Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: kenhuey on July 13, 2009, 04:36:10 PM
-
I realize in speaking as a program director here I start out at an immediate disadvantage. I urge you to put aside your prejudices for a moment and give me the chance to present my case. I realize many of you here have been hurt and many of you are angry but not all program directors are the same. Not all programs are the same. To judge me evil-intended or to judge CALO as somehow abusive--without knowing CALO and without hearing me out--is no better than the lack of due process and the prejudice many of you complain about when decrying residential treatment for teens.
I have spent the last 5 years presenting at conferences around the country on the need for change in residential treatment. I have presented at regional NATSAP’s, national NATSAP’s, FRUA, Wilderness Symposiums, Naropa, etc. about the need to move away from behavior modification and level systems to more humane, relationship-centered approaches that are fundamentally respectful to teenagers and those in programs. This is a matter of record. Searches of my name and many of these conferences will show that I have dedicated considerable professional energy to changing the way residential services are delivered. I believe that therapeutic invitations to change based on relationships, based on psycho-education, based on nurturing, are superior to change that is based on simply modifying behavior. Accountability, consequences, and structure are needed but relationship-based change is superior, in my opinion, to strict level-systems and behavior mod that do not provide nurturing. In even more succinct terms I openly repudiate change based on coercion, bullying, intimidation, and power. It does not work. It is not right.
The following are some of the ways I think CALO proves its commitment to what is stated above:
1. CALO does not allow the use of escort services for the transport of our teenagers.
a. The picture of a young person being awakened at 3am and taken by force from their home is not one I want to be a part of.
b. CALO will transport a teen by sending the CEO, Clinical Director, therapist, or other highly trained staff with a Residential Coach. This is done with full knowledge of the teenager and is non-confrontational in approach. We have not had a physical confrontation during a transport ever and hope to never have one.
2. CALO does not use level systems at all. We believe that lasting change comes as a byproduct of relationships that have mentoring power. You cannot mentor someone you control or manipulate. Trust has more impact on change than coercion or bribery.
3. CALO does censor some reading material, music, and movies. A certain level of maturity is needed to deal with pornography, racist books advocating death, homicidal or suicidal works, etc. Proven harmful material is kept from campus.
4. CALO does not force teens to change. We invite, encourage, model, and mentor change. We do not believe we can force a certain world view on drugs, relationships, or anything else. We explicitly try to convince teens that there are right and wrong choices but at the end of the day change must be internal or it will not last.
5. CALO does have high staff to student ratios. Our staffing ratios average about one staff member for every three kids. That is ONLY direct care staff. Therapists and teachers and admin staff do not count in those totals.
6. CALO does not believe in sleep deprivation or other systems of breaking down behavior in advance of “encounter” groups and the like. Arguments among peers or student anger at staff may be part of a group but we do nothing that is meant to break down a teen and then build them up in the image that CALO desires.
7. CALO does not have a waiting period before a teen can talk to his or her parents on the phone, or see them in person. Relationships are the key to change and we want teenagers to have access to their caregivers from their start in therapy.
8. CALO does not and will do nothing to take away basic rights to shelter, food, sleep, education, and nurturing. These are not “privileges” at CALO, they are rights. Nurturance is a right.
9. CALO does believe in licensure. We are voluntarily licensed by the state of Missouri. We sought out licensing and allow surprise inspections by the state.
10. CALO does not have custodial rights to kids. Parents retain custody of their children while they are in our care.
11. CALO does not rush the intake process. The intake process is as long as parents and child want. Usually it is several hours as parent and child are oriented to CALO. We do not require control of the child or hasty goodbyes.
12. CALO does not see homosexuality as a disease that can be treated.
13. CALO does not endorse or prohibit the practice of any religion. We have never banned a particular religion but would if it was proven to be an immediate danger.
14. CALO does not have any sort of time-out room.
15. CALO does not use mechanical or chemical restraints.
a. All staff are trained for two days on verbal de-escalation and crisis management. We try to complete this training in the first 30 days of employment. During the last part of that training staff are taught how to safely physically hold/restrain a teen who is a danger to self or others. The focus is on avoiding those holds.
b. We track holds and debrief them with staff, always focusing on keeping holds to a minimum and only initiating them in cases of a safety concern. Holds per student census have decreased every quarter since CALO was created.
16. CALO does not employ unqualified therapists. All CALO therapists are masters level or Psy.D./Ph.D. and appropriately credentialed. License numbers are available on parental request.
I do appreciate the opportunity to present some of the philosophy behind CALO’s program. I respectfully invite you to consider the possibility that CALO may be a nurturing, non-coercive, relationship-focused program.
I recognize that much of what is written in this post may challenge notions that some have about CALO and what we do. I am sorry you have had some misinformation about us and the nature of how we operate. This is who we are and what we believe. We are not perfect in the application of our beliefs but this is the standard to which we hold ourselves.
-
If your groups are not confrontational in nature, what do they consist of? Are kids forced to bring up issues or are they free to keep it to themselves and/or discuss it privately with those they trust?
-
This is done with full knowledge of the teenager and is non-confrontational in approach. We have not had a physical confrontation during a transport ever and hope to never have one.
Define "non confrontational"? Does this mean intimidation by means of overwhelming force? The sort of "offer you can't refuse" type of thing? Do the staff that go to pick up the teens have tazers and such visible?
-
I'd like to know if CALO is voluntary.? Can any kid leave at any time they desire, unimpeded by CALO staff? If not, what is the legal justification for keeping kids against their will?
-
On the controversial topic of Attachment Therapy, what specifically does CALO’S application of this treatment entail?
-
If your groups are not confrontational in nature, what do they consist of? Are kids forced to bring up issues or are they free to keep it to themselves and/or discuss it privately with those they trust?
I just went down and chatted with one of our teens. I thought it more helpful to hear from someone in our program about her actual experience. "H" told me she has been in the following groups led by therapists: Survivors, Social Skills, Mood Regulation, and Trauma. These groups are largely psycho-educational in nature.
H also said that student or residential coach-led groups are also frequent. We call these "power groups," must meaning that they are quick and to the point. H said the motto of those groups that they are "about the behavior, not the person." In those groups they have recently talked about language on campus, conduct while in the community, and appropriate use of time (not slowing everyone down while doing cleaning and household chores). H described those groups as being students bringing up an issue they have with another student or students, staff bringing up an issue about something a student is doing, or students bringing up an issue they have with a staff member or staff members. They work on resolving whatever the conflict. H related that they are usually pointed discussions and sometimes argumentative. I see that as normal relationship stuff. By "not confrontational" I am trying to indicate that we do not force kids to stand in front of all their peers and have them berated in order to break them down. We don't sleep deprive them and then confront them on their issues. That is not to say we don't argue but we look to have that be normal arguing that all relationships have as part of their existence.
-
This is done with full knowledge of the teenager and is non-confrontational in approach. We have not had a physical confrontation during a transport ever and hope to never have one.
Define "non confrontational"? Does this mean intimidation by means of overwhelming force? The sort of "offer you can't refuse" type of thing? Do the staff that go to pick up the teens have tazers and such visible?
Staff do not have tazers or any other weapon. Handcuffs and the like are not even considered. We talk with the teen and talk about what to expect at CALO and during our travel. We work on building the beginnings of a relationship.
-
I'd like to know if CALO is voluntary.? Can any kid leave at any time they desire, unimpeded by CALO staff? If not, what is the legal justification for keeping kids against their will?
CALO's coaching packet itemizes how staff should keep "students" from escaping.
Notice Ken Huey says he doesn't use escort services, not that he doesn't physically force human beings into his compound. Do human beings have the choice not to go to CALO after their rendition is requested via check? I think not.
Once an organization incorporates restraints into their “training” you can assume they are a lock down environment.
Two organizations besides gulags use restraints: prisons and psychiatric hospitals. Both do so because force is necessary to hold people captive, force them to do things they desperately do not want to do, and to take the act of “policing” on themselves.
Restraining systems are only used by groups who violate normal legal and psychological boundaries
Those illegitimate "treatment" profiles, have found their way to concerned and benevolent parties, I hope
-
This is done with full knowledge of the teenager and is non-confrontational in approach. We have not had a physical confrontation during a transport ever and hope to never have one.
Define "non confrontational"? Does this mean intimidation by means of overwhelming force? The sort of "offer you can't refuse" type of thing? Do the staff that go to pick up the teens have tazers and such visible?
Staff do not have tazers or any other weapon. Handcuffs and the like are not even considered. We talk with the teen and talk about what to expect at CALO and during our travel. We work on building the beginnings of a relationship.
You are not answering the question.
What if someone refuses to go? Will they be physically forced? Are they informed if they won’t go they will be physically forced, or physically forced to go somewhere else?
Are you saying everyone that CALO has approached with a request to institutionalize themselves has assented?
::fullofshit::
-
On the controversial topic of Attachment Therapy, what specifically does CALO’S application of this treatment entail?
The best description of our overall model can be found here:
http://caloteens.com/therapeuticModel.aspx (http://caloteens.com/therapeuticModel.aspx)
I think you are asking if we do rebirthing and "rib stimulation" and such. No, we do not use provoking techniques meant to force a teen to attach with us.
-
15. CALO does not use mechanical or chemical restraints.
a. All staff are trained for two days on verbal de-escalation and crisis management. We try to complete this training in the first 30 days of employment. During the last part of that training staff are taught how to safely physically hold/restrain a teen who is a danger to self or others. The focus is on avoiding those holds.
b. We track holds and debrief them with staff, always focusing on keeping holds to a minimum and only initiating them in cases of a safety concern. Holds per student census have decreased every quarter since CALO was created.
Ken Huey failed to clarify the crisis intervention system staff are trained in otherwise known as PCS. PCS is a crisis intervention model that incorporates "bent wrist control and variations." I would like Mr. Huey to explain his choice for a crisis intervention system that incorporates "bent wrist control with variations." Caleb Cottle is the PCS instructor at CALO who has an obligation to train employees upon arrival. CALO leaves the door wide open for lawsuits when staff, who have not been trained within the first 30 days of employment, restrain a child.
-
H also said that student or residential coach-led groups are also frequent.
Whoa whoa... You say above "CALO does not employ unqualified therapists. All CALO therapists are masters level or Psy.D./Ph.D. and appropriately credentialed." I suppose the two statements are not technically contradictory, but it sounds here like some of the group therapy (unless you call it something else) is lead by unqualified personnel. Especially if it's led by a student, I can see it being a recepie for some really inappropriate topics where personal grudges and biases can be used. A student in such control can quickly become "drunk" with power. Is there an actual therapist present at all times to make sure things don't cross over a certain line?
We call these "power groups," must meaning that they are quick and to the point. H said the motto of those groups that they are "about the behavior, not the person." In those groups they have recently talked about language on campus, conduct while in the community, and appropriate use of time (not slowing everyone down while doing cleaning and household chores). H described those groups as being students bringing up an issue they have with another student or students, staff bringing up an issue about something a student is doing, or students bringing up an issue they have with a staff member or staff members.
What sorts of issues are brought up... Could "H" give some specific examples? The reason why I ask is because I wonder whether or not such discussions are really necessary to have in group and whether the time is better spent on other things. Does "H" think that these discussions help kids to build better skills to deal with conflicts effectively, or rather do they stoke fires that are already there?
They work on resolving whatever the conflict. H related that they are usually pointed discussions and sometimes argumentative. I see that as normal relationship stuff.
I suppose all depends on how his definition of pointed and/or argumentative. Do you often sit in on such groups? If not, it might be a good idea to start.
By "not confrontational" I am trying to indicate that we do not force kids to stand in front of all their peers and have them berated in order to break them down. We don't sleep deprive them and then confront them on their issues. That is not to say we don't argue but we look to have that be normal arguing that all relationships have as part of their existence.
Ok. That makes some sense, but I still think there should be some credentialed and well trained people moderating the group to make sure it doesn't get out of hand. Hell. Look at Fornits. It's allright since this is voluntary and consentual, but there is a big difference if a kid is confronted in group and can't leave. Can kids leave group if they choose to? Do they know this?
-
Staff do not have tazers or any other weapon. Handcuffs and the like are not even considered. We talk with the teen and talk about what to expect at CALO and during our travel. We work on building the beginnings of a relationship.
Ok. So what if, hypothetically, a teen decided to run for it? What is your staff instructed to do?
-
Going forward I want to make clear my hopes for this post. Simply, I wish to present what CALO is. I also am willing to have respectful dialogue. I do not expect to have all those who read what I write to agree with me but I do expect to stay out of screaming matches. I don't really want to participate in vulgar exchanges and will choose to avoid them. If we can have a discussion and I am convinced that open sharing of ideas is the real purpose, I am on board.
-
H also said that student or residential coach-led groups are also frequent.
Whoa whoa... You say above "CALO does not employ unqualified therapists. All CALO therapists are masters level or Psy.D./Ph.D. and appropriately credentialed." I suppose the two statements are not technically contradictory, but it sounds here like some of the group therapy is lead by unqualified personnel. Especially if it's led by a student, I can see it being a recepie for some really inappropriate topics where personal grudges and biases can be used. A student in such control can quickly become "drunk" with power. Is there an actual therapist present at all times to make sure things don't cross over a certain line?
We call these "power groups," must meaning that they are quick and to the point. H said the motto of those groups that they are "about the behavior, not the person." In those groups they have recently talked about language on campus, conduct while in the community, and appropriate use of time (not slowing everyone down while doing cleaning and household chores). H described those groups as being students bringing up an issue they have with another student or students, staff bringing up an issue about something a student is doing, or students bringing up an issue they have with a staff member or staff members.
What sorts of issues are brought up... Could "H" give some specific examples? The reason why I ask is because I wonder whether or not such discussions are really necessary to have in group and whether the time is better spent on other things. Does "H" think that these discussions help kids to build better skills to deal with conflicts effectively, or rather do they stoke fires that are already there?
They work on resolving whatever the conflict. H related that they are usually pointed discussions and sometimes argumentative. I see that as normal relationship stuff.
I suppose all depends on how his definition of pointed and/or argumentative. Do you often sit in on such groups? If not, it might be a good idea to start.
By "not confrontational" I am trying to indicate that we do not force kids to stand in front of all their peers and have them berated in order to break them down. We don't sleep deprive them and then confront them on their issues. That is not to say we don't argue but we look to have that be normal arguing that all relationships have as part of their existence.
Ok. That makes some sense, but I still think there should be some credentialed and well trained people moderating the group to make sure it doesn't get out of hand. Hell. Look at Fornits. It's allright since this is voluntary and consentual, but there is a big difference if a kid is confronted in group and can't leave. Can kids leave group if they choose to? Do they know this?
I hope dysfunction junction or Kat Whitehead join this thread. They'll tell you, as experts, CALO employees are not accredited or educated at the level they should be, to be performing and organizing the treatment they claim to .
What’s more, how can you have peers "hold peers accountable" in groups in which they are not allowed to leave without fairly what goes on in these "accountability groups" and "power raps" berating ? It’s not reasonably possible.
Ken Huey, Nicole Fuglsang, you may not choose to recognize this because you are are, well, at least Nicole is, essentially CEDU-Synanotites, but forcing detainees or participants to "confront" other detainees on their supposed wrong doings is THOUGHT REFORM. This is true even for voluntary adult participants. It has been proved harmful to victims over and over, and shown to induce deep pathology, psychological breaks, and suicide. That is evidence based FACT
http://www.culthelp.info/index.php?opti ... ew&id=3090 (http://www.culthelp.info/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3090)
-
Mr. Huey,
I have some other questions for you:
(1) You talked about a decrease in restraints in paragraph 15. How many restraints took place when CALO first opened their doors to students? How many restraints occur on a monthly basis?
(2) I worked at Eckerd Youth Alternatives. Restraints were "not always" done by the book. In your experience at CALO, did you have to fire a staff due to improper restraints [which constitutes physical abuse]?
(3) You worked at an abusive program [Provo Canyon School]. Whereas Landon Kirk, Caleb Cottle and Nicole Fuglsang worked at abusive programs. Why did you choose to work for an abusive program?
(4) The tuition for students is extremely high [$9,000 - $13,000 per month]! Please discuss.
(5) Do all your direct care staff [coaches] have no less than a bachelor degree in a psycology related field?
-
H also said that student or residential coach-led groups are also frequent.
Whoa whoa... You say above "CALO does not employ unqualified therapists. All CALO therapists are masters level or Psy.D./Ph.D. and appropriately credentialed." I suppose the two statements are not technically contradictory, but it sounds here like some of the group therapy is lead by unqualified personnel. Especially if it's led by a student, I can see it being a recepie for some really inappropriate topics where personal grudges and biases can be used. A student in such control can quickly become "drunk" with power. Is there an actual therapist present at all times to make sure things don't cross over a certain line?
We call these "power groups," must meaning that they are quick and to the point. H said the motto of those groups that they are "about the behavior, not the person." In those groups they have recently talked about language on campus, conduct while in the community, and appropriate use of time (not slowing everyone down while doing cleaning and household chores). H described those groups as being students bringing up an issue they have with another student or students, staff bringing up an issue about something a student is doing, or students bringing up an issue they have with a staff member or staff members.
What sorts of issues are brought up... Could "H" give some specific examples? The reason why I ask is because I wonder whether or not such discussions are really necessary to have in group and whether the time is better spent on other things. Does "H" think that these discussions help kids to build better skills to deal with conflicts effectively, or rather do they stoke fires that are already there?
They work on resolving whatever the conflict. H related that they are usually pointed discussions and sometimes argumentative. I see that as normal relationship stuff.
I suppose all depends on how his definition of pointed and/or argumentative. Do you often sit in on such groups? If not, it might be a good idea to start.
By "not confrontational" I am trying to indicate that we do not force kids to stand in front of all their peers and have them berated in order to break them down. We don't sleep deprive them and then confront them on their issues. That is not to say we don't argue but we look to have that be normal arguing that all relationships have as part of their existence.
Ok. That makes some sense, but I still think there should be some credentialed and well trained people moderating the group to make sure it doesn't get out of hand. Hell. Look at Fornits. It's allright since this is voluntary and consentual, but there is a big difference if a kid is confronted in group and can't leave. Can kids leave group if they choose to? Do they know this?
I hope dysfunction junction or Kat Whitehead join this thread. They'll tell you, as experts, CALO employees are not accredited or educated at the level they should be, to be performing and organizing the treatment they claim to offer.
What’s more, how can you force teens to "hold peers accountable" in groups in which they are not allowed to leave without fairly what goes on in these "accountability groups" and "power raps" berating a supposedly errant teen ? It’s not reasonably possible.
Ken Huey, Nicole Fuglsang, you may not choose to recognize this because you are, well, at least Nicole is, essentially CEDU-Synanotites, but forcing detainees or participants to "confront" other detainees on their supposed wrong doings is thought reform
This is true even for voluntary adult participants. It has been proved harmful to victims over and over, and shown to induce deep pathology, psychological breaks, and suicide. That is evidence based fact.
http://www.culthelp.info/index.php?opti (http://www.culthelp.info/index.php?opti) ... ew&id=3090
-
Looks like the steamroller of ownaj isn't finished with him. I wonder what else WP and Gookin are cooking up behind the scenes. I smell a SUPER COMBO coming on and Ken is desperately trying to shed enemies before the DCS finally shrugs off its lethargy and gives him a heaping helping of what he deserves.
What were you saying again? Oh yeah,
No, we do not use provoking techniques meant to force a teen to attach with us.
*bumps two topics proving this is bullshit*
We all know what you do. It's been done to death in topic after topic and will surely be done to death here. So before you rattle on about "we do not do X, Y, Z" know that there is a whole lot of evidence pointing straight to the contrary. So I won't cover that ground.
What I will cover is some bad news for Ken: You can't affect "lasting change" of the kind you want at ALL, no matter what the hell you do. Why do you think Tom ran? Why do you think the rest of your victims envy him? Why do you think most of them would immediately leave CALO given half a chance- don't pretend you don't know this- if they didn't think they'd get caught?
The reality is that you are not worth trust. Seriously, who the fuck trusts ANYONE to touch them in the ways that you've instructed your staff to touch them? I know your goals, Ken, you believe that what you're doing will establish a relationship of trust and dependence (and that really is some serious infantilist bullshit right there). But that's not what you actually get. What you get is fear, rage, Stockholm Syndrome, and lifelong permanent hatred. You get kids who steal their grandmother's car in instants, or, more usually, depression and learned helplessness (but that's kind of the point, now isn't it?). You very literally make your own enemies. Want to know where they end up? That's right. Fornits, or in contact with Fornits members. Why do you think that is?
The steamroller won't stop until you're out of business, regardless of what you post here.
And when you eventually do get put out of business, many of us will simply laugh and move to the next target.
-
I hope dysfunction junction or Kat Whitehead join this thread. They'll tell you, as experts, CALO employees are not accredited or educated at the level they should be, to be performing and organizing the treatment they claim to .
Well. For the moment they're not here. Even if they were, I think it's only fair to hear both sides of the argument. Regardless of what you might feel about Ken Huey or CALO, this is a unique opportunity to ask questions and get them answered from Ken's perspective.
What’s more, how can you have peers "hold peers accountable" in groups in which they are not allowed to leave without fairly what goes on in these "accountability groups" and "power raps" berating ? It’s not reasonably possible.
Well. That's sort of a loaded question. It remains to be seen yet as to whether teens can leave and whether they know they can leave if they are permitted to. I'd like to hear from Ken on that or perhaps from an ex-calo teen if one is available.
-
(6) When you hire employees, do you conduct state background checks or national background checks?
-
6wk7
Looks like the steamroller of ownaj isn't finished with him. I wonder what else WP and Gookin are cooking up behind the scenes. I smell a SUPER COMBO coming on and Ken is desperately trying to shed enemies before the DCS finally shrugs off its lethargy and gives him a heaping helping of what he deserves.
What were you saying again? Oh yeah,
No, we do not use provoking techniques meant to force a teen to attach with us.
*bumps two topics proving this is bullshit*
We all know what you do. It's been done to death in topic after topic and will surely be done to death here. So before you rattle on about "we do not do X, Y, Z" know that there is a whole lot of evidence pointing straight to the contrary. So I won't cover that ground.
What I will cover is some bad news for Ken: You can't affect "lasting change" of the kind you want at ALL, no matter what the hell you do. Why do you think Tom ran? Why do you think the rest of your victims envy him? Why do you think most of them would immediately leave CALO given half a chance- don't pretend you don't know this- if they didn't think they'd get caught?
CALO’s self-professed focus on "change" discloses it is not a medical canter. Real psychiatric medicinal practises never have "change" as a focus, that is not a legitimate or an ethical medical goal
-
A friend of mine i'm talking to on the phone (also reading this topic) had an interesting point regarding escorting. He said "if they aren't throwing a fit... why do they need to be in a program?". It sort of makes sense. Either your staff are supernaturally persuasive to convince all these teens to come without a fight of they don't belong there in the first place (not that anybody deserves to be detained without trial and due process). Can you explain this? What is your average student profile? What is the average set of issues?
-
Mr. Huey,
I lumped all my questions together. Please answer them honestly.
(1) You talked about a decrease in restraints in paragraph 15. How many restraints took place when CALO first opened their doors to students? How many restraints occur on a monthly basis?
(2) I worked at Eckerd Youth Alternatives. Restraints were "not always" done by the book. In your experience at CALO, did you have to fire a staff due to improper restraints [which constitutes physical abuse]?
(3) You worked at an abusive program [Provo Canyon School]. Why did you choose to work for an abusive program?
(4) The tuition for students is extremely high [$9,000 - $13,000 per month]. Please discuss.
(5) Do all your direct care staff [coaches] have no less than a bachelor degree in a psycology related field?
(6) When you hire employees, do you conduct state background checks or national background checks?
(7) Why did you choose a crisis intervention model that incorporates "bent wrist control and variations?"
(8) Are staff trained in PCS [crisis intervention model utilized by CALO staff] upon arrival? If not, please discuss.
-
This is done with full knowledge of the teenager and is non-confrontational in approach. We have not had a physical confrontation during a transport ever and hope to never have one.
Define "non confrontational"? Does this mean intimidation by means of overwhelming force? The sort of "offer you can't refuse" type of thing? Do the staff that go to pick up the teens have tazers and such visible?
Staff do not have tazers or any other weapon. Handcuffs and the like are not even considered. We talk with the teen and talk about what to expect at CALO and during our travel. We work on building the beginnings of a relationship.
You are not answering the question.
1)What if your target refuses to accompany you to CALO? Will they be physically forced? Are they informed if they won’t go they will be physically forced, or physically forced to go somewhere else?
2)Are you claiming everyone that CALO has approached with a request to institutionalize themselves has assented?
::fullofshit
3) once at CALO can a "student" leave, as a real student is allowed to leave the school premises without fear of being physically prevented? If so, then why does CALO's coaching packet itemize how staff should keep students from "escaping."
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27533&p=337194#p337194 (http://fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27533&p=337194#p337194)
-
Mr. Huey,
I have some other questions for you:
(5) Do all your direct care staff [coaches] have no less than a bachelor degree in a psycology related field?
Not according to their website:
(http://notes.ca-lo.com/caloemployment.n ... enDocument (http://notes.ca-lo.com/caloemployment.nsf/20caaea4e652a45d872573fe0071e729/335e96d50d12c4e0062574ef00584561?OpenDocument))
"Job Title
Residential Coach
Requirements
Duties
The Residential Coach position is essentially a life-coaching job. Coaches interact with teens in a school, living, and play environment. Coaches model how to interact with peers, talk about life in productive ways, and provide positive role-modeling. A typical day includes many life and interpersonal activities such as spending a couple of hours on the water wake-boarding, helping students care for an animal in order to gain empathy, helping students complete their school work, assisting counselors during therapy groups, and much more. Our website provides a good representation of what we are trying to accomplish (http://www.ca-lo.com (http://www.ca-lo.com))
The Residential Coach position is usually full-time, but can be part time for some weekend employees. Shifts go from 6:30 am to 2:30 PM (Day Shift), or, 1:50 pm to 10:00 PM (Evening Shift). There is also a night security position available from 9:45 PM to 6:45 AM. Each residential coach is assigned 5 shifts to work during the 7 day week (night security works 4 shifts a week). When hired, coaches will not get to choose shifts, and weekends will be a part of the work-schedule most weeks. After a few months we will try to get you into a regular shift but we cannot guarantee which shift this will be. Typically the day shift is the most popular so it is the hardest to get.
This job requires honesty, caring, a desire to learn and a thick skin. It can be brutal at times, with kids swearing and being disrespectful. It is also very rewarding as you see kids change and make improvements in their lives. Most interactions with the kids are meaningful (or at least neutral) and frequently fun.
Training is an immediate part of the job. Each week on Wednesday, we have a new employee training and an all-staff training immediately afterwards. Training topics include CPR, First Aid, therapeutic hold techniques, clinical interventions, our model, how to be more effective, etc.
The job is physically demanding. Once in a while you will have to participate in a therapeutic hold with a student. You may have to run distances, and some lifting is required.
Hiring decisions have two steps. Initially you will meet with Human Resources and if you meet the basic requirements we may have you participate in an UNPAID trial shift. For 8 hours you will engage with the students and show us your abilities to coach and mentor troubled teens. If you and your potential co-workers and supervisors believe your skills and personality will fit well in the therapeutic environment that we are trying to create, you will be offered a position.
For staff living within a 50 mile radius of the CALO building, pay starts at $9/hr for the first 30 days, $10/hr for next 60 days, and $11/hr thereafter upon successful completion of training curriculum at each stage. If you live outside the 50 mile radius you are eligible for a salary rate of a dollar more an hour at each stage (i.e. $10, $11, and $12/hr). If you have to move to the lake area we pay a $500 bonus after completing the 90 day training. Medical benefits, vacation, and sick days are available to employees after completing 90 days of employment.
Benefits
Medical benefits, vacation, and sick days are available to employees after completing 90 days of employment.
Job Open Date
05/15/2009
Job Closed Date
07/31/2009"
Their want ads require a HS diploma to apply:
(from: http://www.simplyhired.com/job-id/2gmny ... oach-jobs/ (http://www.simplyhired.com/job-id/2gmnytzrt7/mentor-coach-jobs/))
" Change Academy Lake of the Ozarks - Lake Ozark, MO
CALO (http://www.ca-lo.com (http://www.ca-lo.com)) needs direct- care mentors/ coaches. CALO treats troubled youth (13-18). Must pass background check, 21+ years old, HS diploma or GED. $11/ hour. and benefits... "
-
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
CHILDREN’S DIVISION
P.O. BOX 88
JEFFERSON CITY, MISSOURI
January 28, 2008
MEMORANDUM
MEMORANDUM FOR ALL CHILDREN’S DIVISION STAFF
FROM: Jim Harrison, Deputy Director
Children’s Division
SUBJECT: CHANGE ACADEMY LAKE OF THE OZARKS
130 Calo Lane
Lake Ozark, Missouri 65049
(573) 365-2221
This is to advise staff that effective immediately, Change Academy Lake of the Ozarks is licensed as a residential child care agency and meets the standards for basic core residential treatment services. Change Academy is licensed to care for up to sixty-four (64) males and females, ages thirteen (13) to eighteen (18), but does not have a contract with the Children’s Division to provide residential treatment services for children in the custody of the Children’s Division. Instead, Change Academy serves private placements from around the United States. Dr. Ken Huey is the Chief Executive Officer.
Please feel free to contact Fred Proebsting, State Supervisor, Residential Program Unit, at (573) 751-8926, if you have any questions or comments regarding this matter.
JH:JR:ct
Ok, so I quote this little tidbit to show two things. One, CALO isn't exactly the same thing as the other Missouri program that gets rightly pounded on this forum (Thayer). Two, it took them until the winter of 2008 to decide to become a licensed facility.
So, what to make of this entire exchange. First, Mr. Huey, thank you for coming into this little corner of the universe and identifying yourself. For that alone you deserve at least some measure of recognition. You didn't have to come here and try to make your case. "Try" however is the operative word.
Here are my questions. I have data from New Jersey which identifies the different restraint and seclusion techniques they use in that state. Of their 92 programs that use some kind of control system, none of them use Positive Control Systems. Of the systems they use, the models are Crisis Prevention Institute (CPI), Handle With Care (HWC), Managing Aggressive Behavior (MAB), The Mandt System, Professional Crisis Management (PCM), Safe Crisis Management (SCM), The Smart System, and Therapeutic Crisis Intervention (TCI). Furthermore, it appears that PCS is used almost exclusively by private programs, particularly programs based in Utah.
1. Why use PCS instead of one of these other crisis intervention models (which is not necessarily and advertisement of the other models, just how your decision was made)
2. Why not have a contract with Missouri DSS?
3. Why take youth from all over the country, whereby taking youth from places outside Missouri and surrounding states, you invariably make the transition home more difficult than if they were at least in the vicinity of their communities.
Mr Huey, while I appreciate the effort to show that you are trying to move your program in a more positive direction, in particular your stated refusal to work with escort services is a good sign. If nothing else I hope you can convince your counterparts to distance themselves from some of the practices you've identified as problematic. But I can guarantee you that you're not there yet. And I know that I would personally not be satisfied until further dramatic changes took place within your program. If you're serious about moving towards these best practices I would actually refer you to the juvenile justice system within your state. From what I hear they've done a lot of good work moving all of their adjudicated youth into community-based programs that are actually relatively non-coercive despite being part of the juvenile justice system. But who knows, I haven't actually been on the ground in Missouri to see for myself.
Anyway, thanks for the conversation starter. I'm sure this won't be my last post on this thread.
-
On the controversial topic of Attachment Therapy, what specifically does CALO’S application of this treatment entail?
The best description of our overall model can be found here:
http://caloteens.com/therapeuticModel.aspx (http://caloteens.com/therapeuticModel.aspx)
I think you are asking if we do rebirthing and "rib stimulation" and such. No, we do not use provoking techniques meant to force a teen to attach with us.
For an answer to my initial question posed to you, I followed the link you provided.
1. Please describe how the highlighted intervention methods are implemented.
(From your site)"Below are some interventions and concepts that are hallmarks of our work during Trust of Control"
• P.L.A.C.E. (Playful, Loving, Accepting, Curios, and Empathetic)
• Connection-Break-Repair (cycle of a healthy relationship)
• Vulnerability
• Rhythm Control
• Transferable Attachment (using canines)
• Cycles/Patterns
• Closeness vs. consequence
• Time-in vs. Time-out
• Emotional “holding” (figurative not literal holding)....figurative holding?
• Acceptance during exploration
• Healing from past
• Core beliefs
• Give students permission to feel without violence
• Shame (person) vs. Guilt (behavior)
• Modeling
• Accept students on their level (emotional, mental, spiritual, etc.)
• Safe touch
2. When are children under your care allowed to assert their boundaries?
“Training is an immediate part of the job. Each week on Wednesday, we have a new employee training and an all-staff training immediately afterwards. Training topics include CPR, First Aid, therapeutic hold techniques, clinical interventions, our model, how to be more effective, etc.” (also from your site)
3.Will you elaborate on the topic of therapeutic hold techniques?
-
3. CALO does censor some reading material, music, and movies. A certain level of maturity is needed to deal with pornography, racist books advocating death, homicidal or suicidal works, etc. Proven harmful material is kept from campus.
Do CALO staff screen (censor) student's mail?
What procedure do CALO staff follow if a student wants to call the state abuse hotline?
Do CALO staff monitor student phone calls?
How long are phone calls?
Are students allowed to call their parents on a weekly basis?
Do staff evaluate IEP, Individual Education Plans, with students on a weekly basis?
Three Registered Nurses have been hired recently. There are 5 RN's working at CALO now. Why the need for so many RN's?
Do restraint reports stipulate (1) when the restraint took place (2) why the restraint took place (3) who conducted the restraint (4) when the restraint started (5) when the restraint finished (6) what proactive measures were taken to avoid the restraint (7) injuries (8) student state of mind before the restraint (9) student state of mind during the restraint and (10) student state of mind after the restraint?
Are students examined by the Registered Nurse after a restraint takes place?
Do parents receive copies of restraint documentation (IR: Incident Reports)?
-
Do CALO staff screen (censor) student's mail? Well, DUH
What procedure do CALO staff follow if a student wants to call the state abuse hotline? 'Laugh at them' would be my best guess. Don't think the kids have ever heard of it
Do CALO staff monitor student phone calls? Again, DUH
How long are phone calls? Varies wildly
Are students allowed to call their parents on a weekly basis? No
Do staff evaluate IEP, Individual Education Plans, with students on a weekly basis? I doubt even a quarter of the people in that building have heard of an IEP
Three Registered Nurses have been hired recently. There are 5 RN's working at CALO now. Why the need for so many RN's? Because they figure at least two of them are going to resign immediately when they figure out what the hell goes on in there. Also the state is breathing down their neck.
Do restraint reports stipulate:
1) In general terms
2) Supposedly, but it's usually bullshit
3) Sometimes
4) In general terms
5) In general terms
6) Hahahahaha, no
7) In cursory, glossed-over terms
8) More bullshit
9) More bullshit with extra bullshit and a side order of cult-speak
10) They have a very special thing for this. They actually ask "on a scale of 1 to 10, how much physical pain are you feeling" and the same question for emotional pain.
Are students examined by the Registered Nurse after a restraint takes place? Sometimes, not usually
Do parents receive copies of restraint documentation (IR: Incident Reports)? Fuck no
-
You juvenile delinquents are trying to cut into my profits and I don't like it one bit!!!!!!
-
You juvenile delinquents are trying to cut into my profits and I don't like it one bit!!!!!!
(http://http://www.preisvergleich.org/pimages/Suck-My-Dick_92__51946_20.jpg)
-
Dear Lizard Tits, aka Ken Hooey.
I know why you are posting here. It isn't going to work, unlike you, I'm not that big of an idiot. We'll just have to wait and see what the future brings. We both know it won't be much longer.
As for Blombro:
CALO is every bit as toxic and disturbing as Thayer is and ever will be. You giving them any credit is a slap in the face to all of those kids jacked up in a bent wrist arm lock and thrown face first on the ground.
To the rest:
Keep in mind Mr. Ken Hooey has to protect his revenue flow. What businessman hasn't lied about his dealings to protect his profits? Don't be taken in by this scumbag.
-
One, CALO isn't exactly the same thing as the other Missouri program that gets rightly pounded on this forum (Thayer). Two, it took them until the winter of 2008 to decide to become a licensed facility.
I take it this is the offending quote. I didn't say CALO was better, safer, or less toxic than Thayer, I just said they're not the same thing. It would be like comparing West Ridge Academy to Cross Creek in Utah. It was strictly in reference to the fact that they're licensed by the State of Missouri. I guess there goes the argument on the utility of licensing.
Why even make the distinction? Partly because I was under the distinct impression that CALO was one of the many unlicensed programs in Missouri. I haven't been involved in the conversation up to this point, but I see that there are pages and pages devoted to this topic. As someone who hasn't been on top of this, the first thing that disturbs me about CALO is the use of PCS, if for no other reason because of the company that CALO keeps by using it, that and the stories of broken arms and wrists.
-
There not the same thing?
That's your problem right there....I don't make distinctions between duckfarms. A duckfarm is a duckfarm and they all ought to be razed to the ground.
and btw.. that also applies for these so called 'nice, safe' placements.
Kill em all and let god sort em out.
That's what you should have said to Congress. Not a bunch of shit about the need for regulation.
-
I know why you are posting here. It isn't going to work, unlike you, I'm not that big of an idiot. We'll just have to wait and see what the future brings. We both know it won't be much longer.
Say, can you hear that?
It's the sound of the Reaper...
-
It's the sound of the Reaper...
I thought that was the sound the doctor made after seeing my lab results last week?
-
Dear Lizard Tits, aka Ken Hooey.
I know why you are posting here. It isn't going to work, unlike you, I'm not that big of an idiot. We'll just have to wait and see what the future brings. We both know it won't be much longer.
As for Blombro:
CALO is every bit as toxic and disturbing as Thayer is and ever will be. You giving them any credit is a slap in the face to all of those kids jacked up in a bent wrist arm lock and thrown face first on the ground.
To the rest:
Keep in mind Mr. Ken Hooey has to protect his revenue flow. What businessman hasn't lied about his dealings to protect his profits? Don't be taken in by this scumbag.
Very nice and respectful language - Che. It is one way to avoid intelligent dialogue, eh?
One thing that comes to mind when thinking about the question "are kids free to leave" is this: are kids free to leave ANYWHERE? If my kid gets mad or upset about life in our home s/he isn't free to go. Also, in the public school they attend, they are not "free" to leave campus during the school day.
I have attended several of the CALO peer group sessions discussed earlier on this thread. There is no "screaming" or confrontation and if somebody doesn't want to talk, they can just sit there. At least two coaches are there to keep things respectful and on track, I suppose. CALO is not Elan or Family Foundation.
Most of the posters here disagree with the principle of RTCs in general, and are hell-bent to find specific "bad" things at CALO. Give it a break! And with regard to RTCs in general - if not a place like CALO, what do its detractors suggest instead? In our case it would have been jail or a lock-down psych facility.
-
One thing that comes to mind when thinking about the question "are kids free to leave" is this: are kids free to leave ANYWHERE? If my kid gets mad or upset about life in our home s/he isn't free to go. Also, in the public school they attend, they are not "free" to leave campus during the school day.
In both those cases, if something is wrong the kids *can* leave if something is wrong and, for example, go to the police. The same is not true of a facility where if they try to leave they are restrained (I assume that would be in the fairly broad category of "danger to self"). I do not know if this is true at CALO or whether they let the kids go so that the police may pick them up. It's not so much the question of whether there is or is not abuse, but whether if there is something wrong there is a way kids can report wrongdoing to a neutral outside party without fear that they'll somehow be punished for it.
I have attended several of the CALO peer group sessions discussed earlier on this thread. There is no "screaming" or confrontation and if somebody doesn't want to talk, they can just sit there.
If indeed that is true, why hasn't ken said as much so far? In any case, I'd like to get it confirmed by a kid who was actually there. If you are, for example, a parent who was allowed to sit in on a group, your very presence interferes with the authenticity of what you're seeing.
At least two coaches are there to keep things respectful and on track
And what about licensed therapists? From Ken's language earlier in the thread, (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27962#p337158) it sounded almost as if most of the group therapy was run by coaches and students, neither of which are qualified to lead group therapy. What's the point of having licensed therapists if they aren't used for group therapy? It sounds like it's cutting corners for expense purposes. There are good reasons why the law, at least in spirit if not letter, prohibits such things... the same reasoning applies to practicing medicine without a license. If you're a parent and you're ok with that... ok. but as far as i'm concerned, it's not really your decision to make. Your mind isn't the one being affected. It's your kid's. If it's truly voluntary, I don't see the problem, but if there is punishment in any way to not participating in group, it's not truly voluntary... rather it's coerced.
Most of the posters here disagree with the principle of RTCs in general, and are hell-bent to find specific "bad" things at CALO. Give it a break! And with regard to RTCs in general - if not a place like CALO, what do its detractors suggest instead? In our case it would have been jail or a lock-down psych facility.
Why not something in the community? The general reasoning behind "treating" people against their will is that it should only be done if a person is a direct danger to themselves or others, and they should only be detained for as long as it takes to "stabilize" them. What was your son/daughter doing (I assume you are a parent) that made incarceration without due process such a necessity?
-
Psy, I absolutely agree with you! There are lots of community interventions to be tried, and we did (mostly against my kid's will, too, by the way - I never got his full cooperation). Let's see, some of the things that contributed to the placement decision were fire-setting (he was facing criminal charges when he was placed), violent threats against school personnel, self-harm, drug use and drug sales, truancy, theft, non-compliance with curfew, etc. I suspect it is never an easy decision to place a child residentially, but there you are - my kid was a threat to himself and others, including the family.
-
Oh, sorry - I missed the first part of your post.
Well, you would have to ask Ken about the therapist thing, but in a group accountability session I don't think you necessarily need more than trained coaches. You are, of course, correct that dynamics change by our mere presence (what is the sound of a tree falling in the forest?...) but a) these sessions are done in the open and can be observed from any vantage point in the CALO facility, and b) places like the Family Foundation pride themselves with the confrontational style of those kinds of meetings, as a behavioral modification method. CALO's programs have a different premise.
-
P.S. Oh, and I don't think treatment should be a one-way street. I, too, see a therapist and a psychiatrist, plus I participate in family therapy. I definitely see the need for change at home and in my self. (Big difference from when I was a kid and my mom sent me away to a boarding school!)
-
but in a group accountability session I don't think you necessarily need more than trained coaches.
Maybe it's the name, because so many programs have a different definition of "accountability", but something about it rubs me the wrong way. Kids are, apparantly, confronted about things they are accused of doing. Shame is used as a tool to affect change. Without a therapist there, and even with a therapist, I can see that sort of thing getting very ugly very quickly, and It doesn't matter if the group is visible from any vantage point. Words can't be seen, and reactions are often subtle.
The reason I asked Ken what the topics were in these "power groups" or "accountability groups" is because some of them, at least at other programs, can be grossly inappropriate for discussion in a group setting. Take for example a kid who is confronted for... let's say masturbatory practices. That sort of thing can cause lasting shame in a person to the point where it causes scars that affect their whole life. Such topics should be dealt with quietly, in private, and with sensitivity. Everybody does not have to know everything about everybody for therapy to work. If there is no therapist in such groups, who is ensuring that these kids don't come out scarred? I'd like to hear from Ken on that.
-
Psy, I absolutely agree with you! There are lots of community interventions to be tried, and we did (mostly against my kid's will, too, by the way - I never got his full cooperation). Let's see, some of the things that contributed to the placement decision were fire-setting (he was facing criminal charges when he was placed), violent threats against school personnel, self-harm, drug use and drug sales, truancy, theft, non-compliance with curfew, etc. I suspect it is never an easy decision to place a child residentially, but there you are - my kid was a threat to himself and others, including the family.
I recognize it wasn't an easy decision, and i'm sorry it's one you felt you had to make, but there was no due process for your son, was there? Was he convicted of a crime by a jury of his peers and sentenced? Was it his choice to go to CALO? Was CALO represented accurately to him at the time he was given a choice if that was so?
-
Dear Lizard Tits, aka Ken Hooey.
I know why you are posting here. It isn't going to work, unlike you, I'm not that big of an idiot. We'll just have to wait and see what the future brings. We both know it won't be much longer.
As for Blombro:
CALO is every bit as toxic and disturbing as Thayer is and ever will be. You giving them any credit is a slap in the face to all of those kids jacked up in a bent wrist arm lock and thrown face first on the ground.
To the rest:
Keep in mind Mr. Ken Hooey has to protect his revenue flow. What businessman hasn't lied about his dealings to protect his profits? Don't be taken in by this scumbag.
Very nice and respectful language - Che. It is one way to avoid intelligent dialogue, eh?
One thing that comes to mind when thinking about the question "are kids free to leave" is this: are kids free to leave ANYWHERE? If my kid gets mad or upset about life in our home s/he isn't free to go. Also, in the public school they attend, they are not "free" to leave campus during the school day.
I have attended several of the CALO peer group sessions discussed earlier on this thread. There is no "screaming" or confrontation and if somebody doesn't want to talk, they can just sit there. At least two coaches are there to keep things respectful and on track, I suppose. CALO is not Elan or Family Foundation.
Most of the posters here disagree with the principle of RTCs in general, and are hell-bent to find specific "bad" things at CALO. Give it a break! And with regard to RTCs in general - if not a place like CALO, what do its detractors suggest instead? In our case it would have been jail or a lock-down psych facility.
Well, this is the paradoxical thinking we are asked to embrace when dealing with programs, isn't it? On one hand the program says "We don't take violent, dangerous or criminal kids" and on the other hand the parents say "My kid would have been in jail or in a lockdown psych facility." One of you isn't being honest.
You can't say that your kid was such a danger to self or others that s/he couldn't remain at home and say at the same time that CALO is a safe environment that doesn't take kids with severe problems. Either your kid isn't that bad and you're exaggerating (for the record I believe you) or CALO accepts dangerous and violent criminals (for the record I believe this is true).
One way or the other, we're asked to wilfully suspend disbelief in one case or the other and both statements can't be true, as they are mutually exclusive premises.
I also agree with Psy that it sounds like CALO does not use any clinically appropriate therapies. Parents should never be allowed to sit in on group sessions (it violates so many privacy laws and ethical principles) and the people facilitating the groups have no educational basis upon which to perform this duty.
From just what Ken Huey and this one parent have posted, I can state unequivocally that CALO is not the place to send children. Ken, Tiger, you've shot CALO in the foot trying to support it.
-
Well, this is the paradoxical thinking we are asked to embrace when dealing with programs, isn't it? On one hand the program says "We don't take violent, dangerous or criminal kids" and on the other hand the parents say "My kid would have been in jail or in a lockdown psych facility." One of you isn't being honest.
:notworthy: :notworthy: :deal: :rocker: :tup: :tup:
-
TigerEye wrote:Psy, I absolutely agree with you! There are lots of community interventions to be tried, and we did (mostly against my kid's will, too, by the way - I never got his full cooperation). Let's see, some of the things that contributed to the placement decision were fire-setting (he was facing criminal charges when he was placed), violent threats against school personnel, self-harm, drug use and drug sales, truancy, theft, non-compliance with curfew, etc. I suspect it is never an easy decision to place a child residentially, but there you are - my kid was a threat to himself and others, including the family.
Tiger Eye I examined your posts. You are a new user whose posts are all in CALO threads in lieu of controversy surrounding Ken Huey. Therein lies a strong case you're a staff at CALO trying to do damage control. It will not work on Fornits because everyone can smell bullshit.
-
Well, this is the paradoxical thinking we are asked to embrace when dealing with programs, isn't it? On one hand the program says "We don't take violent, dangerous or criminal kids" and on the other hand the parents say "My kid would have been in jail or in a lockdown psych facility." One of you isn't being honest.
Yeah. A friend I was talking to on the phone yesterday who was reading the same thread had a very hard time believing that if these kids are truly violent, and truly dangers to themselves... that they would just give up and go to CALO without a fight. Considering that these are supposedly the profile of kids that attend CALO, I find it hard to believe that there has never been a physical confrontation involved in order to convince a teen to go with the CALO staff. Maybe it's possible, as is everything, but it certainly doesn't strike me as probable unless CALO staff have some sort of magic compliance gaining wand.
-
Tiger Eye I examined your posts. You are a new user whose posts are all in CALO threads in lieu of controversy surrounding Ken Huey. Therein lies a strong case you're a staff at CALO trying to do damage control. It will not work on Fornits because everyone can smell bullshit.
No. She (i assume by the writing style) is who she says she is. From the issues she said her son had, I assume she's a calo parent who posted on another thread as a guest. The only difference is that she is now registered. Nothing in her posts sounds suspicious in the least, either. Sometimes bullshit detectors are wrong.
-
unless CALO staff have some sort of magic compliance gaining wand.
Like a cattle prod?
-
Tiger Eye I examined your posts. You are a new user whose posts are all in CALO threads in lieu of controversy surrounding Ken Huey. Therein lies a strong case you're a staff at CALO trying to do damage control. It will not work on Fornits because everyone can smell bullshit.
No. She (i assume by the writing style) is who she says she is. From the issues she said her son had, I assume she's a calo parent who posted on another thread as a guest. The only difference is that she is now registered. Nothing in her posts sounds suspicious in the least, either. Sometimes bullshit detectors are wrong.
Right you are, Psy. I got tired of posting as a guest because of the stupid little letters/numbers thing you have to type, and they are so hard to read, I kept getting them wrong.
I imagine that most folks get their kids to RTC as a couple - in other words, two people escorting one. I had some fear and trepidation about getting my kid to CALO, but he was going there from a wilderness program, so half the battle was won - we were already out West. He was pretty furious about going, but he went nevertheless, because he saw no way around it.
Guess what? Last weekend when I saw him he said that after CALO he wants to go back to the wilderness program, because the people there were "chill." Go figure....
-
TigerEye wrote:Psy, I absolutely agree with you! There are lots of community interventions to be tried, and we did (mostly against my kid's will, too, by the way - I never got his full cooperation). Let's see, some of the things that contributed to the placement decision were fire-setting (he was facing criminal charges when he was placed), violent threats against school personnel, self-harm, drug use and drug sales, truancy, theft, non-compliance with curfew, etc. I suspect it is never an easy decision to place a child residentially, but there you are - my kid was a threat to himself and others, including the family.
Tiger Eye I examined your posts. You are a new user whose posts are all in CALO threads in lieu of controversy surrounding Ken Huey. Therein lies a strong case you're a staff at CALO trying to do damage control. It will not work on Fornits because everyone can smell bullshit.
Whatever...
-
hmm CALO is in Lake of the Ozarks
im like 1-2 hours from there
temped to go up there one day see for my self
-
hmm CALO is in Lake of the Ozarks
im like 1-2 hours from there
temped to go up there one day see for my self
As a tourist?
-
Right you are, Psy. I got tired of posting as a guest because of the stupid little letters/numbers thing you have to type, and they are so hard to read, I kept getting them wrong.
I imagine that most folks get their kids to RTC as a couple - in other words, two people escorting one. I had some fear and trepidation about getting my kid to CALO, but he was going there from a wilderness program, so half the battle was won - we were already out West. He was pretty furious about going, but he went nevertheless, because he saw no way around it.
Guess what? Last weekend when I saw him he said that after CALO he wants to go back to the wilderness program, because the people there were "chill." Go figure....
Did Ken Huey explain to you that "bent wrist control with variations" were a part of PCS?
-
I imagine that most folks get their kids to RTC as a couple - in other words, two people escorting one. I had some fear and trepidation about getting my kid to CALO, but he was going there from a wilderness program, so half the battle was won - we were already out West. He was pretty furious about going, but he went nevertheless, because he saw no way around it.
So he was escorted to Wilderness? How did he get to CALO from wilderness?
Guess what? Last weekend when I saw him he said that after CALO he wants to go back to the wilderness program, because the people there were "chill." Go figure....
Don't you think that's a little bit strange. One of the issues I have with programs is that they really don't seem like they prepare kids for the real world.
-
hmm CALO is in Lake of the Ozarks
im like 1-2 hours from there
temped to go up there one day see for my self
As a tourist?
yes in a way
id like to know what really goes on
and why not?
if every thing is on the level whats wrong with letting some one take a look around and ask the kids a few questions?
-
Dear Lizard Tits, aka Ken Hooey.
I know why you are posting here. It isn't going to work, unlike you, I'm not that big of an idiot. We'll just have to wait and see what the future brings. We both know it won't be much longer.
As for Blombro:
CALO is every bit as toxic and disturbing as Thayer is and ever will be. You giving them any credit is a slap in the face to all of those kids jacked up in a bent wrist arm lock and thrown face first on the ground.
To the rest:
Keep in mind Mr. Ken Hooey has to protect his revenue flow. What businessman hasn't lied about his dealings to protect his profits? Don't be taken in by this scumbag.
Very nice and respectful language - Che. It is one way to avoid intelligent dialogue, eh?
One thing that comes to mind when thinking about the question "are kids free to leave" is this: are kids free to leave ANYWHERE? If my kid gets mad or upset about life in our home s/he isn't free to go. Also, in the public school they attend, they are not "free" to leave campus during the school day.
I have attended several of the CALO peer group sessions discussed earlier on this thread. There is no "screaming" or confrontation and if somebody doesn't want to talk, they can just sit there. At least two coaches are there to keep things respectful and on track, I suppose. CALO is not Elan or Family Foundation.
Most of the posters here disagree with the principle of RTCs in general, and are hell-bent to find specific "bad" things at CALO. Give it a break! And with regard to RTCs in general - if not a place like CALO, what do its detractors suggest instead? In our case it would have been jail or a lock-down psych facility.
Well, this is the paradoxical thinking we are asked to embrace when dealing with programs, isn't it? On one hand the program says "We don't take violent, dangerous or criminal kids" and on the other hand the parents say "My kid would have been in jail or in a lockdown psych facility." One of you isn't being honest.
You can't say that your kid was such a danger to self or others that s/he couldn't remain at home and say at the same time that CALO is a safe environment that doesn't take kids with severe problems. Either your kid isn't that bad and you're exaggerating (for the record I believe you) or CALO accepts dangerous and violent criminals (for the record I believe this is true).
One way or the other, we're asked to wilfully suspend disbelief in one case or the other and both statements can't be true, as they are mutually exclusive premises.
I also agree with Psy that it sounds like CALO does not use any clinically appropriate therapies. Parents should never be allowed to sit in on group sessions (it violates so many privacy laws and ethical principles) and the people facilitating the groups have no educational basis upon which to perform this duty.
From just what Ken Huey and this one parent have posted, I can state unequivocally that CALO is not the place to send children. Ken, Tiger, you've shot CALO in the foot trying to support it.
Tiger Eye, what's your response to this? Does CALO accept dangerous children (you said yours was an arsonist, I believe)? How about court-ordered kids? What about convicted felons?
-
I imagine that most folks get their kids to RTC as a couple - in other words, two people escorting one. I had some fear and trepidation about getting my kid to CALO, but he was going there from a wilderness program, so half the battle was won - we were already out West. He was pretty furious about going, but he went nevertheless, because he saw no way around it.
So he was escorted to Wilderness? How did he get to CALO from wilderness?
Guess what? Last weekend when I saw him he said that after CALO he wants to go back to the wilderness program, because the people there were "chill." Go figure....
Don't you think that's a little bit strange. One of the issues I have with programs is that they really don't seem like they prepare kids for the real world.
Well, I escorted him myself to wilderness and then to CALO. I tried to be straight with him and he knew he was out of options. He was very pissed and didn't want to be near me, but it worked out ok.
In terms of "what next," I think they do prepare the kids and parents for the next steps, but, hell, the kid is 15. I was semi-delusional at that age, too. (I even ran away to Mexico thinking a could get a job there!!)
-
hmm CALO is in Lake of the Ozarks
im like 1-2 hours from there
temped to go up there one day see for my self
As a tourist?
yes in a way
id like to know what really goes on
and why not?
if every thing is on the level whats wrong with letting some one take a look around and ask the kids a few questions?
I can think of lots of reasons - safety and privacy, to name a couple. It's not like visiting Mount Rushmore...
-
Dear Lizard Tits, aka Ken Hooey.
I know why you are posting here. It isn't going to work, unlike you, I'm not that big of an idiot. We'll just have to wait and see what the future brings. We both know it won't be much longer.
As for Blombro:
CALO is every bit as toxic and disturbing as Thayer is and ever will be. You giving them any credit is a slap in the face to all of those kids jacked up in a bent wrist arm lock and thrown face first on the ground.
To the rest:
Keep in mind Mr. Ken Hooey has to protect his revenue flow. What businessman hasn't lied about his dealings to protect his profits? Don't be taken in by this scumbag.
Very nice and respectful language - Che. It is one way to avoid intelligent dialogue, eh?
One thing that comes to mind when thinking about the question "are kids free to leave" is this: are kids free to leave ANYWHERE? If my kid gets mad or upset about life in our home s/he isn't free to go. Also, in the public school they attend, they are not "free" to leave campus during the school day.
I have attended several of the CALO peer group sessions discussed earlier on this thread. There is no "screaming" or confrontation and if somebody doesn't want to talk, they can just sit there. At least two coaches are there to keep things respectful and on track, I suppose. CALO is not Elan or Family Foundation.
Most of the posters here disagree with the principle of RTCs in general, and are hell-bent to find specific "bad" things at CALO. Give it a break! And with regard to RTCs in general - if not a place like CALO, what do its detractors suggest instead? In our case it would have been jail or a lock-down psych facility.
Well, this is the paradoxical thinking we are asked to embrace when dealing with programs, isn't it? On one hand the program says "We don't take violent, dangerous or criminal kids" and on the other hand the parents say "My kid would have been in jail or in a lockdown psych facility." One of you isn't being honest.
You can't say that your kid was such a danger to self or others that s/he couldn't remain at home and say at the same time that CALO is a safe environment that doesn't take kids with severe problems. Either your kid isn't that bad and you're exaggerating (for the record I believe you) or CALO accepts dangerous and violent criminals (for the record I believe this is true).
One way or the other, we're asked to wilfully suspend disbelief in one case or the other and both statements can't be true, as they are mutually exclusive premises.
I also agree with Psy that it sounds like CALO does not use any clinically appropriate therapies. Parents should never be allowed to sit in on group sessions (it violates so many privacy laws and ethical principles) and the people facilitating the groups have no educational basis upon which to perform this duty.
From just what Ken Huey and this one parent have posted, I can state unequivocally that CALO is not the place to send children. Ken, Tiger, you've shot CALO in the foot trying to support it.
Tiger Eye, what's your response to this? Does CALO accept dangerous children (you said yours was an arsonist, I believe)? How about court-ordered kids? What about convicted felons?
I dunno - you should ask CALO. My son, in a controlled environment, is not dangerous to himself or others. The wilderness program was worried about the fire issue (!) but in the end, his counselors correctly concluded that it would not be an issue there.
-
Guess what? Last weekend when I saw him he said that after CALO he wants to go back to the wilderness program, because the people there were "chill." Go figure....
Oddly, his preferred destination was not "home"...
-
Dear Lizard Tits, aka Ken Hooey.
I know why you are posting here. It isn't going to work, unlike you, I'm not that big of an idiot. We'll just have to wait and see what the future brings. We both know it won't be much longer.
As for Blombro:
CALO is every bit as toxic and disturbing as Thayer is and ever will be. You giving them any credit is a slap in the face to all of those kids jacked up in a bent wrist arm lock and thrown face first on the ground.
To the rest:
Keep in mind Mr. Ken Hooey has to protect his revenue flow. What businessman hasn't lied about his dealings to protect his profits? Don't be taken in by this scumbag.
Very nice and respectful language - Che. It is one way to avoid intelligent dialogue, eh?
One thing that comes to mind when thinking about the question "are kids free to leave" is this: are kids free to leave ANYWHERE? If my kid gets mad or upset about life in our home s/he isn't free to go. Also, in the public school they attend, they are not "free" to leave campus during the school day.
I have attended several of the CALO peer group sessions discussed earlier on this thread. There is no "screaming" or confrontation and if somebody doesn't want to talk, they can just sit there. At least two coaches are there to keep things respectful and on track, I suppose. CALO is not Elan or Family Foundation.
Most of the posters here disagree with the principle of RTCs in general, and are hell-bent to find specific "bad" things at CALO. Give it a break! And with regard to RTCs in general - if not a place like CALO, what do its detractors suggest instead? In our case it would have been jail or a lock-down psych facility.
Well, this is the paradoxical thinking we are asked to embrace when dealing with programs, isn't it? On one hand the program says "We don't take violent, dangerous or criminal kids" and on the other hand the parents say "My kid would have been in jail or in a lockdown psych facility." One of you isn't being honest.
You can't say that your kid was such a danger to self or others that s/he couldn't remain at home and say at the same time that CALO is a safe environment that doesn't take kids with severe problems. Either your kid isn't that bad and you're exaggerating (for the record I believe you) or CALO accepts dangerous and violent criminals (for the record I believe this is true).
One way or the other, we're asked to wilfully suspend disbelief in one case or the other and both statements can't be true, as they are mutually exclusive premises.
I also agree with Psy that it sounds like CALO does not use any clinically appropriate therapies. Parents should never be allowed to sit in on group sessions (it violates so many privacy laws and ethical principles) and the people facilitating the groups have no educational basis upon which to perform this duty.
From just what Ken Huey and this one parent have posted, I can state unequivocally that CALO is not the place to send children. Ken, Tiger, you've shot CALO in the foot trying to support it.
Tiger Eye, what's your response to this? Does CALO accept dangerous children (you said yours was an arsonist, I believe)? How about court-ordered kids? What about convicted felons?
Just waiting for your answer here. It seems you'll answer the most trivial posts like how far people live from CALO, but you're not addressing the substance of this thread. Why wouldn't you want to respond to items like the above or bent wrist control techniques? Seems like a very familiar tactic. Very familiar.
-
Why? Because it was not relevant to my posts and I've been asked the question before.(and answered it). So fuck off!
-
hmm CALO is in Lake of the Ozarks
im like 1-2 hours from there
temped to go up there one day see for my self
As a tourist?
yes in a way
id like to know what really goes on
and why not?
if every thing is on the level whats wrong with letting some one take a look around and ask the kids a few questions?
I can think of lots of reasons - safety and privacy, to name a couple. It's not like visiting Mount Rushmore...
having been in a program my self do you think i would out the poor kids at the place
i would just like to hear from them with out staff or parents what THEY think
again if its all on the level whats the issue?
then again if they have some thing to hide...
and whats my going to see it different from say a parent wanting to check things out for them selves first
i know if i ever sent my kid to any kinda boarding school i would want to see it IN PERSON be for i did any thing
-
OK, then. We have confirmed that CALO takes deeply disturbed kids like arsonists who are dangers to themselves and their families. Just wanted to get that cleared up so we can talk about CALO's population more intelligently.
Do they mix in more-or-less normal kids with the dangerous ones like your boy? Or is there a general population and some sort of special housing unit where they keep the really bad ones?
-
OK, then. We have confirmed that CALO takes deeply disturbed kids like arsonists who are dangers to themselves and their families. Just wanted to get that cleared up so we can talk about CALO's population more intelligently.
Do they mix in more-or-less normal kids with the dangerous ones like your boy? Or is there a general population and some sort of special housing unit where they keep the really bad ones?
A bit blunt and callous, but I see your point.
Calo's webpage (http://http://caloteens.com/whyCalo.aspx) states:
As residential treatment has matured, the one size fits all approach has lost its appeal. There are many presenting problems that are not well grouped together. A program that puts eating-disordered teens with Conduct Disordered ones will feel the strain of the differing needs of those populations. Simply put, specialist care is needed for many emotional and behavioral issues. Eating Disorders, issues of trauma, Reactive Attachment Disorder, non-verbal learning disabilities, substance abuse; these and many other issues demand specialized knowledge and treatment. CALO was created with this need for specialty care in mind.
CALO focuses on only three presenting issues: issues of emotion, trauma, and attachment.
An even more concise way of presenting CALO’s specialty is to say that issues with trauma at their core are what we treat. Trauma during the attachment window will frequently create attachment issues in later adolescence. Trauma will also lay the groundwork for later Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Trauma will predispose some teens for emotional regulation issues like Bi-polar Disorder or Depression. CALO treats trauma-induced emotional and behavioral problems.
Our theoretical framework is based on attachment research. Our treatment model relies on relationships and attachment interventions to create lasting change. CALO is a relational, attachment-centered program.
The following would be a partial list of the type of teenager CALO would specialize in treating:
* A teenage adoptee struggling to connect with parents and caregivers
* A teen who has been physically, emotionally, or sexually abused and is now acting out behaviorally
* A teen who has survived a trauma and cannot maintain emotional control
* A foreign-adopted teen who is not fitting in at home or at school and is draining emotional resources from his/her adopted family
* A teen with anger control issues and a history of abuse or neglect
* An untrustworthy and sexually promiscuous teenager who does not enjoy deeper connection with family or caregivers
Maybe i'm not seeing everything here, but it seems to me that pretty much anything whatsoever could be attributed to "issues of emotion, trauma, and attachment". I wonder if there is much difference in practice from the varied population in other programs.
-
The following would be a partial list of the type of teenager CALO would specialize in treating:
- A teenage adoptee struggling to connect with parents and caregivers
- A teen who has been physically, emotionally, or sexually abused and is now acting out behaviorally
- A teen who has survived a trauma and cannot maintain emotional control
- A foreign-adopted teen who is not fitting in at home or at school and is draining emotional resources from his/her adopted family
- A teen with anger control issues and a history of abuse or neglect
- An untrustworthy and sexually promiscuous teenager who does not enjoy deeper connection with family or caregivers
A lot of these characteristics are also based, at least in part, on subjective observation. Parental or diagnostician bias can figure into this quite heavily. What one person considers "lack of emotional control" can be substantially different from someone else's call.
-
TigerEye,
I have some questions for you.
(1) Did Ken Huey explain to you that PCS incorporates "bent wrist control methods with variations."
(2) Did you ask questions about consequences for rule violations?
(3) Did you discuss staff credentials with Ken Huey?
(4) Did you speak with students who were recently enrolled at CALO?
(5) Did you tour the entire campus when you enrolled your son at CALO?
(6) Did you eat a meal with your son to see how staff interacted with students?
(7) Did you ask questions about crisis intervention training and appropriate restraint techniques/procedures?
(8) Did you ask for CALO's business license number and verify it with the appropriate state agency?
(9) Did you speak with the appropriate state agency to see if they received complaints about physical abuse, emotional abuse and sexual abuse?
(10) Did you walk through the dorm your son would be living in?
(11) I don't 'know if you're aware but Ken Huey, Landon Kirk, Caleb Cottle, and Nicole Fuglsang worked at abusive programs. Do you see this as a red flag?
RE: (12) viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810)
-
TigerEye,
I have some questions for you.
(1) Did Ken Huey explain to you that PCS incorporates "bent wrist control methods with variations."
(2) Did you ask questions about consequences for rule violations?
(3) Did you discuss staff credentials with Ken Huey?
(4) Did you speak with students who were recently enrolled at CALO?
(5) Did you tour the entire campus when you enrolled your son at CALO?
(6) Did you eat a meal with your son to see how staff interacted with students?
(7) Did you ask questions about crisis intervention training and appropriate restraint techniques/procedures?
(8) Did you ask for CALO's business license number and verify it with the appropriate state agency?
(9) Did you speak with the appropriate state agency to see if they received complaints about physical abuse, emotional abuse and sexual abuse?
(10) Did you walk through the dorm your son would be living in?
(11) I don't 'know if you're aware but Ken Huey, Landon Kirk, Caleb Cottle, and Nicole Fuglsang worked at abusive programs. Do you see this as a red flag?
RE: (12) http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810)
I would say yes to most of the above but not the last (no.11)
And regarding the previous posts, one thing should be clear - what is dangerous behavior by a kid out in the community is not necessarily the same behavior that would be manifested in a controlled setting. Isn't that partly the point of a restrictive setting? A kid who uses drugs, gets into fights, steals, destroys public property, cuts him or herself, etc. is placed into a setting where that is pretty much impossible - and situations that do arise are nipped in the bud. Do you dig what I am saying? We are not talking about kids who are psychotic, or who have a true conduct disorder, as I think they would probably be excluded from a setting like CALO.
-
[
having been in a program my self do you think i would out the poor kids at the place
i would just like to hear from them with out staff or parents what THEY think
again if its all on the level whats the issue?
then again if they have some thing to hide...
and whats my going to see it different from say a parent wanting to check things out for them selves first
i know if i ever sent my kid to any kinda boarding school i would want to see it IN PERSON be for i did any thing
Well, I suppose you can try. I can't think of any place that would let you just wander in to chat with the kids, though. Not even public schools!
-
Oh, and regarding the profile of the kids there, I think that the description typically fits kids who were adopted, often from institutions, where all kids of issues arose that don't necessarily respond to "behavioral modification." Early neglect rewires the brain in a negative way, that therapeutic support, relationship-building, etc. can help to overcome. Behavioral modification is just what it says: changing behavior. Which in certain kids will only work temporarily.
-
TigerEye,
I have some questions for you.
(1) Did Ken Huey explain to you that PCS incorporates "bent wrist control methods with variations."
(2) Did you ask questions about consequences for rule violations?
(3) Did you discuss staff credentials with Ken Huey?
(4) Did you speak with students who were recently enrolled at CALO?
(5) Did you tour the entire campus when you enrolled your son at CALO?
(6) Did you eat a meal with your son to see how staff interacted with students?
(7) Did you ask questions about crisis intervention training and appropriate restraint techniques/procedures?
(8) Did you ask for CALO's business license number and verify it with the appropriate state agency?
(9) Did you speak with the appropriate state agency to see if they received complaints about physical abuse, emotional abuse and sexual abuse?
(10) Did you walk through the dorm your son would be living in?
(11) I don't 'know if you're aware but Ken Huey, Landon Kirk, Caleb Cottle, and Nicole Fuglsang worked at abusive programs. Do you see this as a red flag?
RE: (12) http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810)
I would say yes to most of the above but not the last (no.11)
And regarding the previous posts, one thing should be clear - what is dangerous behavior by a kid out in the community is not necessarily the same behavior that would be manifested in a controlled setting. Isn't that partly the point of a restrictive setting? A kid who uses drugs, gets into fights, steals, destroys public property, cuts him or herself, etc. is placed into a setting where that is pretty much impossible - and situations that do arise are nipped in the bud. Do you dig what I am saying? We are not talking about kids who are psychotic, or who have a true conduct disorder, as I think they would probably be excluded from a setting like CALO.
Please be more specific than "I would say yes to most of the above but not the last (no.11)"
(1) Did Ken Huey explain to you that PCS incorporates "bent wrist control methods with variations." Yes or No? If not, what was said about restraints?
(2) Did you ask questions about consequences for rule violations? Please be specific.
(3) Did you discuss staff credentials with Ken Huey? Are you aware that certain CALO staff don't have experience working with youth?
(4) Did you speak with students who were recently enrolled at CALO? If so, how long were they at CALO for?
(5) Did you tour the entire campus when you enrolled your son at CALO? Did CALO staff offer to walk around the entire campus with you?
(6) Did you eat a meal with your son to see how staff interacted with students?
(7) Did you ask questions about crisis intervention training and appropriate restraint techniques/procedures? If yes, please be specific.
(8) Did you ask for CALO's business license number and verify it with the appropriate state agency?
(9) Did you speak with the appropriate state agency to see if they received complaints about physical abuse, emotional abuse and sexual abuse?
(10) Did you walk through the dorm your son would be living in?
(11) I don't 'know if you're aware but Ken Huey, Landon Kirk, Caleb Cottle, and Nicole Fuglsang worked at abusive programs. Do you see this as a red flag?
RE: (12) http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810)
-
Who are you, the Grand Inquisitor? Or is this a job interview...
-
Who are you, the Grand Inquisitor? Or is this a job interview...
The questions above are common sense. Every parent should ask them. If you did not, then that is indicative you failed to do your homework about CALO.
-
OK, then. We have confirmed that CALO takes deeply disturbed kids like arsonists who are dangers to themselves and their families. Just wanted to get that cleared up so we can talk about CALO's population more intelligently.
Do they mix in more-or-less normal kids with the dangerous ones like your boy? Or is there a general population and some sort of special housing unit where they keep the really bad ones?
This is all any parent needs to know. Dangerous population, mixed together, living together and untrained, uneducated "coaches" facilitating "therapy." I'd run from this place. This "treatment model" is crazy!
For those of you 'who' haven't noticed yet, "TigerEye" is not a CALO parent.
-
TigerEye,
I have some questions for you.
(1) Did Ken Huey explain to you that PCS incorporates "bent wrist control methods with variations."
(2) Did you ask questions about consequences for rule violations?
(3) Did you discuss staff credentials with Ken Huey?
(4) Did you speak with students who were recently enrolled at CALO?
(5) Did you tour the entire campus when you enrolled your son at CALO?
(6) Did you eat a meal with your son to see how staff interacted with students?
(7) Did you ask questions about crisis intervention training and appropriate restraint techniques/procedures?
(8) Did you ask for CALO's business license number and verify it with the appropriate state agency?
(9) Did you speak with the appropriate state agency to see if they received complaints about physical abuse, emotional abuse and sexual abuse?
(10) Did you walk through the dorm your son would be living in?
(11) I don't 'know if you're aware but Ken Huey, Landon Kirk, Caleb Cottle, and Nicole Fuglsang worked at abusive programs. Do you see this as a red flag?
RE: (12) viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810)
I would say yes to most of the above but not the last (no.11)
And regarding the previous posts, one thing should be clear - what is dangerous behavior by a kid out in the community is not necessarily the same behavior that would be manifested in a controlled setting. Isn't that partly the point of a restrictive setting? A kid who uses drugs, gets into fights, steals, destroys public property, cuts him or herself, etc. is placed into a setting where that is pretty much impossible - and situations that do arise are nipped in the bud. Do you dig what I am saying? We are not talking about kids who are psychotic, or who have a true conduct disorder, as I think they would probably be excluded from a setting like CALO.
Ithought you said your son was so dangerous to self and others that he had to be placed at CALO or he would be in jail or a lock-down psych facility. If your son could be appropriately placed in a lock-down psych ward or in prison, how could he be appropriately placed at CALO? This makes no sense whatsover on its face.
-
Guess what? Last weekend when I saw him he said that after CALO he wants to go back to the wilderness program, because the people there were "chill." Go figure....
Oddly, his preferred destination was not "home"...Guest
This speaks volumes.
My observations after reading posts here and at other sites, and after talking personally with survivors, is that the majority of (though not all) teens sent to programs do not have close relationships with their parents afterwards. They say they go through the motions. They appear agreeable and compliant around their parents, but privately do not trust their parents again.
I can understand this. I imagine how it would feel to have the very people whom you are supposed to be able to trust completely a) allow you to be forcibly transported, usually in handcuffs, b) turn you over to the care of strangers, often thousands of miles from home, c) end their daily parental contact with you, just a few minutes on the phone every week or two for a year or more, and d) deny all your requests to return home. Personally, I would not trust or love these people/parents again.
That said, I can often understand how parents can be victims in this environment as well, though they do not endure anywhere near the sort of suffering and abuse the teens endure.
Few, if any, parents realize the program will most likely cost them their relationship with their child in addition to hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Auntie Em
-
OK, then. We have confirmed that CALO takes deeply disturbed kids like arsonists who are dangers to themselves and their families. Just wanted to get that cleared up so we can talk about CALO's population more intelligently.
Do they mix in more-or-less normal kids with the dangerous ones like your boy? Or is there a general population and some sort of special housing unit where they keep the really bad ones?
This is all any parent needs to know. Dangerous population, mixed together, living together and untrained, uneducated "coaches" facilitating "therapy." I'd run from this place. This "treatment model" is crazy!
For those of you 'who' haven't noticed yet, "TigerEye" is not a CALO parent.
Right. Alot you know! Read back, knucklebrain.
And btw, what is "normal," anyway? Are YOU "normal?"
And for the purposes of argument, why would you case so much about my identity?
-
Your agenda, your credibility…
Ken Huey might be better off at least taking the time to answer some of the more pointed questions…the ones you’ve been dodging.
-
OK, then. We have confirmed that CALO takes deeply disturbed kids like arsonists who are dangers to themselves and their families. Just wanted to get that cleared up so we can talk about CALO's population more intelligently.
Do they mix in more-or-less normal kids with the dangerous ones like your boy? Or is there a general population and some sort of special housing unit where they keep the really bad ones?
This is all any parent needs to know. Dangerous population, mixed together, living together and untrained, uneducated "coaches" facilitating "therapy." I'd run from this place. This "treatment model" is crazy!
For those of you 'who' haven't noticed yet, "TigerEye" is not a CALO parent.
Right. Alot you know! Read back, knucklebrain.
And btw, what is "normal," anyway? Are YOU "normal?"
And for the purposes of argument, why would you case so much about my identity?
Well, because it speaks to your motive for defending the indefensible. Once more, you are asking us to believe two mutually exclusive pieces of information: One, that your kid is so dangerously deranged that he would be appropriately placed in a lock-down psych ward or in prison (your words, not mine); and two, that CALO is a safe environment, free from dangerous attendees (Ken Huey's words, not mine).
Obviously, your kid a is dangerous. Arson is a dangerous crime with a potential for many fatalities in dorm-style housing. It also happens to be very, very highly correlated with sexual abusers. Considering that CALO accepts these very dangerous types, it's hard to reconcile why any parent would send a "struggling teen" there, as it seems to be populated with dangerous and potentially deadly offenders.
I just want you to characterize CALO fairly. It cannot be both a safe environment for struggling teens and suitable for kids who belong in prison or lock-down psych wards, as you stated your kid does.
I'm just pointing out your logical fallacies here. Don't shoot the messenger.
-
This is all any parent needs to know. Dangerous population, mixed together, living together and untrained, uneducated "coaches" facilitating "therapy." I'd run from this place. This "treatment model" is crazy!.
Right. Alot you know! Read back, knucklebrain.
And btw, what is "normal," anyway? Are YOU "normal?"
Nobody is normal. The point I think the guest is trying to make is that certain aspects of the program' population and staff scare the crap out of him, especially based on knowledge of what has happened in other programs where these volatile "ingredients" are combined.
Personally, I'd really like to know what a survey of the "student" population would reveal (in terms of supposed "issues"). I'd like to know whether the student population is uniform or greatly varied, and if the student's issues vary, to what extent. If you don't know this, perhaps you should educate yourself. If I had a daughter and she was was, for example, a victim of severe abuse, i wouldn't want her around other kids who have a history of abuse or violent behavior. Even if nothing happens, I couldn't see her being very safe. Furthermore, I wouldn't feel her being very safe at all in the hands of untrained "coaches" and indeed, other students actually leading the supposed therapy, especially without the supervision of trained professionals (if that is indeed the case).
-
It is a possibility that TigerEye is Maminka.
-
Maybe so, but that's immaterial. What matters is that TigerEye and Ken Huey offer mutually exclusive depictions of CALO. Now I just want to know which one is lying. They can't both be telling the truth.
-
Maybe so, but that's immaterial. What matters is that TigerEye and Ken Huey offer mutually exclusive depictions of CALO. Now I just want to know which one is lying. They can't both be telling the truth.
AND the only way to do that is go up there and see whats going on...
-
Huh. Someone told me "Ken Huey" means "free pussy" in Tagalog. Any truth to that?
-
Maybe so, but that's immaterial. What matters is that TigerEye and Ken Huey offer mutually exclusive depictions of CALO. Now I just want to know which one is lying. They can't both be telling the truth.
AND the only way to do that is go up there and see whats going on...
I'll be expecting a full report, soldier.
Seriously, though, if TE is telling the truth, then Ken Huey has some serious explaining to do.
-
Guess what? Last weekend when I saw him he said that after CALO he wants to go back to the wilderness program, because the people there were "chill." Go figure....
Oddly, his preferred destination was not "home"...
This speaks volumes.
My observations after reading posts here and at other sites, and after talking personally with survivors, is that the majority of (though not all) teens sent to programs do not have close relationships with their parents afterwards. They say they go through the motions. They appear agreeable and compliant around their parents, but privately do not trust their parents again.
I can understand this. I imagine how it would feel to have the very people whom you are supposed to be able to trust completely a) allow you to be forcibly transported, usually in handcuffs, b) turn you over to the care of strangers, often thousands of miles from home, c) end their daily parental contact with you, just a few minutes on the phone every week or two for a year or more, and d) deny all your requests to return home. Personally, I would not trust or love these people/parents again.
That said, I can often understand how parents can be victims in this environment as well, though they do not endure anywhere near the sort of suffering and abuse the teens endure.
Good point.
Often the pretense of familial relations is kept up for a few months or even years, but once the realization of what happened sinks in fully, some kids opt for a complete break from the family in order to preserve their sanity and integrity.
Btw, extreme measures need not always have occurred. A more critical contributing factor seems to be the extent to which the parents "bought into" the program.
Few, if any, parents realize the program will most likely cost them their relationship with their child in addition to hundreds of thousands of dollars.
It could also cost them their relationship with their grandkids.
-
It could also cost them their relationship with their grandkids.
Another good point, Ursus. We've certainly heard people say that here.
It's not surprising that teens form close friendships while in the programs. Unless I've misunderstood, this becomes their new "family," day and night for years. The old family is not to be trusted; the new family understands firsthand what they're going through. The old family is absent; the new family is present.
My niece's parents defend what they did as their choice as parents; I say they resigned as her parents when they handed her over to the escort service and the program.
Auntie Em
-
Guess what? Last weekend when I saw him he said that after CALO he wants to go back to the wilderness program, because the people there were "chill." Go figure....
Oddly, his preferred destination was not "home"...
This speaks volumes.
My observations after reading posts here and at other sites, and after talking personally with survivors, is that the majority of (though not all) teens sent to programs do not have close relationships with their parents afterwards. They say they go through the motions. They appear agreeable and compliant around their parents, but privately do not trust their parents again.
I can understand this. I imagine how it would feel to have the very people whom you are supposed to be able to trust completely a) allow you to be forcibly transported, usually in handcuffs, b) turn you over to the care of strangers, often thousands of miles from home, c) end their daily parental contact with you, just a few minutes on the phone every week or two for a year or more, and d) deny all your requests to return home. Personally, I would not trust or love these people/parents again.
That said, I can often understand how parents can be victims in this environment as well, though they do not endure anywhere near the sort of suffering and abuse the teens endure.
Good point.
Often the pretense of familial relations is kept up for a few months or even years, but once the realization of what happened sinks in fully, some kids opt for a complete break from the family in order to preserve their sanity and integrity.
Btw, extreme measures need not always have occurred. A more critical contributing factor seems to be the extent to which the parents "bought into" the program.
Few, if any, parents realize the program will most likely cost them their relationship with their child in addition to hundreds of thousands of dollars.
It could also cost them their relationship with their grandkids.
Yes indeed. Even TheWho, the most vainglorius of program pimps, admits that his daughter came home from ASR (with no diploma, BTW, she never graduated from there), hooked up with her old friends, started drinking heavily and doing drugs, cut him off from her life, and dropped out of school completely. Somehow TheWho hold this up as a "success story" which illustrates the Orwellian nature of program-speak. Failure is success. Neat and tidy.
-
You guys have totally lost me...I don't know what the hell you are talking about on this thread anymore...Let's see, earlier somebody said that kids shouldn't be sent to residential unless they are dangerous to themselves or others. I responded that in my kid's case, and in most cases at this RTC that was true. Then I explained that "dangerous" in terms of behavior in the general outside world is different than what might be expected in a controlled, therapeutic environment. The community resources, the parents, the schools can't keep these kids (or themselves) safe.
Then somebody said that "dangerous" kids like mine should be kept separate from the "normal" ones. Then nobody could define normal. Then there was a lot of speculation about who I am, why I don't answer all of the "pointed" questions with which bobpeterson would like to pin me against the wall, since I am supposedly such an evil bitch of a parent. And then it was that either Ken or I were lying.
WTF! I have lost interest in this supposed "dialogue"...
-
OK, then. We have confirmed that CALO takes deeply disturbed kids like arsonists who are dangers to themselves and their families. Just wanted to get that cleared up so we can talk about CALO's population more intelligently.
Do they mix in more-or-less normal kids with the dangerous ones like your boy? Or is there a general population and some sort of special housing unit where they keep the really bad ones?
This is all any parent needs to know. Dangerous population, mixed together, living together and untrained, uneducated "coaches" facilitating "therapy." I'd run from this place. This "treatment model" is crazy!
For those of you 'who' haven't noticed yet, "TigerEye" is not a CALO parent.
Right. Alot you know! Read back, knucklebrain.
And btw, what is "normal," anyway? Are YOU "normal?"
And for the purposes of argument, why would you case so much about my identity?
Well, because it speaks to your motive for defending the indefensible. Once more, you are asking us to believe two mutually exclusive pieces of information: One, that your kid is so dangerously deranged that he would be appropriately placed in a lock-down psych ward or in prison (your words, not mine); and two, that CALO is a safe environment, free from dangerous attendees (Ken Huey's words, not mine).
Obviously, your kid a is dangerous. Arson is a dangerous crime with a potential for many fatalities in dorm-style housing. It also happens to be very, very highly correlated with sexual abusers. Considering that CALO accepts these very dangerous types, it's hard to reconcile why any parent would send a "struggling teen" there, as it seems to be populated with dangerous and potentially deadly offenders.
I just want you to characterize CALO fairly. It cannot be both a safe environment for struggling teens and suitable for kids who belong in prison or lock-down psych wards, as you stated your kid does.
I'm just pointing out your logical fallacies here. Don't shoot the messenger.
"deranged?"
:rasta:
I never said my kid "belonged " in prison or a psych ward. I said that is where he would have ended up. My child is a good kid who needs the kind of environment and the help that CALO offers. Like it or not...
And the correlation is between firesetting behavior in kids and being a VICTIM of sexual abuse, physical abuse or neglect, fyi.
-
(1) Did Ken Huey explain to you that PCS incorporates "bent wrist control methods with variations."
(2) Did you ask questions about consequences for rule violations?
(3) Did you discuss staff credentials with Ken Huey?
(4) Did you speak with students who were recently enrolled at CALO?
(5) Did you tour the entire campus when you enrolled your son at CALO?
(6) Did you eat a meal with your son to see how staff interacted with students?
(7) Did you ask questions about crisis intervention training and appropriate restraint techniques/procedures?
(8) Did you ask for CALO's business license number and verify it with the appropriate state agency?
(9) Did you speak with the appropriate state agency to see if they received complaints about physical abuse, emotional abuse and sexual abuse?
(10) Did you walk through the dorm your son would be living in?
(11) I don't 'know if you're aware but Ken Huey, Landon Kirk, Caleb Cottle, and Nicole Fuglsang worked at abusive programs. Do you see this as a red flag?
RE: (12) viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810
If you did your homework, you would be able to answer the above questions within 10 minutes. Why are you avoiding them? I was told "Because your motives are dishonest. You have already made up your mind about me and now you are looking for more ammunition in order to condemn me. I am not accountable to you, Bob". The name of the person who sent me that message will not be revealed.
-
You guys have totally lost me...I don't know what the hell you are talking about on this thread anymore...Let's see, earlier somebody said that kids shouldn't be sent to residential unless they are dangerous to themselves or others. I responded that in my kid's case, and in most cases at this RTC that was true. Then I explained that "dangerous" in terms of behavior in the general outside world is different than what might be expected in a controlled, therapeutic environment. The community resources, the parents, the schools can't keep these kids (or themselves) safe.
Then somebody said that "dangerous" kids like mine should be kept separate from the "normal" ones. Then nobody could define normal. Then there was a lot of speculation about who I am, why I don't answer all of the "pointed" questions with which bobpeterson would like to pin me against the wall, since I am supposedly such an evil bitch of a parent. And then it was that either Ken or I were lying.
WTF! I have lost interest in this supposed "dialogue"...
what there saying is if your kid was doing the things you said he and others like him should be held apart from other kids how may not have as severe issues
this is some thing i have always had an issue with the public "special ed" system they put the kids with learning disablitys in with the kids that act out
and being some one that in that i can say it wasnt for the better
CALO and other programs have also said they will not take kid/teens with severe issues like the ones you said so this also brings up questions if they really can deal with it other then brute force
then theres the issue one size fits all again if they ARE taking kids like that then the kids there for other things on a more emotional level are going to get screwed in a VERY restrictive setting that may not be right for them
Lastly are there daily staff trained to deal with some one like your son which looking at there site i dont think they are; most are just "kids them selves out of high school
i know i wouldnt want some bestbuy rejects "helping" my kid god know what issues they could add on top of every thing else
bottom line it seems ether you didnt really look in to the place or were lied to or some of both ether way if i were you i would rethink your sons placement
even jail or lock down mental ward is better becouse then HE HAS RIGHTS THAT HE DOESNT HAVE AT A PROGRAM
-
(1) Did Ken Huey explain to you that PCS incorporates "bent wrist control methods with variations."
(2) Did you ask questions about consequences for rule violations?
(3) Did you discuss staff credentials with Ken Huey?
(4) Did you speak with students who were recently enrolled at CALO?
(5) Did you tour the entire campus when you enrolled your son at CALO?
(6) Did you eat a meal with your son to see how staff interacted with students?
(7) Did you ask questions about crisis intervention training and appropriate restraint techniques/procedures?
(8) Did you ask for CALO's business license number and verify it with the appropriate state agency?
(9) Did you speak with the appropriate state agency to see if they received complaints about physical abuse, emotional abuse and sexual abuse?
(10) Did you walk through the dorm your son would be living in?
(11) I don't 'know if you're aware but Ken Huey, Landon Kirk, Caleb Cottle, and Nicole Fuglsang worked at abusive programs. Do you see this as a red flag?
RE: (12) viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27810
If you did your homework, you would be able to answer the above questions within 10 minutes. Why are you avoiding them? I was told "Because your motives are dishonest. You have already made up your mind about me and now you are looking for more ammunition in order to condemn me. I am not accountable to you, Bob". The name of the person who sent me that message will not be revealed.
Tiger Eye avoids the substantive issues but did make time to add a tongue in cheek quip to the chat strand. Way to represent Mama.
(12:01:08) Deprogrammed: 717097 obviously has a napoleon complex
(13:14:19) psy: "go buy yourself a sportscar to overcompensate, you tool" LOLOLOLOL
(13:46:09) (773384): LOLOL!
(13:48:38) unmentionable: psy are you there?
(13:49:58) unmentionable: you there psy?
(14:12:14) psy: sure aim me at psy2k6
(14:12:49) psy: sure. i'll start it up. my yahoo is psyborgue@mac.com
(15:04:22) (852062): nonsense, everyone knows hummers are the compensator of choice
(17:09:50) (151401): Any mention of hummers will result in a closeted troll suddenly having to wipe down it’s key board
(21:58:25) TigerEye: haha - did u know that there is supposedly a Hummer Hybrid?
:o
Who’s going to pm Ken Huey to let him know what a piss poor spokes person he has?
He’s better off on his own offering some explanation for CALO’s questionable treatments. ;)
-
OK, then. We have confirmed that CALO takes deeply disturbed kids like arsonists who are dangers to themselves and their families. Just wanted to get that cleared up so we can talk about CALO's population more intelligently.
Do they mix in more-or-less normal kids with the dangerous ones like your boy? Or is there a general population and some sort of special housing unit where they keep the really bad ones?
This is all any parent needs to know. Dangerous population, mixed together, living together and untrained, uneducated "coaches" facilitating "therapy." I'd run from this place. This "treatment model" is crazy!
For those of you 'who' haven't noticed yet, "TigerEye" is not a CALO parent.
Right. Alot you know! Read back, knucklebrain.
And btw, what is "normal," anyway? Are YOU "normal?"
And for the purposes of argument, why would you case so much about my identity?
Well, because it speaks to your motive for defending the indefensible. Once more, you are asking us to believe two mutually exclusive pieces of information: One, that your kid is so dangerously deranged that he would be appropriately placed in a lock-down psych ward or in prison (your words, not mine); and two, that CALO is a safe environment, free from dangerous attendees (Ken Huey's words, not mine).
Obviously, your kid a is dangerous. Arson is a dangerous crime with a potential for many fatalities in dorm-style housing. It also happens to be very, very highly correlated with sexual abusers. Considering that CALO accepts these very dangerous types, it's hard to reconcile why any parent would send a "struggling teen" there, as it seems to be populated with dangerous and potentially deadly offenders.
I just want you to characterize CALO fairly. It cannot be both a safe environment for struggling teens and suitable for kids who belong in prison or lock-down psych wards, as you stated your kid does.
I'm just pointing out your logical fallacies here. Don't shoot the messenger.
"deranged?"
:rasta:
I never said my kid "belonged " in prison or a psych ward. I said that is where he would have ended up. My child is a good kid who needs the kind of environment and the help that CALO offers. Like it or not...
And the correlation is between firesetting behavior in kids and being a VICTIM of sexual abuse, physical abuse or neglect, fyi.
"Let's see, some of the things that contributed to the placement decision were fire-setting (he was facing criminal charges when he was placed), violent threats against school personnel, self-harm, drug use and drug sales, truancy, theft, non-compliance with curfew, etc. I suspect it is never an easy decision to place a child residentially, but there you are - my kid was a threat to himself and others, including the family."
i believe you posted that did you not?
imo id let the kid end up in jail for a night or two might do some good
but it put a kid like that in with non-violent kids wow do you know harm he could do to THEM physical and mentally?
or is it not your problem any more and you have wiped your hands of it after leaving your son with from what i can people you know very little about?
did you ever stop to think what he could do to some one elses son or daughter?
this is why we question most programs they lump kids like your son who are CLEARLY violent with non-violent kids with out thinking about harm this can bring
-
Going forward I want to make clear my hopes for this post. Simply, I wish to present what CALO is. I also am willing to have respectful dialogue. I do not expect to have all those who read what I write to agree with me but I do expect to stay out of screaming matches. I don't really want to participate in vulgar exchanges and will choose to avoid them. If we can have a discussion and I am convinced that open sharing of ideas is the real purpose, I am on board.
We’re still waiting for you to quit obfuscating. FYI,Try a few non circular answers that don’t involve a link to the psycho-hyperbolic site of your program.
-
Quick quote:Tiger Eye, what's your response to this? Does CALO accept dangerous children (you said yours was an arsonist, I believe)? How about court-ordered kids? What about convicted felons?
Quick quote:I dunno - you should ask CALO. My son, in a controlled environment, is not dangerous to himself or others. The wilderness program was worried about the fire issue (!) but in the end, his counselors correctly concluded that it would not be an issue there.-Tiger Eye
Tiger eye,
Why didn’t you make these inquiries of CALO, before sending them your child? In the time since this question was posed to you, have you bothered to find out?
Your kid is still there right? Wouldn’t it behoove you as a loving parent to know who your child is being held with?
Have you (as any vigilant parent would) investigated the available information on the previous employment histories of CALO staff et al? They are known to have worked with abusive programs.
-
I realize in speaking as a program director here I start out at an immediate disadvantage. I urge you to put aside your prejudices for a moment and give me the chance to present my case. I realize many of you here have been hurt and many of you are angry but not all program directors are the same. Not all programs are the same. To judge me evil-intended or to judge CALO as somehow abusive--without knowing CALO and without hearing me out--is no better than the lack of due process and the prejudice many of you complain about when decrying residential treatment for teens .
Going forward I want to make clear my hopes for this post. Simply, I wish to present what CALO is. I also am willing to have respectful dialogue. I do not expect to have all those who read what I write to agree with me but I do expect to stay out of screaming matches. I don't really want to participate in vulgar exchanges and will choose to avoid them. If we can have a discussion and I am convinced that open sharing of ideas is the real purpose, I am on board.
Just in case the Director missed following up on this exchange amidst the Tiger Eye divergence...
On the controversial topic of Attachment Therapy, what specifically does CALO’S application of this treatment entail?
The best description of our overall model can be found here:
http://caloteens.com/therapeuticModel.aspx (http://caloteens.com/therapeuticModel.aspx)
I think you are asking if we do rebirthing and "rib stimulation" and such. No, we do not use provoking techniques meant to force a teen to attach with us.
For an answer to my initial question posed to you, I followed the link you provided.
1. Please describe how the highlighted intervention methods are implemented.
(From your site)"Below are some interventions and concepts that are hallmarks of our work during Trust of Control"
• P.L.A.C.E. (Playful, Loving, Accepting, Curios, and Empathetic)
• Connection-Break-Repair (cycle of a healthy relationship)
• Vulnerability
• Rhythm Control
• Transferable Attachment (using canines)
• Cycles/Patterns
• Closeness vs. consequence
• Time-in vs. Time-out
• Emotional “holding” (figurative not literal holding)....figurative holding?
• Acceptance during exploration
• Healing from past
• Core beliefs
• Give students permission to feel without violence
• Shame (person) vs. Guilt (behavior)
• Modeling
• Accept students on their level (emotional, mental, spiritual, etc.)
• Safe touch
2. When are children under your care allowed to assert their boundaries?
“Training is an immediate part of the job. Each week on Wednesday, we have a new employee training and an all-staff training immediately afterwards. Training topics include CPR, First Aid, therapeutic hold techniques, clinical interventions, our model, how to be more effective, etc.” (also from your site)
3.Will you elaborate on the topic of therapeutic hold techniques?
-
My original post seems to have generated a lot of response. In sorting through the most apparently sincere posts I have identified what I believe are some main themes of disagreement that many of you might have with CALO: 1) forced treatment, 2) holds, 3) communication, 4) “attack” groups or groups led incorrectly, 5) my work history, and 6) type of student at CALO. I have also come to the conclusion that these issues are in many cases not resolvable. I will still deal with them today but I am beginning to doubt my ability to answer all questions in a final and satisfactory way. With no offense intended, I am afraid there are some who are unwilling or unable to hear my answers. I will talk more about that at the end of this post. For now, let me address the themes named above.
Theme 1--Many have tackled the idea that CALO enrolls kids in treatment against their will. What would we do if a kid ran from CALO? What would we do if a teen refused to go to CALO during a CALO-led transport? Can teens leave CALO when they want?
Response to theme 1—Kids are not given the same rights as adults in the United States. They are not allowed to drink until 21. They are not allowed to vote until 18. They cannot drive until 16 in most states. We all have different age markers based on adult beliefs about what those age groups can handle. I believe that teens should not have complete authority to make any decision about their lives that they wish. They do not have the requisite maturity to take on the world in this way. Especially when a teen is evidencing poor behavioral and emotional regulation, I do not trust that teen to make decisions of, at times, life and death. I believe that adults around such teens are duty-bound to intervene in such cases. In general, that option of adult intervention without permission of the teen ends at 18. That is the partially arbitrary age that many states have set for consent. In general, I agree with that age and support statute and law as currently written. Some teens would refuse to be in treatment even though they do need it. We support that treatment. All things being equal, we prefer to have kids bought-in from the outset but that is not always possible. A suicidal teen does not get to choose death in our program. A kid running from home and putting themselves in dangerous circumstances of all sorts should not be able to continue that misguided behavior. A young person skipping school and huffing gasoline should not have the opportunity to kill enough brain cells to permanently alter their future. Again, we prefer to have kids walk into CALO and desire to stay until they are doing well enough to go home. That is not always possible and we have no moral dilemma with giving minors the care they need to improve their lives—even if it is against their will.
Theme 2—Why Positive Control Systems and why do holds at all?
Response to theme 2--Positive Control Systems uses bent wrist controls if a situation escalates to the extent that a hold is needed. We tried numerous other de-escalation systems before deciding permanently on PCS. We have administration trained in MANDT, CALM, NCI, and one other private facility system that is not publicly available. We moved to PCS because it was nationally certified and recognized, it could be initiated by one staff member in a pinch at the outset (a second staff joins the first staff), it was less traumatizing for our population, and it had a much better track record than other systems. Compared to other de-escalation systems, the statistics bear out that PCS is a much safer intervention. Injuries per hold were much better with PCS. As for the re-traumatization issue, we were not impressed with systems that called for 3 or 4 staff to restrain a kid. Chest compressions can become a problem and just the sheer number of staff involved is frightening. We saw flashbacks with other systems that we do not see with PCS.
Our holds are done for safety. When a teen is a threat to self or others, we de-escalate first and then progress to a hold if necessary. The holds are all documented and are now debriefed with the CEO for training. If you know of a de-escalation system that is superior to PCS I would be very glad to know of it. I mean that sincerely.
Theme 3—Do kids have access to phones to call in a complaint about their treatment? Do kids have their phone calls monitored?
Response to theme 3--We do not provide a phone for students to call in complaints. To date, we have been concerned about frivolous use of such a phone and we have not been able to figure out a way around that problem. As for monitoring calls, we do have a staff member in our large conference room where we have 3 or 4 phone calls going on. The staff member is there for safety as those calls can get emotional at times. Teens are not directed to avoid difficult issues on calls or told to keep ANYTHING secret. They are free to complain if they wish. If a staff member did hear that (sometimes they do but not always) s/he will inform the therapist who can then check in with parents. Parents and students are free to escalate concerns to therapists and administration if desired. I have an open-door policy and on occasion students have taken that opportunity and made complaints about program issues. Those conversations have many times been the genesis of course correction within our organization. I implicitly and explicitly invite these conversations. Such a conversation could and has led to an employee termination. We take allegations of treatment that is not in line with our model very seriously. We even go so far as to tell parents and teens how to file a complaint against us if they don’t feel we are dealing with them in good faith. We have that invitation in written materials for teens and parents and on our web site.
Theme 4—Are groups “attack” based? Are they always led by a therapist?
Response to theme 4--We seem to be getting hung up on semantics with words like “accountability” and even the word “groups.” It is hard to get a clear picture for the reader of what our gatherings (that are not led by a therapist) even look like. They are not psycho-educational when facilitated by coaches. They are just a chance to air out community concerns. Topics like masturbation by a particular teen would not be allowed. Telling another teen he has made a lot of progress with his canine training, airing out a grievance about someone working too slow or not pulling their weight, sharing student-written poems—all these are fair topics of groups. In other settings some who have posted seem to have seen attack groups and that is leading some of you to look for that in our groups. That is not what we are trying to accomplish. Therapists run almost all groups. Shorter gatherings are out in the middle of the living space for all to see. They cannot be hidden. There is never a group held in a closed space that is not facilitated by a therapist. Kids are simply allowed to huddle up in plain view to talk things out in a team group. I don’t know how else to explain it beyond this.
Theme 5—Why did Ken Huey work for Provo Canyon and West Ridge?
Response to theme 5--I learned a great deal from my time at Provo. I got in a lot of fights with residential staff over how I thought things should go. I got written up for the only time in my life at Provo because I was considered too soft. It is fair to say that I wanted Provo to go in a much different direction while I was there. Many people from Provo could testify to that. That was when I began creating what would eventually become CALO and lecturing around the country on relationship-based treatment and the need to put away power and control. There were a lot of very, very good people at Provo. There were also some front line staff with long tenures who I could not convince to change because I didn’t have any direct supervision over them. I left for West Ridge because I had the chance to add something to that organization as a Clinical Director. It was an extremely positive experience. I felt like I was able to contribute to what they were doing. With the help of the Executive Director I was given a great opportunity to help professionalize West Ridge and move people along who could not make necessary changes. I was not at West Ridge 15 years ago but when I was there 3 years ago the program was impressive.
Theme 6—What kind of kid does CALO accept?
Response to theme 6--CALO accepts one in every 11 or 12 kids who apply for enrollment. We take kids with a trauma history and who have acted out in ways significant enough that their future could be compromised. That could mean an event as significant as death or simply a large loss of future relational and job opportunity. I realize that is vague so let me give an example of our low and high ends and you can generalize from those examples. On the difficult end of the spectrum would be a kid who kept getting in fights with mom and dad. Some had gotten physical. Son was dabbling in a number of different drugs. He periodically ran away from home and would be gone for a couple of nights. One night mom woke up with son holding a knife over her. That was the final straw. Parents told the son he was going to CALO and brought him here themselves. He did not want to be at CALO (but now says it has changed his life for the better). On the lower end of a difficulty scale would be a young person who was hoarding food in her room all the time. She would not interact with her adopted family in productive ways. She disobeyed curfew and would sneak out of the house on occasion. She yelled at people for no apparent reason in school. She was failing all her classes. She had a love of animals and believed CALO could help her learn lessons in attachment. She came to CALO of her own volition.
With that I will close this post and ask for an open mind. I have requested that before and been met with skepticism. I think I understand that skepticism but I am beginning to understand that no amount of conversation with me will alleviate all your concerns. In fact, I am a bit of a flashpoint for many and may actually be contributing to the problem by posting on Fornits. I am sorry if that is the case for some. I have no intention of angering anyone or of somehow being disrespectful. I do not believe that there is enough I can say to change a mind if these exchanges have not already done that. I will attempt to avoid stirring up more negative feelings by bowing out of Fornits at this point.
I want to own that I am the one who invited Antigen (Ginger) and Psy (Michael) to come to NATSAP. I think my community needs to hear their arguments. I do not want anyone to believe I am being sneaky about it so I am acknowledging this invitation here. I also want to thank a few of you who have respectfully challenged my thinking. A few of those discussions have directly contributed to growth at CALO. It is a difficult thing to remain open and attentive when the message coming at you is an attack but I have done my best on that front. I feel I have done all I can at this point to hear concerns and be respectful in attending to that feedback. I will now go back to work trying to respectfully encourage our teens to change their own lives. I have a few programmatic items to work on now and some young people to help. My best regards to you all.
Ken
-
Theme 5—Why did Ken Huey work for Provo Canyon and West Ridge?
Response to theme 5--I learned a great deal from my time at Provo. I got in a lot of fights with residential staff over how I thought things should go. I got written up for the only time in my life at Provo because I was considered too soft. It is fair to say that I wanted Provo to go in a much different direction while I was there. Many people from Provo could testify to that. That was when I began creating what would eventually become CALO and lecturing around the country on relationship-based treatment and the need to put away power and control. There were a lot of very, very good people at Provo. There were also some front line staff with long tenures who I could not convince to change because I didn’t have any direct supervision over them. I left for West Ridge because I had the chance to add something to that organization as a Clinical Director. It was an extremely positive experience. I felt like I was able to contribute to what they were doing. With the help of the Executive Director I was given a great opportunity to help professionalize West Ridge and move people along who could not make necessary changes. I was not at West Ridge 15 years ago but when I was there 3 years ago the program was impressive.
You stated"I got in a lot of fights with residential staff over how I thought things should go." Can you please more specific. What did you disagree with residential staff over?
You stated, "It is fair to say that I wanted Provo to go in a much different direction while I was there. Many people from Provo could testify to that." What direction did you want Provo Canyon to go in?
You stated, "I was not at West Ridge 15 years ago but when I was there 3 years ago the program was impressive." West Ridge Academy has strong ties with Senator Chris Buttars. I think allot of people, including myself, question your morals when you work at a facility that had strong ties with Senator Buttars. Please discuss.
-
Theme 4—Are groups “attack” based? Are they always led by a therapist?
Response to theme 4--We seem to be getting hung up on semantics with words like “accountability” and even the word “groups.” It is hard to get a clear picture for the reader of what our gatherings (that are not led by a therapist) even look like. They are not psycho-educational when facilitated by coaches. They are just a chance to air out community concerns. Topics like masturbation by a particular teen would not be allowed. Telling another teen he has made a lot of progress with his canine training, airing out a grievance about someone working too slow or not pulling their weight, sharing student-written poems—all these are fair topics of groups. In other settings some who have posted seem to have seen attack groups and that is leading some of you to look for that in our groups. That is not what we are trying to accomplish. Therapists run almost all groups. Shorter gatherings are out in the middle of the living space for all to see. They cannot be hidden. There is never a group held in a closed space that is not facilitated by a therapist. Kids are simply allowed to huddle up in plain view to talk things out in a team group. I don’t know how else to explain it beyond this.
You stated, "It is hard to get a clear picture for the reader of what our gatherings (that are not led by a therapist) even look like. They are not psycho-educational when facilitated by coaches." What is CALO's name for "group gatherings." Please be specific to what takes place in "group gatherings."
-
http://caloteens.com/blog/post/Therapy- (http://caloteens.com/blog/post/Therapy-) ... x#continue
Therapy Without Walls
clock July 15, 2009 06:28 by author Caleb
I frequently get asked the question, "What is a recreational therapist?" I am always hesitant to respond. As I explain that I go rock climbing and wake boarding and spend long hours fishing and canoeing with adolescents, people don't always believe that I have a real job. I've been accused of making a living by playing hard. While there is some truth to that statement, recreational therapy is so much more than just lying out in the sun catching rays, or taking a joy ride on a boat with the wind in your hair. I can't always step back at the end of the day and look at what I've accomplished because so much of the work happens deep in the hearts and heads of the youth I work with.
It is difficult for most adolescents to connect with their feelings and talk about relationships, especially when there is a history of trauma or abuse. At times sitting down in an office can inspire fear and an unwillingness to open up. This is particularly obvious when a student begins treatment. Within the recreational therapy department our goal is to get rid of the literal walls surrounding therapy, so that students begin to let their own personal walls down. Fortunately CALO's location allows for wonderful and exciting outdoor opportunities year round.
As students participate in experiential exercises they have opportunities to expose very genuine and sometimes very intense fears that are hidden deep within. Take for example two boys I once took out on a canoe. One of them was very experienced and the other was just learning. In an attempt to paddle from point A to point B these two boys successfully completed numerous circles until eventually the experienced boy got angry and jumped out. Filled with frustration he swam to shore and swore never to share a canoe with his partner again. His partner, now afraid and alone, threw down his paddle and yelled for help. It was tempting to hurry out and rescue the boy still begging for help, but in doing so a great therapeutic opportunity would have been missed.
After some validation and persuasion the experienced boy on shore agreed to swim back to the boat and accompany his stranded partner back to dry land. This was not an impressive sight to behold. The two of them struggled and zigzagged until they finally made it back to shore. I was able to sit down with this frustrated partnership and discuss two issues that were meaningful to both of these boys. The first issue was abandonment. We had a great discussion about how tempting it is to abandon others when they are holding us back. We were also able to discuss what it feels like to be abandoned. The boys were able to connect the dots when I asked my favorite question, "How is that like your life?" Suddenly there was a safe opportunity for these boys to share insights and feelings about their own adoption experiences. The vulnerability demonstrated in this conversation opened doors that led to a discussion about helplessness. The boy left in the canoe had everything he needed to get himself back to dry land. His fear however, had hindered his ability to look for solutions. Again the question, "How is that like your life?" was begging to be asked. The connection made with those two boys that day inspired a friendship that grew and lasted a long time. From that point on a portion of empathy for one another helped them support each other through difficult times and frustrating moments.
It may very well be true that I have the greatest job on earth. However, it is not because I get to spend my afternoons scouting out the lake's best fishing holes, or because I get to climb around on our exciting ropes course each week. I have the greatest job on earth because I get to be an active participant in the process of building and repairing relationships with impressive boys and girls, then observe how the values and principles we learn together are applied to relationships in their lives as they strive for interdependence with their parents and family members. The memories of the fun we have will certainly last a long, long time, but the principles of communication, trust and service that we discover together will hopefully bless their lives forever.
The above was posted on CALO's blog by Caleb Cottle. He wrote, "Take for example two boys I once took out on a canoe. One of them was very experienced and the other was just learning. In an attempt to paddle from point A to point B these two boys successfully completed numerous circles until eventually the experienced boy got angry and jumped out. Filled with frustration he swam to shore and swore never to share a canoe with his partner again. His partner, now afraid and alone, threw down his paddle and yelled for help. It was tempting to hurry out and rescue the boy still begging for help, but in doing so a great therapeutic opportunity would have been missed."
What were to happen if the child was hurt? I worked with youth in a wilderness facility. We did 28 day canoe trips and were well versed in canoe safety. If there was a safety issue, such that Caleb Cottle wrote about, counselors were the first to assist. That took place without question. The student's parents would have every right to sue if he/she sustained injuries.
-
Theme 3—Do kids have access to phones to call in a complaint about their treatment? Do kids have their phone calls monitored?
Response to theme 3--We do not provide a phone for students to call in complaints. To date, we have been concerned about frivolous use of such a phone and we have not been able to figure out a way around that problem. As for monitoring calls, we do have a staff member in our large conference room where we have 3 or 4 phone calls going on. The staff member is there for safety as those calls can get emotional at times. Teens are not directed to avoid difficult issues on calls or told to keep ANYTHING secret. They are free to complain if they wish. If a staff member did hear that (sometimes they do but not always) s/he will inform the therapist who can then check in with parents. Parents and students are free to escalate concerns to therapists and administration if desired. I have an open-door policy and on occasion students have taken that opportunity and made complaints about program issues. Those conversations have many times been the genesis of course correction within our organization. I implicitly and explicitly invite these conversations. Such a conversation could and has led to an employee termination. We take allegations of treatment that is not in line with our model very seriously. We even go so far as to tell parents and teens how to file a complaint against us if they don’t feel we are dealing with them in good faith. We have that invitation in written materials for teens and parents and on our web site.
You stated, "We do not provide a phone for students to call in complaints. To date, we have been concerned about frivolous use of such a phone and we have not been able to figure out a way around that problem." Your previous statement has serious implications. The policy could open up the door for potential lawsuits in the future, should you deny a child the right to report abuse.
-
Note that he immediately and completely conceded the field about "lasting change" or whatever goals his organization was supposed to be accomplishing. THAT he knows he can't justify, because at some level he knows damn well that what he's trying to do is in fact completely impossible, ethics be damned. I only had to tell him that once.
So now he's just trying to paint CALO as a hold-them-until-they're-18 mini-prison in order to avoid the inevitable.
-
Note that he immediately and completely conceded the field about "lasting change" or whatever goals his organization was supposed to be accomplishing. THAT he knows he can't justify, because at some level he knows damn well that what he's trying to do is in fact completely impossible, ethics be damned. I only had to tell him that once.
So now he's just trying to paint CALO as a hold-them-until-they're-18 mini-prison in order to avoid the inevitable.
at which point id bet most are shipped off to places like Benchmark
id like to know the number that go to "lead normal lives" if its as they say it cant be very big
whats the exit plan for the kids that are held till 18?
or for any of them
no way there going off to college right from this place if its HS diploma is even worth the paper its printed on
this brings up a question
what tools does this place give kids to enter the work force or college after they get out
do they offer ANY computer training at all?
the high school i when to beleved that if you could find a trade skill that an "at risk" kid liked and WANTED TO DO they would do it and you can impart change via that ie work and study habits
just a thought
-
moved to another thread
-
khuey@ca-lo.com > Ken Huey's e-mail address
-
I feel I have done all I can at this point to hear concerns and be respectful in attending to that feedback. I will now go back to work trying to respectfully encourage our teens to change their own lives. I have a few programmatic items to work on now and some young people to help. My best regards to you all.
Hate to sound like a cynical ol' bear this morning, but my guess is that Ken's posting here doesn't have a whole lot to do with caring what fornits thinks anyway.
Rather, I'd venture that this has a hell of a lot more to do with impressing certain folk whose opinion impacts CALO's existence more directly. Like various governmental agencies in Missouri, the ol' gang back in Utah, present and potential future CALO parents, and whoever holds the mortgage on the CALO property. :D
-
I feel I have done all I can at this point to hear concerns and be respectful in attending to that feedback. I will now go back to work trying to respectfully encourage our teens to change their own lives. I have a few programmatic items to work on now and some young people to help. My best regards to you all.
Hate to sound like a cynical ol' bear this morning, but my guess is that Ken's posting here doesn't have a whole lot to do with caring what fornits thinks anyway.
Rather, I'd venture that this has a hell of a lot more to do with impressing certain folk whose opinion impacts CALO's existence more directly. Like various governmental agencies in Missouri, the ol' gang back in Utah, present and potential future CALO parents, and whoever holds the mortgage on the CALO property. :D
Quoted for truth.
-
even jail or lock down mental ward is better becouse then HE HAS RIGHTS THAT HE DOESNT HAVE AT A PROGRAM
Wanna bet?
-
(1)
If you did your homework, you would be able to answer the above questions within 10 minutes. Why are you avoiding them? I was told "Because your motives are dishonest. You have already made up your mind about me and now you are looking for more ammunition in order to condemn me. I am not accountable to you, Bob". The name of the person who sent me that message will not be revealed.
It was me. And my "real" name you do not know.
-
what there saying is if your kid was doing the things you said he and others like him should be held apart from other kids how may not have as severe issues
this is some thing i have always had an issue with the public "special ed" system they put the kids with learning disablitys in with the kids that act out
and being some one that in that i can say it wasnt for the better
CALO and other programs have also said they will not take kid/teens with severe issues like the ones you said so this also brings up questions if they really can deal with it other then brute force
then theres the issue one size fits all again if they ARE taking kids like that then the kids there for other things on a more emotional level are going to get screwed in a VERY restrictive setting that may not be right for them
Lastly are there daily staff trained to deal with some one like your son which looking at there site i dont think they are; most are just "kids them selves out of high school
i know i wouldnt want some bestbuy rejects "helping" my kid god know what issues they could add on top of every thing else
bottom line it seems ether you didnt really look in to the place or were lied to or some of both ether way if i were you i would rethink your sons placement
even jail or lock down mental ward is better becouse then HE HAS RIGHTS THAT HE DOESNT HAVE AT A PROGRAM
You really have no idea about the place and therefore you don't know what you are talking about. You just THINK you know.
-
even jail or lock down mental ward is better becouse then HE HAS RIGHTS THAT HE DOESNT HAVE AT A PROGRAM
Wanna bet?
With CALO being "managed" behind the scenes by Proficio (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=27534), and with Proficio being fully owned and operated by West Ridge Academy (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=28003), ya gotta wonder 'bout that... :D
-
I realize in speaking as a program director here I start out at an immediate disadvantage. I urge you to put aside your prejudices for a moment and give me the chance to present my case. I realize many of you here have been hurt and many of you are angry but not all program directors are the same. Not all programs are the same. To judge me evil-intended or to judge CALO as somehow abusive--without knowing CALO and without hearing me out--is no better than the lack of due process and the prejudice many of you complain about when decrying residential treatment for teens.
I have spent the last 5 years presenting at conferences around the country on the need for change in residential treatment. I have presented at regional NATSAP’s, national NATSAP’s, FRUA, Wilderness Symposiums, Naropa, etc. about the need to move away from behavior modification and level systems to more humane, relationship-centered approaches that are fundamentally respectful to teenagers and those in programs. This is a matter of record. Searches of my name and many of these conferences will show that I have dedicated considerable professional energy to changing the way residential services are delivered. I believe that therapeutic invitations to change based on relationships, based on psycho-education, based on nurturing, are superior to change that is based on simply modifying behavior. Accountability, consequences, and structure are needed but relationship-based change is superior, in my opinion, to strict level-systems and behavior mod that do not provide nurturing. In even more succinct terms I openly repudiate change based on coercion, bullying, intimidation, and power. It does not work. It is not right.
The following are some of the ways I think CALO proves its commitment to what is stated above:
1. CALO does not allow the use of escort services for the transport of our teenagers.
a. The picture of a young person being awakened at 3am and taken by force from their home is not one I want to be a part of.
b. CALO will transport a teen by sending the CEO, Clinical Director, therapist, or other highly trained staff with a Residential Coach. This is done with full knowledge of the teenager and is non-confrontational in approach. We have not had a physical confrontation during a transport ever and hope to never have one.
2. CALO does not use level systems at all. We believe that lasting change comes as a byproduct of relationships that have mentoring power. You cannot mentor someone you control or manipulate. Trust has more impact on change than coercion or bribery.
3. CALO does censor some reading material, music, and movies. A certain level of maturity is needed to deal with pornography, racist books advocating death, homicidal or suicidal works, etc. Proven harmful material is kept from campus.
4. CALO does not force teens to change. We invite, encourage, model, and mentor change. We do not believe we can force a certain world view on drugs, relationships, or anything else. We explicitly try to convince teens that there are right and wrong choices but at the end of the day change must be internal or it will not last.
5. CALO does have high staff to student ratios. Our staffing ratios average about one staff member for every three kids. That is ONLY direct care staff. Therapists and teachers and admin staff do not count in those totals.
6. CALO does not believe in sleep deprivation or other systems of breaking down behavior in advance of “encounter” groups and the like. Arguments among peers or student anger at staff may be part of a group but we do nothing that is meant to break down a teen and then build them up in the image that CALO desires.
7. CALO does not have a waiting period before a teen can talk to his or her parents on the phone, or see them in person. Relationships are the key to change and we want teenagers to have access to their caregivers from their start in therapy.
8. CALO does not and will do nothing to take away basic rights to shelter, food, sleep, education, and nurturing. These are not “privileges” at CALO, they are rights. Nurturance is a right.
9. CALO does believe in licensure. We are voluntarily licensed by the state of Missouri. We sought out licensing and allow surprise inspections by the state.
10. CALO does not have custodial rights to kids. Parents retain custody of their children while they are in our care.
11. CALO does not rush the intake process. The intake process is as long as parents and child want. Usually it is several hours as parent and child are oriented to CALO. We do not require control of the child or hasty goodbyes.
12. CALO does not see homosexuality as a disease that can be treated.
13. CALO does not endorse or prohibit the practice of any religion. We have never banned a particular religion but would if it was proven to be an immediate danger.
14. CALO does not have any sort of time-out room.
15. CALO does not use mechanical or chemical restraints.
a. All staff are trained for two days on verbal de-escalation and crisis management. We try to complete this training in the first 30 days of employment. During the last part of that training staff are taught how to safely physically hold/restrain a teen who is a danger to self or others. The focus is on avoiding those holds.
b. We track holds and debrief them with staff, always focusing on keeping holds to a minimum and only initiating them in cases of a safety concern. Holds per student census have decreased every quarter since CALO was created.
16. CALO does not employ unqualified therapists. All CALO therapists are masters level or Psy.D./Ph.D. and appropriately credentialed. License numbers are available on parental request.
I do appreciate the opportunity to present some of the philosophy behind CALO’s program. I respectfully invite you to consider the possibility that CALO may be a nurturing, non-coercive, relationship-focused program.
I recognize that much of what is written in this post may challenge notions that some have about CALO and what we do. I am sorry you have had some misinformation about us and the nature of how we operate. This is who we are and what we believe. We are not perfect in the application of our beliefs but this is the standard to which we hold ourselves.
I'm a CALO parent, and his description is spot on. I would add that therapists are not needed to oversee every aspect of daily life or group problem-solving. The residential coaches are there to trouble shoot and manage things, under the guidance of the therapists. Anyway, it works.
-
I realize in speaking as a program director here I start out at an immediate disadvantage. I urge you to put aside your prejudices for a moment and give me the chance to present my case. I realize many of you here have been hurt and many of you are angry but not all program directors are the same. Not all programs are the same. To judge me evil-intended or to judge CALO as somehow abusive--without knowing CALO and without hearing me out--is no better than the lack of due process and the prejudice many of you complain about when decrying residential treatment for teens.
I have spent the last 5 years presenting at conferences around the country on the need for change in residential treatment. I have presented at regional NATSAP’s, national NATSAP’s, FRUA, Wilderness Symposiums, Naropa, etc. about the need to move away from behavior modification and level systems to more humane, relationship-centered approaches that are fundamentally respectful to teenagers and those in programs. This is a matter of record. Searches of my name and many of these conferences will show that I have dedicated considerable professional energy to changing the way residential services are delivered. I believe that therapeutic invitations to change based on relationships, based on psycho-education, based on nurturing, are superior to change that is based on simply modifying behavior. Accountability, consequences, and structure are needed but relationship-based change is superior, in my opinion, to strict level-systems and behavior mod that do not provide nurturing. In even more succinct terms I openly repudiate change based on coercion, bullying, intimidation, and power. It does not work. It is not right.
The following are some of the ways I think CALO proves its commitment to what is stated above:
1. CALO does not allow the use of escort services for the transport of our teenagers.
a. The picture of a young person being awakened at 3am and taken by force from their home is not one I want to be a part of.
b. CALO will transport a teen by sending the CEO, Clinical Director, therapist, or other highly trained staff with a Residential Coach. This is done with full knowledge of the teenager and is non-confrontational in approach. We have not had a physical confrontation during a transport ever and hope to never have one.
2. CALO does not use level systems at all. We believe that lasting change comes as a byproduct of relationships that have mentoring power. You cannot mentor someone you control or manipulate. Trust has more impact on change than coercion or bribery.
3. CALO does censor some reading material, music, and movies. A certain level of maturity is needed to deal with pornography, racist books advocating death, homicidal or suicidal works, etc. Proven harmful material is kept from campus.
4. CALO does not force teens to change. We invite, encourage, model, and mentor change. We do not believe we can force a certain world view on drugs, relationships, or anything else. We explicitly try to convince teens that there are right and wrong choices but at the end of the day change must be internal or it will not last.
5. CALO does have high staff to student ratios. Our staffing ratios average about one staff member for every three kids. That is ONLY direct care staff. Therapists and teachers and admin staff do not count in those totals.
6. CALO does not believe in sleep deprivation or other systems of breaking down behavior in advance of “encounter” groups and the like. Arguments among peers or student anger at staff may be part of a group but we do nothing that is meant to break down a teen and then build them up in the image that CALO desires.
7. CALO does not have a waiting period before a teen can talk to his or her parents on the phone, or see them in person. Relationships are the key to change and we want teenagers to have access to their caregivers from their start in therapy.
8. CALO does not and will do nothing to take away basic rights to shelter, food, sleep, education, and nurturing. These are not “privileges” at CALO, they are rights. Nurturance is a right.
9. CALO does believe in licensure. We are voluntarily licensed by the state of Missouri. We sought out licensing and allow surprise inspections by the state.
10. CALO does not have custodial rights to kids. Parents retain custody of their children while they are in our care.
11. CALO does not rush the intake process. The intake process is as long as parents and child want. Usually it is several hours as parent and child are oriented to CALO. We do not require control of the child or hasty goodbyes.
12. CALO does not see homosexuality as a disease that can be treated.
13. CALO does not endorse or prohibit the practice of any religion. We have never banned a particular religion but would if it was proven to be an immediate danger.
14. CALO does not have any sort of time-out room.
15. CALO does not use mechanical or chemical restraints.
a. All staff are trained for two days on verbal de-escalation and crisis management. We try to complete this training in the first 30 days of employment. During the last part of that training staff are taught how to safely physically hold/restrain a teen who is a danger to self or others. The focus is on avoiding those holds.
b. We track holds and debrief them with staff, always focusing on keeping holds to a minimum and only initiating them in cases of a safety concern. Holds per student census have decreased every quarter since CALO was created.
16. CALO does not employ unqualified therapists. All CALO therapists are masters level or Psy.D./Ph.D. and appropriately credentialed. License numbers are available on parental request.
I do appreciate the opportunity to present some of the philosophy behind CALO’s program. I respectfully invite you to consider the possibility that CALO may be a nurturing, non-coercive, relationship-focused program.
I recognize that much of what is written in this post may challenge notions that some have about CALO and what we do. I am sorry you have had some misinformation about us and the nature of how we operate. This is who we are and what we believe. We are not perfect in the application of our beliefs but this is the standard to which we hold ourselves.
I'm a CALO parent, and his description is spot on. I would add that therapists are not needed to oversee every aspect of daily life or group problem-solving. The residential coaches are there to trouble shoot and manage things, under the guidance of the therapists. Anyway, it works.
Well, this letter definitely did not get much air time here. Thanks Tiger. :D
-
I realize in speaking as a program director here I start out at an immediate disadvantage. I urge you to put aside your prejudices for a moment and give me the chance to present my case. I realize many of you here have been hurt and many of you are angry but not all program directors are the same. Not all programs are the same. To judge me evil-intended or to judge CALO as somehow abusive--without knowing CALO and without hearing me out--is no better than the lack of due process and the prejudice many of you complain about when decrying residential treatment for teens.
I have spent the last 5 years presenting at conferences around the country on the need for change in residential treatment. I have presented at regional NATSAP’s, national NATSAP’s, FRUA, Wilderness Symposiums, Naropa, etc. about the need to move away from behavior modification and level systems to more humane, relationship-centered approaches that are fundamentally respectful to teenagers and those in programs. This is a matter of record. Searches of my name and many of these conferences will show that I have dedicated considerable professional energy to changing the way residential services are delivered. I believe that therapeutic invitations to change based on relationships, based on psycho-education, based on nurturing, are superior to change that is based on simply modifying behavior. Accountability, consequences, and structure are needed but relationship-based change is superior, in my opinion, to strict level-systems and behavior mod that do not provide nurturing. In even more succinct terms I openly repudiate change based on coercion, bullying, intimidation, and power. It does not work. It is not right.
The following are some of the ways I think CALO proves its commitment to what is stated above:
1. CALO does not allow the use of escort services for the transport of our teenagers.
a. The picture of a young person being awakened at 3am and taken by force from their home is not one I want to be a part of.
b. CALO will transport a teen by sending the CEO, Clinical Director, therapist, or other highly trained staff with a Residential Coach. This is done with full knowledge of the teenager and is non-confrontational in approach. We have not had a physical confrontation during a transport ever and hope to never have one.
2. CALO does not use level systems at all. We believe that lasting change comes as a byproduct of relationships that have mentoring power. You cannot mentor someone you control or manipulate. Trust has more impact on change than coercion or bribery.
3. CALO does censor some reading material, music, and movies. A certain level of maturity is needed to deal with pornography, racist books advocating death, homicidal or suicidal works, etc. Proven harmful material is kept from campus.
4. CALO does not force teens to change. We invite, encourage, model, and mentor change. We do not believe we can force a certain world view on drugs, relationships, or anything else. We explicitly try to convince teens that there are right and wrong choices but at the end of the day change must be internal or it will not last.
5. CALO does have high staff to student ratios. Our staffing ratios average about one staff member for every three kids. That is ONLY direct care staff. Therapists and teachers and admin staff do not count in those totals.
6. CALO does not believe in sleep deprivation or other systems of breaking down behavior in advance of “encounter” groups and the like. Arguments among peers or student anger at staff may be part of a group but we do nothing that is meant to break down a teen and then build them up in the image that CALO desires.
7. CALO does not have a waiting period before a teen can talk to his or her parents on the phone, or see them in person. Relationships are the key to change and we want teenagers to have access to their caregivers from their start in therapy.
8. CALO does not and will do nothing to take away basic rights to shelter, food, sleep, education, and nurturing. These are not “privileges” at CALO, they are rights. Nurturance is a right.
9. CALO does believe in licensure. We are voluntarily licensed by the state of Missouri. We sought out licensing and allow surprise inspections by the state.
10. CALO does not have custodial rights to kids. Parents retain custody of their children while they are in our care.
11. CALO does not rush the intake process. The intake process is as long as parents and child want. Usually it is several hours as parent and child are oriented to CALO. We do not require control of the child or hasty goodbyes.
12. CALO does not see homosexuality as a disease that can be treated.
13. CALO does not endorse or prohibit the practice of any religion. We have never banned a particular religion but would if it was proven to be an immediate danger.
14. CALO does not have any sort of time-out room.
15. CALO does not use mechanical or chemical restraints.
a. All staff are trained for two days on verbal de-escalation and crisis management. We try to complete this training in the first 30 days of employment. During the last part of that training staff are taught how to safely physically hold/restrain a teen who is a danger to self or others. The focus is on avoiding those holds.
b. We track holds and debrief them with staff, always focusing on keeping holds to a minimum and only initiating them in cases of a safety concern. Holds per student census have decreased every quarter since CALO was created.
16. CALO does not employ unqualified therapists. All CALO therapists are masters level or Psy.D./Ph.D. and appropriately credentialed. License numbers are available on parental request.
I do appreciate the opportunity to present some of the philosophy behind CALO’s program. I respectfully invite you to consider the possibility that CALO may be a nurturing, non-coercive, relationship-focused program.
I recognize that much of what is written in this post may challenge notions that some have about CALO and what we do. I am sorry you have had some misinformation about us and the nature of how we operate. This is who we are and what we believe. We are not perfect in the application of our beliefs but this is the standard to which we hold ourselves.
I'm a CALO parent, and his description is spot on. I would add that therapists are not needed to oversee every aspect of daily life or group problem-solving. The residential coaches are there to trouble shoot and manage things, under the guidance of the therapists. Anyway, it works.
Well, this letter definitely did not get much air time here. Thanks Tiger. :D
You're welcome!
-
Ah, asinus asinum fricat once again, and with full spam quotes too. Let's try some low-medium images this time.
(http://http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/b/b8/Extrem1.jpg)
(http://http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/b/bc/Shitpuke.jpg)
-
[attachment=0:38ajw1dh]IMG_0296.JPG[/attachment:38ajw1dh]
-
"I bet I can neutralize those horrid images by posting some scenery!"
1. Try actually fitting the image on the page next time, you dumb bitch.
2. The whole "neutralize dark with light" thing only works if you actually have some light in you to begin with. You're here vigorously defending child abuse. There's simply no goodness in you to work with; it's like shooting blanks.
-
Guess what? Last weekend when I saw him he said that after CALO he wants to go back to the wilderness program, because the people there were "chill." Go figure....
Oddly, his preferred destination was not "home"...
This speaks volumes.
My observations after reading posts here and at other sites, and after talking personally with survivors, is that the majority of (though not all) teens sent to programs do not have close relationships with their parents afterwards. They say they go through the motions. They appear agreeable and compliant around their parents, but privately do not trust their parents again.
I can understand this. I imagine how it would feel to have the very people whom you are supposed to be able to trust completely a) allow you to be forcibly transported, usually in handcuffs, b) turn you over to the care of strangers, often thousands of miles from home, c) end their daily parental contact with you, just a few minutes on the phone every week or two for a year or more, and d) deny all your requests to return home. Personally, I would not trust or love these people/parents again.
That said, I can often understand how parents can be victims in this environment as well, though they do not endure anywhere near the sort of suffering and abuse the teens endure.
Good point.
Often the pretense of familial relations is kept up for a few months or even years, but once the realization of what happened sinks in fully, some kids opt for a complete break from the family in order to preserve their sanity and integrity.
Btw, extreme measures need not always have occurred. A more critical contributing factor seems to be the extent to which the parents "bought into" the program.
So true. That's exactly what happened to my family. Once that trust in the parent from the child is broken to that extreme, it rarely, if ever, comes back.
It could also cost them their relationship with their grandkids.
Yep, happened with me too. When my dad cut me off, he cut my kids off too. We never did understand that. Fine, if he wants nothing to do with me - quite frankly I want nothing to do with he and his Straight-parent wife or her Straight-client kids either (my father married another Straight parent with 2 kids in...yipeee).....but to cut off my kids??? And they were, at one time, very close.
It also affected my kids because they saw what I went through both in dealing with the fallout from the PTSD from being in Straight and they saw how my father treated me and ended up hating him for quite a while. From what they (my kids) tell me, they'll never be able to forgive my father for not only Straight, but how he's treated me in the years after. He bought 100% into the Tough Love concept but carried it quite a bit farther, as did most Straight parents. Incidentally, Tough Love disavowed any connection to Straight because they found it to be abusive and not in line with Tough Love's mission statement.
-
I was semi-delusional at that age, too. (I even ran away to Mexico thinking a could get a job there!!)
And somehow you survived without being shipped off to strangers using questionable "therapeutic" techniques. Hmmmm.
-
I was semi-delusional at that age, too. (I even ran away to Mexico thinking a could get a job there!!)
And somehow you survived without being shipped off to strangers using questionable "therapeutic" techniques. Hmmmm.
It was the 60's!
-
You guys have totally lost me...I don't know what the hell you are talking about on this thread anymore...Let's see, earlier somebody said that kids shouldn't be sent to residential unless they are dangerous to themselves or others. I responded that in my kid's case, and in most cases at this RTC that was true. Then I explained that "dangerous" in terms of behavior in the general outside world is different than what might be expected in a controlled, therapeutic environment. The community resources, the parents, the schools can't keep these kids (or themselves) safe.
Then somebody said that "dangerous" kids like mine should be kept separate from the "normal" ones. Then nobody could define normal. Then there was a lot of speculation about who I am, why I don't answer all of the "pointed" questions with which bobpeterson would like to pin me against the wall, since I am supposedly such an evil bitch of a parent. And then it was that either Ken or I were lying.
WTF! I have lost interest in this supposed "dialogue"...
This is fornits at its finest. See Tiger, they really don't care about your son and the struggles you have had with him. They don't even care about what is wrong with your son, if in fact CALO or another program could help him. All DJ, Psy and Che are concerned with is they do not like Ken. No matter how you explain yourself, they will pick apart everything.
Oh, Psy and Ursus play the good poster, Che and DJ play the bad poster and everyone else just clutters the thread with crap.
Their main motivation is to find a flaw in your post (as they define, your flaw) and exploit it amongst themselves.
The dialog here on fornits is not normal, they are manipulative and very disingenuous. They ask questions they already have the answers to or at least think they do. They build you up with leading questions, acting as if they care, then when they have their answers (which usually means, you have convicted yourself in their eyes) they pounce on you. demanding more answers to leading questions, which are characterizing you as a bad parent who is abusing their child.
What is sad, is if they felt you were full of shit from the start, all the questions and answers were to set you up for their file system and catalog your conversation and dump it in the archive. "One more dumbass parent in the bag".
Tiger these fucking people are sick. They will stop at nothing to get their point across to whoever is listening.
One example, Dysfunction Junction, comes across as intelligent, writes superbly and has the degrees yet will write endlessly, utter nonsense in his rebuttals to Whooter. Day after day, week after week nothing but bullshit and he wants parents to listen to him about abuse at TC's, when he displays strange behavior OCD, Conduct Disorder, Delusions of Grander and a Personality Disorder...ect. I don't get it.
Most of these folks really should be in a treatment facility now, they need it. Their minds and emotions are very undisciplined... :roflmao:
Anyway I think you get my point.
-
You guys have totally lost me...I don't know what the hell you are talking about on this thread anymore...Let's see, earlier somebody said that kids shouldn't be sent to residential unless they are dangerous to themselves or others. I responded that in my kid's case, and in most cases at this RTC that was true. Then I explained that "dangerous" in terms of behavior in the general outside world is different than what might be expected in a controlled, therapeutic environment. The community resources, the parents, the schools can't keep these kids (or themselves) safe.
Then somebody said that "dangerous" kids like mine should be kept separate from the "normal" ones. Then nobody could define normal. Then there was a lot of speculation about who I am, why I don't answer all of the "pointed" questions with which bobpeterson would like to pin me against the wall, since I am supposedly such an evil bitch of a parent. And then it was that either Ken or I were lying.
WTF! I have lost interest in this supposed "dialogue"...
This is fornits at its finest. See Tiger, they really don't care about your son and the struggles you have had with him. They don't even care about what is wrong with your son, if in fact CALO or another program could help him. All DJ, Psy and Che are concerned with is they do not like Ken. No matter how you explain yourself, they will pick apart everything.
Oh, Psy and Ursus play the good poster, Che and DJ play the bad poster and everyone else just clutters the thread with crap.
Their main motivation is to find a flaw in your post (as they define, your flaw) and exploit it amongst themselves.
The dialog here on fornits is not normal, they are manipulative and very disingenuous. They ask questions they already have the answers to or at least think they do. They build you up with leading questions, acting as if they care, then when they have their answers (which usually means, you have convicted yourself in their eyes) they pounce on you. demanding more answers to leading questions, which are characterizing you as a bad parent who is abusing their child.
What is sad is they felt you were full of shit from the start all the questions and answers were to set you up for their file system and catalog your conversation and dump it in the archive. "One more dumbass parent in the bag".
Tiger these fucking people are sick. They will stop at nothing to get their point across to whoever is listening. One example, Dysfunction Junction, comes across as intelligent, writes superbly and has the degrees yet will write endlessly, utter nonsense in his rebuttals to Whooter. Day after day, week after week nothing but bullshit and he wants parents to listen to him about abuse at TC's. When he displays strange behavior OCD, Conduct Disorder, Delusions of Grander and a Personality Disorder...ect. I don't get it. Most of these folks really should be in a treatment facility now, they need it. Their minds and emotions are very undisciplined... :roflmao:
Anyway I think you get my point.
Go fuck yourself, Danny Bennison, you little bitch.