Fornits
General Interest => Open Free for All => Topic started by: Anonymous on March 01, 2009, 08:40:47 PM
-
There's a new one called "Passages" in Malibu, at least new to me. Some guy named Chris Prentiss who wrote a book and is advertising regularly on CNN so I guess he's got some backing. I have no idea what it's about, he's claiming AA and the disease concept are wrong. I like the disease concept be it true or false because it was a good argument against imprisoning people for drugs (drug addiction is a disease so it shouldn't be treated as a moral issue, not a medical one). This was the premise of Prop. 5 in California, which unfortunately lost but did have alot of support.
-
Sorry, forgot the URL on Passages - http://www.passagesmalibu.com/ (http://www.passagesmalibu.com/)
-
Passages Malibu is mentioned in the article Going Undercover at Impact House (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=26143) by Mark Groubert. It is also the subject matter, in part, of the book Buying the Cure at Passages Malibu and Rehab or Bust: A Guide to L.A.'s Drug and Alcohol Treatment Centers, written by the same author.
The following post was originally from the comments section when "Going Undercover..." was first published:
viewtopic.php?f=49&t=26143&p=318812#p318824 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=26143&p=318812#p318824)
-
I like the disease concept be it true or false because it was a good argument against imprisoning people for drugs
And a good argument for "treating" people against their will (since they have a "disease" they're not really in control, so taking away their rights is really giving them back "control"). Tell me what is the real difference between imprisonment in prison and impirsonment + re-education in a state "rehab" program?
-
I like the disease concept be it true or false because it was a good argument against imprisoning people for drugs
And a good argument for "treating" people against their will (since they have a "disease" they're not really in control, so taking away their rights is really giving them back "control"). Tell me what is the real difference between imprisonment in prison and impirsonment + re-education in a state "rehab" program?
Any mental disorder and many physical disorders render people not fully in control of their behavior. The significant thing about keeping people out of medical confinement are laws clarifying that unless a person is an immediate and significant danger to themselves or others they cannot be held against their will, and if a danger, they be held only for a short time, until the crisis passes
-
I like the disease concept be it true or false because it was a good argument against imprisoning people for drugs
And a good argument for "treating" people against their will (since they have a "disease" they're not really in control, so taking away their rights is really giving them back "control"). Tell me what is the real difference between imprisonment in prison and impirsonment + re-education in a state "rehab" program?
Any mental disorder and many physical disorders render people not fully in control of their behavior. The significant thing about keeping people out of medical confinement are laws clarifying that unless a person is an immediate and significant danger to themselves or others they cannot be held against their will, and if a danger, they be held only for a short time, until the crisis passes
Yes, but programs parents argue all the time that their kids were in an immediate and significant danger. It's a "progressive and fatal disease" you know. People *are* sentenced to forced treatment all the time regardless of whether it's technically "legal" or not, just as people are sentenced to mandatory AA despite the fact that the supreme court has dictated it to be religious (not spiritual). The rationale is that it "works" even though studies such as that by Jeffery Brandsma show it does not. Not everybody can afford an attorney and if you're stuck with an incompetant public defender a person might never find out what his legal rights are.
-
I think you are all trying hard to apply your anti-program bias towards aspects of life which are not compatible with this analogy. In doing so it makes you appear less than credible, or to be more blunt, kind of kooky.
Now I know about what goes on in programs, and I know what goes in AA meetings. The two are completely different. I'm not seeing restraints leading to suffocation happening in AA when someone chooses not to share, or go on a five mile hike. I haven't heard about stress positions in AA meetings, or anything that could be viewed as abusive in the realm of what goes on inside of unregulated programs.
In perpetuating this one-size-fits-all interpretation to all of life's problems it only harms the cause and continues to alienates any new participants waiting on the sidelines.
The goals of some here are lofty. I'd be happy with a cessation to the murders and forced abductions and incarcerations. I'll leave the kinda-program-like, but-not abusive stuff to you all.
I'm sorry but I have to go find a forum filled with more... rational thought. The conspiracies and paranoia emanating from Fornits recently do not fit with what I'm trying to do. I wish you all good luck in your ventures to enlighten the world on the dangers of AA, but let's try not to forget the pressing issue at hand while doing so.
-
Just because I have certain opinions about programs does not mean I cannot have opinions about AA or forced treatment in general. To say I must shut up about such subjects makes you sound kinda culty. (disclaimer: AA is not a cult... technically).
If you're heading away from Fornits Just because some people disagree with you (instead of injecting your own opinion)... good luck in the real world! My opinions hardly represent everybody here so don't blame the rest of the forums for my textual meanderings.
-
Now I know about what goes on in programs, and I know what goes in AA meetings. The two are completely different. I'm not seeing restraints leading to suffocation happening in AA when someone chooses not to share, or go on a five mile hike. I haven't heard about stress positions in AA meetings, or anything that could be viewed as abusive in the realm of what goes on inside of unregulated programs.
My guess is that if you were in a program you were not in one based on AA (such as Straight). If you were, you might see some similarities (not that they are the same).
Either way; If your parents didn't believe your drug use was progressive and fatal, chances are you wouldn't have been sent to a program. Most program parents i've met are/were devout steppers.
-
It could offend me to see people persist in patently false beliefs, and it could annoy me to have programs misrepresented and minimized, and it could annoy me that people could be so friggin stupid...Wait? where was I going with this? OH yea, its the internet. Oh ,yea, its fornits. Go a couple subforums down,a rape victim is being taunted. Significantly lower your expectations. Go from there
-
Now I know about what goes on in programs, and I know what goes in AA meetings. The two are completely different. I'm not seeing restraints leading to suffocation happening in AA when someone chooses not to share, or go on a five mile hike. I haven't heard about stress positions in AA meetings, or anything that could be viewed as abusive in the realm of what goes on inside of unregulated programs.
My guess is that if you were in a program you were not in one based on AA (such as Straight). If you were, you might see some similarities (not that they are the same).
Either way; If your parents didn't believe your drug use was progressive and fatal, chances are you wouldn't have been sent to a program. Most program parents i've met are/were devout steppers.
Straight is based on AA like Straight is based on therapy, like rape is based on sex, like pryor was based on crack. Maybe not that last one. Basically, psycho crazy person started a brainwashing, money making machine. Supposedly programs (including straight) are based on cognitive behavioral therapy. But what crazy-person claims to "base" something on, or practice, and what crazy persno actually does, are quite different fish . True story. tonight at 11
-
Go a couple subforums down,a rape victim is being taunted. Significantly lower your expectations. Go from there
Well then quit bitching and defend him/her. Seems to me like you're too focused on the negative.... hee hee...
-
It could offend me to see people persist in patently false beliefs
Such as?
-
I think you are all trying hard to apply your anti-program bias towards aspects of life which are not compatible with this analogy. In doing so it makes you appear less than credible, or to be more blunt, kind of kooky.
Now I know about what goes on in programs, and I know what goes in AA meetings. The two are completely different. I'm not seeing restraints leading to suffocation happening in AA when someone chooses not to share, or go on a five mile hike. I haven't heard about stress positions in AA meetings, or anything that could be viewed as abusive in the realm of what goes on inside of unregulated programs.
In perpetuating this one-size-fits-all interpretation to all of life's problems it only harms the cause and continues to alienates any new participants waiting on the sidelines.
The goals of some here are lofty. I'd be happy with a cessation to the murders and forced abductions and incarcerations. I'll leave the kinda-program-like, but-not abusive stuff to you all.
I'm sorry but I have to go find a forum filled with more... rational thought. The conspiracies and paranoia emanating from Fornits recently do not fit with what I'm trying to do. I wish you all good luck in your ventures to enlighten the world on the dangers of AA, but let's try not to forget the pressing issue at hand while doing so.
if this is ftw, please stick around. whoever this is, stick around. this is the only forum i know of for discussion of this sort of thing, and it needs to stay active. if you think this is bad...pfft, come one, be glad you missed thewho
-
I don't necessarily have an "anti-program" bias, in fact I am just one looking for the solution. The Penn & Teller video Psy or someone posted elsewhere had a very good point - none of these programs seem to adjust themselves according to results they see with their "graduates". CEDU would adjust itself according to their in-house population I think but once you were gone, you were gone. I am strongly interested in those denying the disease concept because we now have strong evidence that it is true. I am very involved politically in decriminalization because American constantly fills their prisons with people due to drug charges (I don't maintain that someone who is on drugs and kills or steals should be "forgiven" obviously). But what do we do with these people? You can say drug use is ok, you seem to be ok doing it, but there are many seriously screwed up people too. How are they justly to be handled? Does the state open up a bunch of treatment centers and how are these to be run? AA/NA? I don't find much support for those here, but what is the answer? Manson says you put the temptation in front of someone and tell them not to do it, they'll do it. Do we take a state and go to whatever lengths to insure there are no drugs there, censor the media and send addicts there to live otherwise normal lives - no records or prison terms? I don't know.
I think you are all trying hard to apply your anti-program bias towards aspects of life which are not compatible with this analogy. In doing so it makes you appear less than credible, or to be more blunt, kind of kooky.
Now I know about what goes on in programs, and I know what goes in AA meetings. The two are completely different. I'm not seeing restraints leading to suffocation happening in AA when someone chooses not to share, or go on a five mile hike. I haven't heard about stress positions in AA meetings, or anything that could be viewed as abusive in the realm of what goes on inside of unregulated programs.
In perpetuating this one-size-fits-all interpretation to all of life's problems it only harms the cause and continues to alienates any new participants waiting on the sidelines.
The goals of some here are lofty. I'd be happy with a cessation to the murders and forced abductions and incarcerations. I'll leave the kinda-program-like, but-not abusive stuff to you all.
I'm sorry but I have to go find a forum filled with more... rational thought. The conspiracies and paranoia emanating from Fornits recently do not fit with what I'm trying to do. I wish you all good luck in your ventures to enlighten the world on the dangers of AA, but let's try not to forget the pressing issue at hand while doing so.
-
I don't necessarily have an "anti-program" bias, in fact I am just one looking for the solution. The Penn & Teller video Psy or someone posted elsewhere had a very good point - none of these programs seem to adjust themselves according to results they see with their "graduates". CEDU would adjust itself according to their in-house population I think but once you were gone, you were gone. I am strongly interested in those denying the disease concept because we now have strong evidence that it is true. I am very involved politically in decriminalization because American constantly fills their prisons with people due to drug charges (I don't maintain that someone who is on drugs and kills or steals should be "forgiven" obviously). But what do we do with these people? You can say drug use is ok, you seem to be ok doing it, but there are many seriously screwed up people too. How are they justly to be handled? Does the state open up a bunch of treatment centers and how are these to be run? AA/NA? I don't find much support for those here, but what is the answer? Manson says you put the temptation in front of someone and tell them not to do it, they'll do it. Do we take a state and go to whatever lengths to insure there are no drugs there, censor the media and send addicts there to live otherwise normal lives - no records or prison terms? I don't know.
I think you are all trying hard to apply your anti-program bias towards aspects of life which are not compatible with this analogy. In doing so it makes you appear less than credible, or to be more blunt, kind of kooky.
Now I know about what goes on in programs, and I know what goes in AA meetings. The two are completely different. I'm not seeing restraints leading to suffocation happening in AA when someone chooses not to share, or go on a five mile hike. I haven't heard about stress positions in AA meetings, or anything that could be viewed as abusive in the realm of what goes on inside of unregulated programs.
In perpetuating this one-size-fits-all interpretation to all of life's problems it only harms the cause and continues to alienates any new participants waiting on the sidelines.
The goals of some here are lofty. I'd be happy with a cessation to the murders and forced abductions and incarcerations. I'll leave the kinda-program-like, but-not abusive stuff to you all.
I'm sorry but I have to go find a forum filled with more... rational thought. The conspiracies and paranoia emanating from Fornits recently do not fit with what I'm trying to do. I wish you all good luck in your ventures to enlighten the world on the dangers of AA, but let's try not to forget the pressing issue at hand while doing so.
Yes, the addiction is a disease. There are many ways to approach, no way is 100%, no method is completely understood or without its detractors. I lean toward a holistic approach, myself. With a support group, such as AA , included
-
As I see it the critical article I have seen is an attack made by supporters of step systems.
In Denmark the official Denmark has made an attack against the faith based programs. The Minnesota treatment in various forms is the most widespread step program in use.
The best result are made by treatment of the relatives. Projects like U-turn (http://http://www.uturn.dk) in Copenhagen has analyzed the treatment industry in the states and they found that underneath all the fine marketing the day-to-day "treatment" is done by either peers or lowpaid staff to cut costs. Please point to a program where all the staff is qualified. I havn't found it.
So U-turn teach the parents to be mini-therapists. Instead of judging cuttings, drug use and the few cases of binge-drinking which exist so they can get their own children to talk with them rather than shout at them. The result is that most of the drug-treatment remain out-patient, which is cheaper.
No home contract. Zero-tolorance creates secrets, but the parents have to make a statement rather than being afraid of raising the issue.
Let me be clear about one thing. I don't like drug use. I prefer alcohol. It is safer because all alcohol sold in our shop is controlled and checked to see if the standard is upheld. Drugs could be safer it they were sold under control, but they are not. Pushers mix all kind of stuff into the drugs to create more profit and some of the stuff are poison that kills people. That doesn't mean that one should not have respect for alcohol. Alcohol should not be a habit. It should not be something you need to drink in order to do something.
I believe that there should be a treatment industry. I don't care how people can free themselves of an addiction as long as it is done while perserving the clients dignity. Last but not least I believe that 99% of all this treatment can be done out-patient, if the relatives choose to take the time to learn about the problem rather than shutting down.