Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Anonymous on September 15, 2009, 11:15:52 AM
-
http://fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php? ... 31#p337831 (http://fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=28000&p=337831#p337831)
Ken Huey of CALO stated "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."
1. You used three de-escalation systems before you switched tp PCS [Positive Control Systems]. PCS, a de-escalation system that utilizes bent wrist control methods with sub variations, causes compliance through pain. Please answer the following questions.
a. You stated "one other private facility system that is not publicly available." What private facility system are you referring to?
b. Do staff call a supervisor as a proactive measure to prevent the restraint?
c. What is the maximum time allowed per MO law a child can be in a physical restraint for?
d. What information is included in physical restraint reports?
e. Who writes physical restraint reports?
f. CALO is a secure facility. There are supervision issues amongst your staff if students are escaping. How do you plan on rectifying these supervision issues?
g. You stated "Injuries per hold were much better with PCS." What injuries are you referring to?
h. Are children at CALO allowed to discuss physical restraints with their parents via. telephone?
-
Ken Huey will avoid "CALO is a secure facility. There are supervision issues amongst your staff if students are escaping. How do you plan on rectifying these supervision issues?" like the plague.
-
f. CALO is a secure facility. There are supervision issues amongst your staff if students are escaping. How do you plan on rectifying these supervision issues?
You mean CALO is a private gulag.
-
Your definition of a gulag is incorrect.
gu·lag also Gu·lag (gläg) n.
1. A network of forced labor camps in the former Soviet Union.
2. A forced labor camp or prison especially for political dissidents.
3. A place or situation of great suffering and hardship, likened to the atmosphere in a prison system or a forced labor camp.
-
Your definition of a gulag is incorrect.
gu·lag also Gu·lag (gläg) n.
1. A network of forced labor camps in the former Soviet Union.
2. A forced labor camp or prison especially for political dissidents.
3. A place or situation of great suffering and hardship, likened to the atmosphere in a prison system or a forced labor camp.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy)
-
•informer: one (Michael Crawford) who reveals information to Ken Huey
-
•informer: one (Michael Crawford) who reveals information to Ken Huey
You can believe what you like but I would have no motive to do that.
-
Ain't nobody trying to keep anything from Ken Huey. We're all trying to get some info to him and, whether he absorbs it or not, to get info out about him.
-
•informer: one (Michael Crawford) who reveals information to Ken Huey
All of a sudden anybody who talks to the outsider/enemy is an enemy himself, or at least a spy. This is paranoia and group-think at it's best, folks. Haven't heard such stunning reasoning since the program.
-
There were many people who called Ken Huey nasty names. I don't recall Psy or Ginger commenting on those comments. When someone makes a negative remark about Psy (Michael Crawford) people (Ginger) defend him.
-
There were many people who called Ken Huey nasty names. I don't recall Psy or Ginger commenting on those comments.
So we don't defend Ken? What's your point?
When someone makes a negative remark about Psy (Michael Crawford) people (Ginger) defend him.
Yes. It's a conspiracy at Fornits highest levels. What exactly that conspiracy is I've yet to discover.
-
Reminds me of that book titled, "Escape From Colditz".
-
Guys,
CALO is not a secure facility, nor are they a gated community. Believe me I know. They are specific about that during admission. What they are not specific is about all the other issues especially with regards to their inability and inexperience specifically directed towards the RAD treatment. It is a bunch of voodoo science and quackery. They get away with this because treatment for RAD is not consistantly agreed upon in the psychological community and no other professionals are willing to take a stance on this garbage. To much theory and not enough practice, or proof for that matter. Anyone field that comes up with the notion that kids want to sleep with their mothers is quackery.
They do get free labor (and I use that term loosely) from the "students". I should be more specific though, the parents PAY CALO a hefty sum to "allow" their children the benefit of doing the landscaping, chores and general custodial services for CALO. This might be construed a forced labor camp with cash entitlements to the directors.
CG
-
Same old shit, different wrapper. CALO hasn't come up with any new twists for sure.
-
Same old shit, different wrapper. CALO hasn't come up with any new twists for sure.
Is that what your inside sources say Che Gookin?
-
This thread is boring, please don't bump it anymore.
-
CALO strikes me as a redone version of WWASP minus the LGATs. Certainly the physical punishment in form of Regroups and pain compliance restraints echo WWASP. Given Ken's Momorm Mafia Connections with Utah it doesn't surprise me either.
Oh yeah.. also the green shirt thing? WWASP..
-
CALO strikes me as a redone version of WWASP minus the LGATs. Certainly the physical punishment in form of Regroups and pain compliance restraints echo WWASP. Given Ken's Momorm Mafia Connections with Utah it doesn't surprise me either.
Oh yeah.. also the green shirt thing? WWASP..
Is that what your inside sources say Che Gookin?
-
Your definition of a gulag is incorrect.
gu·lag also Gu·lag (gläg) n.
1. A network of forced labor camps in the former Soviet Union.
2. A forced labor camp or prison especially for political dissidents.
3. A place or situation of great suffering and hardship, likened to the atmosphere in a prison system or a forced labor camp.
Guest's use of gulag is appropriate, as you verify with your own quote. The term "Gulag" describes prisons which have a system that is *worse* than "standard." Prisons which house detainees who have not been granted appropriate due process, or which subject detainees to organized abuse are properly called gulags. Abu Ghraib and CALO are gulags.
-
You are a fool if you think Abu Ghraib and CALO are alike!
-
Actually the American military authorities have rectified a majority of the abuses of Abu Ghrahib. A strong case could be made that in fact Abu Ghrahib is now safer than CALO.
-
A strong case could be made that in fact Abu Ghrahib is now safer than CALO.
DO you have any proof Abu Ghrahib is now safer than CALO?
-
A strong case could be made that in fact Abu Ghrahib is now safer than CALO.
DO you have any proof Abu Ghrahib is now safer than CALO?
You fail the Turing test.
-
A strong case could be made that in fact Abu Ghrahib is now safer than CALO.
DO you have any proof Abu Ghrahib is now safer than CALO?
You fail the Turing test.
:blabla: