://http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0)
-
Still waiting to hear who that psychiatrist is at AARC, along with the licensed psychologist and the registered social worker we were told were on staff.
-
Ajax13 disclaimer:
Warning!! He is a confirmed liar. He has no experience with AARC and is stuck taking care of his wife who has major substance abuse issues. So he comes on fornits to vent his anger towards places which rehabilitate because he wishes his wife had taken her chance more seriously but seems more inclined to blame others for his situation.
If you review the study AARC has one of the highest success rates of the top 5 programs:
85% of the grads are clean and sober after 4 years and
93% are clean and sober after their first 12 months after graduating.
Study – http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0 (http://http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0)
-
No AARColyte able to demonstrate any evidence to support the claim that I have made up anything. Everyone, take out your big books and start gnashing your teeth.
-
Ajax13 disclaimer:
Warning!! He is a confirmed liar. He has no experience with AARC and is stuck taking care of his wife who has major substance abuse issues. So he comes on fornits to vent his anger towards places which rehabilitate because he wishes his wife had taken her chance more seriously but seems more inclined to blame others for his situation.
If you review the study AARC has one of the highest success rates of the top 5 programs:
85% of the grads are clean and sober after 4 years and
93% are clean and sober after their first 12 months after graduating.
Study – http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0 (http://http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0)
-
Still nothing. This inability to demonstrate any evidence that what I have said is untrue is brings to mind AARC's inability to demonstrate that their treatment centre has a license.
-
Ajax13 disclaimer:
Warning!! He is a confirmed liar. He has no experience with AARC and is stuck taking care of his wife who has major substance abuse issues. So he comes on fornits to vent his anger towards places which rehabilitate because he wishes his wife had taken her chance more seriously but seems more inclined to blame others for his situation.
If you review the study AARC has one of the highest success rates of the top 5 programs:
85% of the grads are clean and sober after 4 years and
93% are clean and sober after their first 12 months after graduating.
Study – http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0 (http://http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0)
-
AARC still has no license, no psychiatrist, no licensed psychologist, and no registered social worker on staff.
-
Ajax13 disclaimer:
Warning!! He is a confirmed liar. He has no experience with AARC and is stuck taking care of his wife who has major substance abuse issues. So he comes on fornits to vent his anger towards places which rehabilitate because he wishes his wife had taken her chance more seriously but seems more inclined to blame others for his situation.
If you review the study AARC has one of the highest success rates of the top 5 programs:
85% of the grads are clean and sober after 4 years and
93% are clean and sober after their first 12 months after graduating.
Study – http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0 (http://http://fornits.com/smf/index.php?PHPSESSID=6qtomta92gkab729sc9sv6htk0&topic=25625.0)
-
AARC still has no license, no psychiatrist, no licensed psychologist, and no registered social worker on staff.
no licensed plumber, licensed pediatrician, licensed engineer, licensed chiropractor, licensed psychologist, 1 person with a class 2 license, no licensed electrician or licensed neurologist.
But when they need one they arrange to have one there like everyone else. No one keeps all these licensed people on staff, even some hospitals.
-
You might find that hospitals generally keep licensed professional staff on the premises providing treatment. As a rule, in a hospital you won't find many unlicesned amateurs providing treatment.
-
You might find that hospitals generally keep licensed professional staff on the premises providing treatment. As a rule, in a hospital you won't find many unlicesned amateurs providing treatment.
Yes they generally do if they are needed 24/7. If they are not then they are not kept on staff. It depends on how much a person is utilized during the course of a day or week if they need to be brought on full time or not. Licensed chiropractors may be called in during an emergency or the patient would be sent to see them at their location, as an example. Depends on the hospital, size, location on how staffed the are.
-
You might find that hospitals generally keep licensed professional staff on the premises providing treatment. As a rule, in a hospital you won't find many unlicesned amateurs providing treatment.
Yes they generally do if they are needed 24/7. If they are not then they are not kept on staff. It depends on how much a person is utilized during the course of a day or week if they need to be brought on full time or not. Licensed chiropractors may be called in during an emergency or the patient would be sent to see them at their location, as an example. Depends on the hospital, size, location on how staffed the are.
Agreed, If you are downtown manhatten then you probably have a full staff of almost every profession including translators of 80 different languages. But places like Red lodge , Montana or East Buttuck may only have a receptionist and the doctor needs to be called in from the local trout stream in an emergency and specialists are located in neighboring cities.
-
Where does the provision of treatment by amateurs, such as the entire saff of AARC, fit into this picture? As far as I know, AARC is located in a major metropolitan centre and purports to provide long-term treatment to chemically addicted youth and their family. Why are amateurs like the Wiz, and his entire clinical and peer staff, providing treatment to anyone?
-
Bullshit~ No one has ever mentioned the words "get honest" to me in the real world, business world, or elsewhere. That is cultspeak that I haven't heard since being blasted and spat upon in my own group. Those who continue to speak such jargon are still under the influence (or not too far from the influence) of the greed based mind control cults that took the lives of so many and ruined the lives of so many others. People don't motivate in the real world, people don't beltloop each other in the real world, and people don't use terminology such as "get honest" in the real world.
The people here have subjectively EXPERIENCED abuse under the guise of rehabilitation and are able to identify and recognize abuse that continues today. I don't think those here on fornits overestimate or exaggerate anything as you mentioned. There have been numerous studies, lawsuits, news reports, allegations, investigations and even congressional hearings on continued abuse that continues to take the lives of way too many children, and ruin and wreck the lives of others.
It will continue until he begins to get honest.
rtynjk, that cultspeak tells me exactly who I should believe.
This is one of the reasons why cults and abusive programs are so overstated here on fornits. A person uses a phrase which you believe to be unique to a cult and that person is branded as a cult member when in fact that phrase is used everyday in the business world. I have seen the same thing done when someone talks about getting screamed at or punished in a program then the whole program is considered abusive and any program which employees move to automatically is considered abusive. I believe that abusive programs exist but there are way less than everyone here would have you believe and statements like the one above support this conclusion.
-
Where does the provision of treatment by amateurs, such as the entire saff of AARC, fit into this picture? As far as I know, AARC is located in a major metropolitan centre and purports to provide long-term treatment to chemically addicted youth and their family. Why are amateurs like the Wiz, and his entire clinical and peer staff, providing treatment to anyone?
I think what the guest was saying is if a professional is not utilized or needed in a full time capacity and/or since they are in close proximity to many professionals then there is no reason to have them on staff.
-
Bullshit~ No one has ever mentioned the words "get honest" to me in the real world, business world, or elsewhere. That is cultspeak that I haven't heard since being blasted and spat upon in my own group. Those who continue to speak such jargon are still under the influence (or not too far from the influence) of the greed based mind control cults that took the lives of so many and ruined the lives of so many others.
One reason I can't stand Dr. Phool. He's a fake doctor, uses cultspeak, has his own series of LGAT seminars (based off LifeSpring) and refers to programs. The four are most definitely interrelated as far as i'm concerned. Too many coincidences. Whenever I hear somebody use a phrase like that (which is not often, but unfortunately becoming more common), I always make sure to ask where they heard it from.
The other day I was watching "Dexter", second season (during which he admits to being an addict (to killing people.. lol) and goes to a rehab... but then he really gets into it and starts using language like "in my head". GAAAH! In the end, of course, he's still killing people (including his sponsor... lol), and the steppery didn't seem to do him all that much good other than to convince him that he was powerless over his "addiction", that it was natural, and that he should just continue killing people. I can't figure out whether the director is supporting or making fun of stepcraft, as it's often a bit hard to tell. One thing is for sure, though: the industry is growing, as is it's influence on society, however indirect.
-
I think what the guest was saying is if a professional is not utilized or needed in a full time capacity and/or since they are in close proximity to many professionals then there is no reason to have them on staff.
I think the whole debate as to whether or not qualifications is relevant is a red herring... chaff. Hypothetically, even if the place were staffed with qualified shrinks, if they didn't change their practices all it would do is change the place from a nonprofessional therapy cult that abuses kids to a regular plain old therapy cult that abuses kids.
The ultimate issue with me is that "treating" people against their will is inherantly not actually "treatment", rather re-education. Professional or not, the thing with programs is that you don't progress until you confess to whatever they said you did, accept the program, praise the program, push the program on your peers, etc... In soviet russia, you don't leave interrogation until you confess, and you won't leave prison unless you cooperate (includes snitching on others, etc...) Treatment is a voluntary process. What goes on in programs isn't, and as such inherently abusive as it violates a person's free will (this includes the right to make a mess out of your own life, so long as you do not infringe on the liberties of others).
If you love and care for a person you respect their human right to self determination... guiding them and getting them to respect you rather than coercing them into a course of action that ultimately you can't control and will backfire. Pressure is met with resistance. Instead, convince a person to change course (and respect their decision not to take your advice). It may not be easy, but it is the only way that will work in the long run.
-
Not being specific to AARC, because I know very little about it. I agree with the whole treating vs. re-education. But there isn’t much choice if the kids are under age. There are very few kids who know enough to seek out help on their own. I have known children who are aware/mature enough to get themselves home from school and be trusted in an empty house for the afternoon at age 10. There are other kids who couldn’t be trusted for a minute by themselves at age 18. So each child is different.
On the other end if the parents decide not to parent their kids and refuse to get them help when they need it they can be liable for any and all damage that child does until the child reaches 18/21 regardless of if they care about them or not. So it is not just the parents who care about their kids who place them in programs, there is also a motivation for parents who could care less what their kids do to place them.
If a child is not attending school and is passed out in the driveway every morning when you wake up, hasn’t responded to local services then a parent needs to do something and get the child help whether the child feels he/she needs it or not. It wouldn’t be responsible parenting to just drag the kid off the driveway and onto the lawn so you can back the car out to go to work.
-
If you know very little about AARC, then why are you posting time and again to share your conjecture and speculation?
As to what is responsible, is it more responsible to turn the child over to quacks? Is it correct then, that desperate people should be able to do whatever they choose, from forcing the child to undergo an exorcism to castration? Anything goe if you say you're desperate? Isn't that the philsophy of a criminal?
-
If you know very little about AARC, then why are you posting time and again to share your conjecture and speculation?
As to what is responsible, is it more responsible to turn the child over to quacks? Is it correct then, that desperate people should be able to do whatever they choose, from forcing the child to undergo an exorcism to castration? Anything goe if you say you're desperate? Isn't that the philsophy of a criminal?
The same reason you are!! If you knew more than me you wouldnt be asking so many questions. I am here to learn and contribute.
It is responsible to get help for your child whether your child recognizes they need help or not. To castrate them, no. I am sure some contries and religions do that but this is not something I agree with or would do.
-
So castration is out, but quackery is okay? You've avoided directly addressing my question. You don't pose questions Who, you offer either your opinion, your speculation, or occasionally a manipulation of vague information already presented. I live with someone whom I believe to have been harmed by AARC, whether anyone else agrees with this or not. I also believe that her sibilings, some of whom are my friends, were also harmed by AARC. I live in the city in which AARC operates, and I think that it's a criminal organization, regardless of what anyone else thinks, so I have made efforts to draw attention to the issues related to AARC that I believe make it a dangerous and unlawful organization. It's my community. So, again, what are you doing, Who?
-
So castration is out, but quackery is okay?
Quackery is a derogatory term used to describe unscientific medical practices. Unscientific medical practices are okay as long as they are safe. I drink Green tea to reduce my chances of cancer but there are no scientific studies that show there is a direct correlation. Some people throw salt over the left shoulder after they spill it... no harm done.
You've avoided directly addressing my question.
I don’t believe I have but I do know that you have, I watched you for days avoiding answering any questions from others. Myself included.
You don't pose questions Who,
Sure I do, maybe not lately.
you offer either your opinion, your speculation,
I do, yes
or occasionally a manipulation of vague information already presented.
I believe that part has been already taken by you. You are mistaken.
I live with someone whom I believe to have been harmed by AARC,whether anyone else agrees with this or not. I also believe that her sibilings, some of whom are my friends, were also harmed by AARC.
You believe, but are not totally sure. I don’t think others are either based on posts I have read here. You shouldn’t attack someone unless you are sure of what happened and get some sort of official documentation of the incidence so that the stories are captured and do not change over time or details lost. Maybe local sheriff office.
I live in the city in which AARC operates, and I think that it's a criminal organization, regardless of what anyone else thinks, so I have made efforts to draw attention to the issues related to AARC that I believe make it a dangerous and unlawful organization. It's my community. So, again, what are you doing, Who?
I understand standing up for your community. But the problems usually spread beyond the town or cities boarders and many others like myself tend to get involved. We had a similar problem here in the East. We had a guy here a year or two ago (Lawrence Summers, you probably remember)) who basically said that men were smarter than woman in science and he was the head of Harvard University. The phrase went something like this “the possibility that many factors outside of socialization could explain why there were more men than women in high-end science and engineering positions. He suggested one such possible reason could be men's higher variance in relevant innate abilities or innate preference....â€. He wasn’t fired but he was attacked from people like yourself as well as outside the Boston/Cambridge area. So proximity to AARC doesn’t necessarily mean direct or indirect involvement in local issues. If AARC is a problem then it is everyones issue.
...
]
-
Your explanation of quackery had nothing whatsoever to do with what I said, and it's incorrect. Quackery is a form of fraud, and as such is illegal on those grounds alone, regardless of medical malpractise laws. But nice effort at derailing the thread. Why would you tell me to contact the local Sheriff's office? We don't have such a thing where I live. The Sheriff here handles property seizures and the like. If you weren't so massively ignorant of the subject at hand, you would know that. Now which problem spread to you from AARC that required your involvement? And beyond undermining the threads in this forum, since you admittedly know almost nothing about AARC, what are you doing about this problem?
I think what the guest was saying is if a professional is not utilized or needed in a full time capacity and/or since they are in close proximity to many professionals then there is no reason to have them on staff.[/quote]I didn't attack Lawerence Summers. Beyond that, I'm not sure what your comment "people like yourself" means. If you were saying that they were like me because they attacked Mr. Summers, then your statement was entirely incorrect. As is so often the case, what you post has nothing to do with the topic of the thread.
-
So, again, what are you doing, Who?
He's leading you around in circles attempting to tire you out. Even if you win an argument with him, he'll raise the same one in a page or two (knowing that most casual readers won't bother to look back).
My advice is to completely ignore him (click on his username and add him as a "foe"). If you do that, he goes away. Or you can categorize your responses to his most common arguments into a faq and simply post a link to the appropriate answer in each of your responses (so you don't have to repeat yourself).
Look, Who. I've talked to AARC survivors, and frankly, based on what they've told me, it's one of the worst places i've heard of. Maybe you should do a little reserach on who you are defending before you decide (in boredom, I suppose) to give AARC some pro-bono propaganda services.
-
Where does the provision of treatment by amateurs, such as the entire saff of AARC, fit into this picture? As far as I know, AARC is located in a major metropolitan centre and purports to provide long-term treatment to chemically addicted youth and their family. Why are amateurs like the Wiz, and his entire clinical and peer staff, providing treatment to anyone?
I think what the guest was saying is if a professional is not utilized or needed in a full time capacity and/or since they are in close proximity to many professionals then there is no reason to have them on staff.
Sorry, who was it that determined that professionals were not needed to render treatment in AARC? AARC purports to offer long-term treatment to adolescents suffering from chemical dependency and their families. That sounds like medical treatment to me. I have yet to enter a medical facility in Calgary where treatment is left to amateurs as long as there are profesionals in close proximity. I am sure that anyone else in this city would be hard-pressed to find another medical clinic that has no licensed professionals on staff and leaves treatment to unlicensed amateurs. But thanks again Who for telling us what someone else is saying. It helps me out immensely when you tell me what I'm thinking, and I can only hope that it does the same for others. The Glen or Glenda business is intriguing. You take a highly paternalistic attitude at times, but when you're corner and log-rolling, you resort to high feminine tactics, such as claiming to speak for a group. You remind me of a thirteen-year-old girl with Daddy issues when you do that. Keep it up.
-
Sorry, who was it that determined that professionals were not needed to render treatment in AARC? AARC purports to offer long-term treatment to adolescents suffering from chemical dependency and their families. That sounds like medical treatment to me. I have yet to enter a medical facility in Calgary where treatment is left to amateurs as long as there are profesionals in close proximity. I am sure that anyone else in this city would be hard-pressed to find another medical clinic that has no licensed professionals on staff and leaves treatment to unlicensed amateurs. But thanks again Who for telling us what someone else is saying. It helps me out immensely when you tell me what I'm thinking, and I can only hope that it does the same for others. The Glen or Glenda business is intriguing. You take a highly paternalistic attitude at times, but when you're corner and log-rolling, you resort to high feminine tactics, such as claiming to speak for a group. You remind me of a thirteen-year-old girl with Daddy issues when you do that. Keep it up.
I am not saying they don’t need professionals on site or that amateurs should be used in their stead (you are upset because you don’t listen and misunderstand)….. But they may not need them 24/7 and therefore not need them on staff. If a place needs meds dispensed prior to bed time you don’t need to have a nurse on staff 24 hours (or on staff). You could bring one in for the meds and then she could go home, the same with other professionals. Thats all I am saying.
...
-
Look, Who. I've talked to AARC survivors, and frankly, based on what they've told me, it's one of the worst places i've heard of. Maybe you should do a little reserach on who you are defending before you decide (in boredom, I suppose) to give AARC some pro-bono propaganda services.
I guess I can take your word for that, I havent done any research on them. I am not defending AARC as a program, just the tactics used... why try to discredit (for example) a place like Hazelden, just makes everyone here look like idiots.
...
-
Look, Who. I've talked to AARC survivors, and frankly, based on what they've told me, it's one of the worst places i've heard of. Maybe you should do a little reserach on who you are defending before you decide (in boredom, I suppose) to give AARC some pro-bono propaganda services.
I guess I can take your word for that, I havent done any research on them. I am not defending AARC as a program, just the tactics used... why try to discredit (for example) a place like Hazelden, just makes everyone here look like idiots.
...
Back in the late 60s, Hazelden started sending people down to Eagleville Hospital in Pennsylvania to "learn their methodology." Eagleville Hospital, meanwhile, had learned their "methods" directly from Synanon, Daytop, and other TCs. It wasn't 'till the mid-80s that Hazelden finally admitted that there "is a better way" than their then current use of hot seats and confrontational therapy.
http://www.counselormagazine.com/content/view/608/ (http://www.counselormagazine.com/content/view/608/)
-
Back in the late 60s, Hazelden started sending people down to Eagleville Hospital in Pennsylvania to "learn their methodology." Eagleville Hospital, meanwhile, had learned their "methods" directly from Synanon, Daytop, and other TCs. It wasn't 'till the mid-80s that Hazelden finally admitted that there "is a better way" than their then current use of hot seats and confrontational therapy.
http://www.counselormagazine.com/content/view/608/ (http://www.counselormagazine.com/content/view/608/)
Thanks Ursus,great find!! The emotional tone of treatment has come a long way (and still has far to go for some places)
This little known story shows that change is not just difficult for the substance abuser/addict but also for the professionals who treat them:
It can be difficult to change established mental models. The Hungarian physician Ignaz Semmelweis discovered in 1847 that the deaths of mothers from childbed fever could be dramatically reduced if doctors washed their hands before delivering each baby. His discovery was adamantly rejected, however, and he was fired from his hospital position in Vienna. His subsequent studies demonstrated conclusively that handwashing could virtually eliminate these preventable deaths. He published his findings in a book in 1861, but his data clashed with medical theories of the time, and were widely rejected. Practitioners continued to deny the evidence, rather than facing the terrible truth that they had killed countless women simply by not washing their hands. In 1865, at age 47, Semmelweis was involuntarily committed to a mental asylum, where he was beaten to death two weeks later. Another generation passed before handwashing became routine when attending childbirth, and in the interim, thousands of women died needlessly.
...
-
I have a friend , that went tru Hazelden, in 88.She swears up and down,that it was the best thing that could have happened.Ive read alot of the literature that she got during TREATMENT,(and I do believe it to be just that) Its like a blend of rational recovery with the 12 step type stuff playing a somewhat more minor part. In my most humble,and "having been thru the wringer" __OPINION___ meaning ,UN-Like SOME FOLKS ON THIS FORUM,I have suffered at the hands of MALIGNANT,and MOST VILE quackery.-------------------------If ,today , I were in need of treatment,real BONAFIDE treatment ,Hazelden would be my choice.
AS BOTH A SURVIVOR,AND GRADUATE OF STRAIGHT INC,MORGAN YACHT ERA ,ST.PETE,FLA......DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW HARD THAT IS TO SAY???
-
@TheWho: Yeah, well... "hot seats and confrontational therapy" are still being used in programs to "treat" everything from true drug addiction to depression to simply having a "bad attitude," whatever that means. How many generations must pass 'till humane treatment becomes routine, and how many kids' lives must become totally screwed up in the interim?
@seamus: Hazelden was already well underway in moving away from their previous flirtation with Synanon styled treatment when your friend attended.
There was a time when the dominant mode of chemical dependency treatment was based on a "tear 'em down to build 'em up" philosophy... Counseling sessions sounded disrespectful and dehumanizing. And they were... Patients...don't need to be "put down" to deal with symptoms...they need to be treated as individuals, with the same rights and respect we expect for ourselves. We're concerned because many treatment programs still use these confrontational techniques. Some even call themselves Hazelden or Minnesota models. It's true that we once used confrontation. But we found a better way. -- Hazelden Foundation, 1985[/list]
When Joe Gauld attended Hazelden back in 1975, confrontational therapy was still in full swing. I personally do not think that this was the first time he attended, but I haven't been able to find confirmation of that. Both he and his wife, not to mention good old Sumner Hawley, were all quite fond of hitting the sauce to unmanageable levels (well, maybe Sumner was better at hiding it). In the meantime, confrontational therapy was the backbone of Hyde School methodology since its inception (1966), and there wasn't a whole lot of difference in Joe's style before vs. after his visit to Hazelden in 1975. But I digress...
Hazelden seems to be an organization that tries to be on the cutting edge of the latest and greatest treatment methodologies, and the therapeutic community methods that harkened to the Synanon days were the cat's meow back in the late 1960s through the 70s. The fact that said methods are definitively NOT considered the cat's meow these days merits emphasis. Why are programs for adolescents still using them?
I should also mention that Eagleville Hospital, to its credit, seems to have also moved away from the confrontational model. A piece of trivia: I do believe there is still a fund at Eagleville for donations to be made in Nancy Spungen's memory (who never attended), that was set up in the aftermath of her death/murder back in 1978.
-
Why are programs for adolescents still using them?
Because it gives marketable results: "patients" who will swear up and down that the program is the saviour, and without it, they would be deadinsaneinjail. Does it work long-term? Of course not... but programs get their "sucess story" far before the kids self destruct... so why should they really care? The way they function as it is couldn't be more profitable.
-
If ,today , I were in need of treatment,real BONAFIDE treatment ,Hazelden would be my choice.
AS BOTH A SURVIVOR,AND GRADUATE OF STRAIGHT INC,MORGAN YACHT ERA ,ST.PETE,FLA......DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW HARD THAT IS TO SAY???
Personally, stepcraft makes me cringe and convulse instinctively (yeah, I suppose the program contributed to the reaction). If I were a heroin addict or somethign like that in need and want of recovery, i'd probably opt for something like Ibogaine (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibogaine) or pure rational recovery... rather than that powerlessness crap which, in my opinion, causes more harm than good. It's not logical. It's a cop out (sorry to use that term). No amount of dependence relinquishes a person from personal responsibility. People don't have to drink and do drugs, and if they do, people don't have to take a second or third or fourth drink. Those who say they do are simply making excuses for their own lack of self control. Seems harsh? Well. It's the logical reality of the situation and if people want to get in control of their lives they should first realize they have control, rather than handing it over to some fictional Easter bunny who may or may not be having a bad day.
AA statistics speak for themselves (http://http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-effectiveness.html). 12 steppers have a 5 times higher rate of binge drinking than alcoholics who don't do stepcraft. Know why? I think it's because they're told that they're powerless, and if they have one drink they won't be able to stop themselves from havign another. Such idiotic, illogical behaviour is not a product of some "spiritual disease" of addiction, it's learned helplessness (http://http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-powerless.html) that's attractive, not to people who want to stop drinking, but to those who want to take comfort in the illusion that their own behavior is somehow not their fault. It's bullshit.
To read more about stepcraft, check out the Orange Papers (http://http://www.orange-papers.org/).
-
So, again, what are you doing, Who?
He's leading you around in circles attempting to tire you out. Even if you win an argument with him, he'll raise the same one in a page or two (knowing that most casual readers won't bother to look back).
My advice is to completely ignore him (click on his username and add him as a "foe"). If you do that, he goes away. Or you can categorize your responses to his most common arguments into a faq and simply post a link to the appropriate answer in each of your responses (so you don't have to repeat yourself).
Nailed it. Totally nailed it.
-
@TheWho: Yeah, well... "hot seats and confrontational therapy" are still being used in programs to "treat" everything from true drug addiction to depression to simply having a "bad attitude," whatever that means. How many generations must pass 'till humane treatment becomes routine, and how many kids' lives must become totally screwed up in the interim?
@seamus: Hazelden was already well underway in moving away from their previous flirtation with Synanon styled treatment when your friend attended.
There was a time when the dominant mode of chemical dependency treatment was based on a "tear 'em down to build 'em up" philosophy... Counseling sessions sounded disrespectful and dehumanizing. And they were... Patients...don't need to be "put down" to deal with symptoms...they need to be treated as individuals, with the same rights and respect we expect for ourselves. We're concerned because many treatment programs still use these confrontational techniques. Some even call themselves Hazelden or Minnesota models. It's true that we once used confrontation. But we found a better way. -- Hazelden Foundation, 1985[/list]
When Joe Gauld attended Hazelden back in 1975, confrontational therapy was still in full swing. I personally do not think that this was the first time he attended, but I haven't been able to find confirmation of that. Both he and his wife, not to mention good old Sumner Hawley, were all quite fond of hitting the sauce to unmanageable levels (well, maybe Sumner was better at hiding it). In the meantime, confrontational therapy was the backbone of Hyde School methodology since its inception (1966), and there wasn't a whole lot of difference in Joe's style before vs. after his visit to Hazelden in 1975. But I digress...
Hazelden seems to be an organization that tries to be on the cutting edge of the latest and greatest treatment methodologies, and the therapeutic community methods that harkened to the Synanon days were the cat's meow back in the late 1960s through the 70s. The fact that said methods are definitively NOT considered the cat's meow these days merits emphasis. Why are programs for adolescents still using them?
I should also mention that Eagleville Hospital, to its credit, seems to have also moved away from the confrontational model. A piece of trivia: I do believe there is still a fund at Eagleville for donations to be made in Nancy Spungen's memory (who never attended), that was set up in the aftermath of her death/murder back in 1978.
I agree, I know of many people who have gone thru the Hazelden program in the mid to late '90s who did very well. Not sure why more programs are not picking their model. It seems to be successful and non- confrontational.
...
-
So, again, what are you doing, Who?
He's leading you around in circles attempting to tire you out. Even if you win an argument with him, he'll raise the same one in a page or two (knowing that most casual readers won't bother to look back).
My advice is to completely ignore him (click on his username and add him as a "foe"). If you do that, he goes away. Or you can categorize your responses to his most common arguments into a faq and simply post a link to the appropriate answer in each of your responses (so you don't have to repeat yourself).
Look, Who. I've talked to AARC survivors, and frankly, based on what they've told me, it's one of the worst places i've heard of. Maybe you should do a little reserach on who you are defending before you decide (in boredom, I suppose) to give AARC some pro-bono propaganda services.
-
That's some good advice. Too bad nobody listens to it, not even the person who originally offered up such advice. By posting in this thread, psy contributes to perpetuating a conversation involving TheWho. This type of contradiction, which seems common on fornits, is confusing. It's like psy and some other posters have pent up monolgues they need to purge from themselves. TheWho acts as a release valve in this way, because most people in our everyday lives don't want to hear about it. That's my theory for why people, who know they are feeding TheWho like psy, do it anyways.
-
Damn where was Ibogaine,back when I needed it? :wall:
-
No he has not!! He has lied about shit, people and events without backing up any statements. He lies to make his wife feel good and it is not right. Makes up facts to suit his wifes imagination. Claims people don’t have degrees. When people answer his questions he ignores the answers.
It will continue until he begins to get honest.
Parent of a recent aarc graduate here.
Never heard "get honest" in the real world, but it's coined a lot in AARC.
AARC has dealings with a REAL psychiatrist. AARC will mention this person's name if they are queried on professionals within their organization. I spoke to her. This person is not on staff and is NOT in contact with the clients. She will "consult with the clinical staff" if it's requested. This is a consultation only, based on information provided by AARC staff, the psychiatrist does NOT interview or examine the client.
Despite my son's history and previous involvement with a psychiatrist, this psychiatrist had never heard of my son, certainly never treated him and was surprised to hear of many incidents I described that, due to their nature, should have been brought to her attention, but weren't.
My client child also believed AARC, specifically Dean Vause, was his legal guardian. He was not.
He believed "Doc Vause" was a medical doctor, a psychiatrist. He is not.
He believed Peter Choate was a psychiatrist or at least a psychologist. He is not. But Choate did give him a short quiz AFTER he was already a client at AARC, which according to them, confirmed his status as an addict.
This "quiz" along with information provided by AARC and no one else constituted the "independent, outside evaluation" that was explained to me to be conducted on my son. I fail to believe that Choate is entirely independent or outside of the AARC program.
He believed the doctor he visited (Dr. Alan Stanhope) had no previous or current connection to the AARC program despite the fact that this doctor is the only doctor to examine clients (they are not permitted to see their OWN physicians), is quoted several times on the AARC website, is a former board member, not to mention being married to the provincial youth court judge who ordered my son into the program in the first place and then kept him there as a minor without parental consent which was required to get him in there in the first place.
This husband and wife doctor/judge team also attended his graduation ceremony at AARC, as AARC appointed 'guests'.
He believed his lawyer had no connection to the AARC program and was simply a referral despite the fact that the clinical staff later revealed that this lawyer is a part of the AARC's "legal committee" and in spite of the fact that this lawyer was spotted sitting with the executive director of AARC, Dean Vause, in box seats at a Calgary Hitmen/Swift Current Bronco's playoff game.
I provided a wrapped Christmas present for my son, a dress shirt, along with a stocking full of toiletries that complied with "client rules". A staff member gave him this shirt and claimed it was HIS OWN and my son could have it. The contents of the stocking were later given to him too (sans stocking) with no mention that it came from his family.
He believed I abandoned him, and didn't care if he lived or died. He knew nothing of the numerous times I tried to remain in contact with him, but was unlawfully denied access to my own child for almost an entire YEAR!
He knew nothing of the fact that his autistic brother could not participate in the AARC program. Or that lack of participation meant he had to be removed from our household for me to remain in AARC and remain in contact with him. Despite the fact that there was no where for his brother to go, including AARC's suggestion that he be placed into the custody of Child Welfare even though he is safe and well cared for with his family.
He progressively grew to hate me, knew nothing of the torment his brother and I went through over the holidays and birthdays and each and every day we knew nothing of his whereabouts or well being.
Worst of all he grew to believe he was an addict, and an alcoholic.
His real problems and mental health issues that needed professional help were never addressed and he was treated for problems he had to THEN CREATE to ever get out of the program.
Don't even talk to me about "lies"!!!!!
Anything else you'd like first hand information on?
-
Wow. I'd like to see the resident aarcolytes respond to that. Ain't it a bitch when the parents and the kids get back together and figure out the program's bullshit. It's one of the main reasons the program needs to control communication so tightly. Just makes me smile ear to ear when it fails, though, and the program is caught pants down.
My heart goes out to your kid, though. He's so, so, fortunate to have you, though. I can't imagine how much easier it's going to be with you to help him through this and explain what was going on. Most kids never find out how the program play kids against parents as they never reconnect... It's not just the kids that programs hurt. So many families are destroyed...
-
Wow. I'd like to see the resident aarcolytes respond to that.
Well I'm sure a likely response is that my son is only a "program failure". One of the very few they were unable to "save" and we're probably both "sick".
Something like that?
-
Wow. I'd like to see the resident aarcolytes respond to that.
Well I'm sure a likely response is that my son is only a "program failure". One of the very few they were unable to "save" and we're probably both "sick".
Hey. In another thread they didn't respond to my post at all in substance other than to get diagnosed as "codependant" (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=25728&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=15#p313609). I'm so proud. I've gotten my first AARC diagnosis.
Something like that?
LOL. Don't forget they'll deny everything and throw hollow legal threats in every direction that make ginger and I laugh our collective asses off. Some of the shit the aarcolytes have written had me in stitches. It's like the idiots don't realize they are absolutely fucking powerless over this site. Guess what AARC: accept the things you cannot change (oh... and your easter bunny higher power can't touch this either).
:moon:
... i really miss the finger emoticon
-
Congrats Psy!
Yeah, I'm not expecting an intelligent response from the "insiders"
I'm sure had I been able to remain in the program I would have also come to "accept my powerlessness" as I learned to "live and let God", as I slowly lost facets of my own self-determined life. After all... "That too shall pass".
*shrugs*
-
Parent of a recent aarc graduate here.
Never heard "get honest" in the real world, but it's coined a lot in AARC.
AARC has dealings with a REAL psychiatrist. AARC will mention this person's name if they are queried on professionals within their organization. I spoke to her. This person is not on staff and is NOT in contact with the clients. She will "consult with the clinical staff" if it's requested. This is a consultation only, based on information provided by AARC staff, the psychiatrist does NOT interview or examine the client.
Despite my son's history and previous involvement with a psychiatrist, this psychiatrist had never heard of my son, certainly never treated him and was surprised to hear of many incidents I described that, due to their nature, should have been brought to her attention, but weren't.
My client child also believed AARC, specifically Dean Vause, was his legal guardian. He was not.
He believed "Doc Vause" was a medical doctor, a psychiatrist. He is not.
He believed Peter Choate was a psychiatrist or at least a psychologist. He is not. But Choate did give him a short quiz AFTER he was already a client at AARC, which according to them, confirmed his status as an addict.
This "quiz" along with information provided by AARC and no one else constituted the "independent, outside evaluation" that was explained to me to be conducted on my son. I fail to believe that Choate is entirely independent or outside of the AARC program.
He believed the doctor he visited (Dr. Alan Stanhope) had no previous or current connection to the AARC program despite the fact that this doctor is the only doctor to examine clients (they are not permitted to see their OWN physicians), is quoted several times on the AARC website, is a former board member, not to mention being married to the provincial youth court judge who ordered my son into the program in the first place and then kept him there as a minor without parental consent which was required to get him in there in the first place.
This husband and wife doctor/judge team also attended his graduation ceremony at AARC, as AARC appointed 'guests'.
He believed his lawyer had no connection to the AARC program and was simply a referral despite the fact that the clinical staff later revealed that this lawyer is a part of the AARC's "legal committee" and in spite of the fact that this lawyer was spotted sitting with the executive director of AARC, Dean Vause, in box seats at a Calgary Hitmen/Swift Current Bronco's playoff game.
I provided a wrapped Christmas present for my son, a dress shirt, along with a stocking full of toiletries that complied with "client rules". A staff member gave him this shirt and claimed it was HIS OWN and my son could have it. The contents of the stocking were later given to him too (sans stocking) with no mention that it came from his family.
He believed I abandoned him, and didn't care if he lived or died. He knew nothing of the numerous times I tried to remain in contact with him, but was unlawfully denied access to my own child for almost an entire YEAR!
He knew nothing of the fact that his autistic brother could not participate in the AARC program. Or that lack of participation meant he had to be removed from our household for me to remain in AARC and remain in contact with him. Despite the fact that there was no where for his brother to go, including AARC's suggestion that he be placed into the custody of Child Welfare even though he is safe and well cared for with his family.
He progressively grew to hate me, knew nothing of the torment his brother and I went through over the holidays and birthdays and each and every day we knew nothing of his whereabouts or well being.
Worst of all he grew to believe he was an addict, and an alcoholic.
His real problems and mental health issues that needed professional help were never addressed and he was treated for problems he had to THEN CREATE to ever get out of the program.
Don't even talk to me about "lies"!!!!!
Anything else you'd like first hand information on?