Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => Aspen Education Group => Topic started by: Whooter on September 22, 2009, 06:56:53 AM
-
Long-Term Outcome Studies of Wilderness Therapy Programs Show Teens Improve at SUWS of the Carolinas
Aspen Education Group has participated in multiple independent research studies to ensure that we provide the most cutting-edge, evidence-based therapeutic practices and clinical models within each of our programs. As the leading provider of therapeutic education programs for youth and young adults, we feel it is our responsibility to measure the effectiveness of our methods and the sustainability of our results.
Aspen Education Group’s Outdoor Behavior Healthcare (OBH) programs, also referred to as wilderness therapy, participated in two long-term, independent research studies, most recently from March 2006 through October 2008. One hundred-ninety adolescents, ages 14-17, enrolled in three different wilderness therapy programs were assessed at admission; one week after they started treatment; graduation from the wilderness therapy program; three months after graduation; and 12 months after graduation. Adolescent participants in wilderness therapy programs experienced reported struggling with issues such as substance use, depression, anxiety, suicidal ideations, ADHD and academic performance
-
The outcome of any research is depending of who is paying the bill for this research. Every single Saturday one of our TV-channels have a program where members of the news media have to confess what story they published last week they are sorry to have tormented the public with.
4 of 10 times it is a headline showing something a company wants people to believe in. It could be new medication or food product etc. but that very day where companies like Aspen enter Denmark, they will be cited on Saturdays too.
Whenever the justice department in Denmark ask what to do with troubled teens, their research states that the answer is social workers, family therapists and personal mentors in the local community. Of course we have a lot of politicians writing such research of and then they come into office and order yet a research to be conducted.
Result: The answer is the same.
Kids belong in the families. If a family is disfunctional, then the answer is court-ordered therapy of the parents.
-
The outcome of any research is depending of who is paying the bill for this research.
Who else is willing to pay for it? If you develop a new drug you need to come up with the 25 million or so yourself to have it tested, no one does this for free. What Aspen did was choose an outside agency which does research for a living and then get a university to work in parrallel with them. This is about as independent as you can get.
-
At least big pharmaceutical companies make allowances up front for the billion dollar lawsuits that often follow a drug which has crept out the back door onto the market. Instead of spending that money on research, the companies would rather get it on the market now and pay later.
Get your kid into the program now and pay later. It is the gift that keeps on giving-kinda like syphilis.
-
One hundred-ninety adolescents, ages 14-17, enrolled in three different wilderness therapy programs were assessed at admission; one week after they started treatment; graduation from the wilderness therapy program; three months after graduation; and 12 months after graduation.
Five different time points does not obscure the fact that these teens were assayed during a window in which long term damage cannot be seen.
Twelve months post-graduation? Pffft. Where are the assays at 2 years? Five years? Ten years? And yet these are are referred to as "Long-Term Outcome Studies!" Gaw-leeeee!
Moreover, there is no information in this overt piece of viral marketing regarding HOW these assays were conducted. "Informal surveys" sent out? Disregarding for the moment the general bias inherent in such surveys, what percentage were actually returned?
And... where oh where are the links to these so-called "independent research studies?"
-
Social conflict and aggressive behaviors decrease. Reduction of these self-defeating behaviors continues post-graduation, with greatest improvement shown at the 12-month follow-up assessment.
These results suggest that Aspen Education Group's wilderness therapy programs are teaching important emotion regulation skills, as well as providing a climate for adolescents to rehearse newly acquired strategies to manage negative emotions such as worry, sadness, and anger. Overall findings provide considerable support for the use of wilderness therapy programs in treating resistant adolescents.
Research conducted by: Ellen Behrens, Ph.D., Canyon Research & Consulting, Inc.; Sarah (Salli) Lewis, Ph.D. and Ellen Leen-Feldner, Center for Research, Assessment, and Treatment Efficacy and Arkansas Institute of Developmental Science; Keith Russell, Ph.D., Outdoor Behavioral Healthcare Research Cooperative, University of Minnesota.
-
Post the study. Your word is worthless. BTW, why did you create the login "Whooter" if you're just going to troll anon anyway? What's the point?
Anyway, this so-called study, based on anonymous surveys, not any clinical data has been thoroughly debunked several times here already. Post the "study" and I'll post the the obvious knock-outs of this flimsy marketing white paper.
Admins, it's time to link up "Whooter" to all of his anon posts again. Under the previous agreement, this should happen immediately.
-
Social conflict and aggressive behaviors decrease. Reduction of these self-defeating behaviors continues post-graduation, with greatest improvement shown at the 12-month follow-up assessment.
These results suggest that Aspen Education Group's wilderness therapy programs are teaching important emotion regulation skills, as well as providing a climate for adolescents to rehearse newly acquired strategies to manage negative emotions such as worry, sadness, and anger. Overall findings provide considerable support for the use of wilderness therapy programs in treating resistant adolescents.
Research conducted by: Ellen Behrens, Ph.D., Canyon Research & Consulting, Inc.; Sarah (Salli) Lewis, Ph.D. and Ellen Leen-Feldner, Center for Research, Assessment, and Treatment Efficacy and Arkansas Institute of Developmental Science; Keith Russell, Ph.D., Outdoor Behavioral Healthcare Research Cooperative, University of Minnesota.
No need to wait. The sound you hear is this "study" circling the toilet drain...
This paper presents the results from the first phase of a longitudinal, multi-center study of outcomes in private residential treatment. It is the first known large-scale attempt at a systematic exploration of client characteristics, treatment outcomes, and discharge predictors in private residential treatment. The sample of nearly 1000 adolescents, from nine private residential programs, was about equally likely to be male or female, from middle or upper socioeconomic backgrounds and predominately white. Ninety-five percent had prior treatment and 85% were treated for multiple presenting problems, the most common of which were disruptive behavior, mood, and substance abuse problems. Parents and adolescents reported significant improvement during treatment on adolescent communication, family relationships, and compliance. Analyses of variance indicated that both adolescents and parents reported a significant reduction in problems from admission to discharge, on each aggregate measure psycho-social functioning (Total Problems Scores, Internalizing Scales, and Externalizing Scales of the Child Behavior CheckList, CBCL, and Youth Self-Report, YSR) and nearly every syndrome (15 of 16 YSR and CBCL Syndrome scales). Only two out of 22 treatment and non-treatment-related variables (Grade Point Average and Mood Disorder) interacted with outcomes. Furthermore, in stepwise regression analyses, testing a wide array of treatment and non-treatment variables, only a handful of variables predicted discharge functioning. Taken together, the analyses suggested that adolescent problems improve significantly during private residential treatment and that, with only a few exceptions, discharge functioning and in-treatment change are relatively similar, regardless of adolescent background, history, problems, and treatment factors. Implications and research recommendations are presented.
http://http://natsap.org/Behrens.doc
So, then, let's begin with the scrutiny, shall we?
Here are the facts about the "study" you quoted and the research of the APA which believes PARENT TRAINING is the effective way to work with "troubled teens":
Thanks to Deb for doing the legwork...
The study implies that NATSAP programs are "licensed". How many are licensed? Their flagship program, HLA, isn?t and hasn't been since its inception.
This was not an Independent study. One must consider the author?s connections with the industry.
C Smoot employed by AEG and serveral other RTCs.
Smoot and Behrens co-create Evidence Based Consulting.
Behrens Clinical Director for AEG's Youth Care program, Member NATSAP.
Smoots 'partner' with AEGs Youth Care program.
Smoots are 'associates' of Open Sky Wilderness, Member NATSAP.
Behrens creates Canyon Research and Consulting- most of their clients are AEG programs.
Smoot and Behrens pitch EBC to NATSAP.
Dr. Kevin Fenstermacher employed by both EBC and CRC.
Looks more like a concerted effort to shore up the industry?s reputation, and give parents a false sense of security.
Who is Ellen Behrens, lead researcher at Canyon Research & Consulting, Salt Lake City, Utah?
Sept 2005- AEG?s Youth Care in Draper, Utah ?partners? with Evidence Based Consulting (EBC), a group of psychologists. (Only 2 listed- Tracine and Carl Smoot)- committed to fulfilling the National Institute of Mental Health's agenda for the application of evidence-based research in testing, assessment and treatment.
This is how the innovative partnership works: EBC provides testing services for Youth Care students by using up-to-date psychological tests, interpretive strategies, and treatment recommendations that are suggested in the research literature. In collaboration with Youth Care therapists, a strategic treatment plan is developed, utilizing research-based practices and measurements. The additional perspective of EBC psychologists provides the best possible assessments and treatment for Youth Care students.
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5186.shtml (http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/publish/article_5186.shtml)
More on Evidence Based Consulting
http://www.evidencebasedconsulting.com/ (http://www.evidencebasedconsulting.com/)
Behrens, Clinical Dir of Youth Care
http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?p=218094#218094 (http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?p=218094#218094)
Smoot?s are ?Associates? of Open Sky Wilderness
Prior to completing his graduate work, Carl was employed in hospital management. He successfully ran two inpatient psychiatry programs and was later a therapist at (AEGs) Youth Care, Inc.
http://www.openskywilderness.com/assoc.htm (http://www.openskywilderness.com/assoc.htm)
Oct 2005- AEG hosts workshop in Utah. One of the guest speakers:
Ellen Behrens, PhD discussed out of home treatment outcome research. She is the co-founder of Evidence Based Consulting. Behrens was the principal investigator for a large, multi-center study on student outcomes in residential treatment.
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5204.shtml (http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/publish/article_5204.shtml)
June ?05 Ellen Behrens and Tracine Smoot pitch ?Evidence-based Practice? to NATSAP members.
http://www.natsap.org/Newsletters/NATSA ... letter.pdf (http://www.natsap.org/Newsletters/NATSAP%20Summer%20Newsletter.pdf)
Dr. Kevin Fenstermacher works for both ?Evidence Based Consulting? (Smoots) and ?Canyon Research and Consulting? (Behrens).
http://canyonrc.com/experience.html (http://canyonrc.com/experience.html)
http://psychologicalsolutions.info/exec ... 0team.html (http://psychologicalsolutions.info/executive%20team.html)
Who are CRCs clients? And, who funded this study?
http://canyonrc.com/experience.html (http://canyonrc.com/experience.html)
A whole slew of AEG programs.
Under Links at CRCs website one is taken to the APAs Empirically Supported Treatments page. http://www.apa.org/divisions/div12/rev_est/index.html (http://www.apa.org/divisions/div12/rev_est/index.html)
Their recommendations, under Oppositional Disorders:
Because the immediate goal of treatment is to develop parenting skills, the therapist begins by having parents apply new skills to relatively simple problems (e.g., compliance, completion of chores, oppositional behavior). As parents become proficient using the initial techniques, the child's most serious problem behaviors at home and in school are addressed (e.g., fighting, poor school performance, truancy, stealing, firesetting). In most PMT (PARENT Management Training) programs, the therapist maintains close telephone contact with the parents in-between sessions. These contacts are used to encourage parents to ask questions about the home programs, to provide an opportunity for the therapist to prompt compliance with the behavior-change programs and reinforce parents' use of the skills, to strengthen the therapeutic alliance, and to allow the therapist to problem-solve when programs are not modifying child behavior effectively.
II. Summary of Studies Supporting Treatment Efficacy
PMT is one of the most extensively studied therapies for children and has been shown to be effective in decreasing oppositional, aggressive, and antisocial behavior (for reviews of research, see Dumas, 1989; Forehand & Long, 1988; Kazdin, 1985; Miller & Prinz, 1990; Moreland, Schwebel, Beck, & Wells, 1982). Randomized controlled trials have found that PMT is more effective in changing antisocial behavior and promoting prosocial behavior than many other treatments (e.g. relationship, play therapy, family therapies, varied community services) and control conditions (e.g. waiting-list, "attention-placebo"). Follow-up data have shown that gains are maintained from posttreatment to 1 and 3 years after treatment has ended. One research team found that noncompliant children treated by parent training were functioning as well as nonclinic individuals approximately 14 years later (Long, Forehand, Wierson, & Morgan, 1994). The benefits of PMT often generalize to areas that are not focused on directly during therapy. For example, improvements in parental adjustment and functioning, marital satisfaction, and sibling behavior have been found following therapy. Overall, perhaps no other technique has been as carefully documented and empirically supported as PMT in treating conduct problems.
A unique feature of PMT is the abundance of research on child, parent, and family factors that moderate treatment effects. Moreover, PMT, either alone or in combination with other techniques, has been applied with promising effects to other populations including autistic children, mentally retarded children and adolescents, adjudicated delinquents, and parents who physically abuse their children. The principles and procedures on which PMT relies have also been applied in many settings including schools, institutions, community homes, day-care facilities, and facilities for the elderly.
http://www.apa.org/divisions/div12/rev_ ... child.html (http://www.apa.org/divisions/div12/rev_est/pmt_child.html)
One must also consider the report presented August 12 at the American Psychological Association Convention by Allison Pinto PhD.
http://apinto.blog.usf.edu/2006/08/21/e ... -treatment (http://apinto.blog.usf.edu/2006/08/21/exploitation-of-youth-families-perspectives-on-unregulated-residential-treatment)
Now, please tell me how the "study" you cited is anything more than a shill-piece for NATSAP. I'd be delighted to hear your answer.
This so-called study is omplete and utter bunk. Now it has been completely de-bunked. Next study, please. Make this one a clinical study instead of a survey, ok? This one is laughable.
-
Post the study. Your word is worthless. BTW, why did you create the login "Whooter" if you're just going to troll anon anyway? What's the point?
Anyway, this so-called study, based on anonymous surveys, not any clinical data has been thoroughly debunked several times here already. Post the "study" and I'll post the the obvious knock-outs of this flimsy marketing white paper.
Admins, it's time to link up "Whooter" to all of his anon posts again. Under the previous agreement, this should happen immediately.
This was an independent study conducted by Ellen Behrens, Ph.D., Canyon Research & Consulting, Inc.; Sarah (Salli) Lewis, Ph.D. and Ellen Leen-Feldner, Center for Research, Assessment, and Treatment Efficacy and Arkansas Institute of Developmental Science; Keith Russell, Ph.D., Outdoor Behavioral Healthcare Research Cooperative, University of Minnesota.
What I typically do is contact the research and consulting firm for the details if needed, but they are not going to give you the names of the participants or raw data if that is your need. I may be able to find the tables and graphs which they provided via a link.
I find it interesting that after all this time of demanding independent studies and then when provided you change your tune. This occured when everyone was jumping up and down for regulation and licensure and then after they were regulatated you called the regulation agencies ineffective lol. Are you going to place the researchers and research firms on your axis of evil list now?
As far as linking up posts. I believe RobertBruce has been waiting for his posts be linked up for some time now but there is some difficulty getting it done on the present revision. So any discussion on that topic will have to wait.
-
BTW, why did you create the login "Whooter" if you're just going to troll anon anyway? What's the point?
The point is he needs a registered user address through which he can facilitate contact with parents or other interested parties via fornits. This way they can PM him or email him for his "unbiased" expertise on parenting and the TTI as a whole, or for whatever reason there may be.
Many on fornits call him "Whooter," so this is as good a name as any, as far as his recognizability is concerned. However, he may not always want to be recognized. :D
-
One of the proplems with reports is that they are so broad and vague. I, for one, would like to see the actual "theraputic" strategies broken down into their components and have program supporters explain how they think children benefit from them and if they would accept the same strategies in their own 'therapy. In talking about what is good or not we need to identify the "what".
Takle CEDU for instance. One strategy was to have a workshop where kids were kept awake for 24 hours at a time with little food or bathroom breaks. A girl, for instance would be screamed at by foaming at the mouth staff who would call her a whore, slut, cunt, lesbian, liar until the girl would break down in tears.
So explain the theraputic value of sleep deprivation, being screamed at and called names. How is this beneficial, what behavior is it supposed to change and would you tolerate this "therapy" for yourself?
Another strategy is for the staff to elict confessions and admissions from students of any past embarrassing, traumatic event then have it announced to all of the other studentsl. For instance a student that had been molested would be forced to discuss it in detail with the other students. Quite often they would be screamed at and blamed for being raped. So please explain to us how this "therapy" is beneficial and would you be willing to sit in a goup of your peers while every traumatic, embarrassing event in yourI life is put on display for them to judge.
It would be interesting to explore the actual "therapies" used and have a discussion about in what way they were beneficial.
-
OH, and don't forget to cite your sources:
For example
Dr. X in X clinical study has difinitively proven the theraputic value of a young rape victim being called a whore and a slut in his published study in the Journal of the AMA dated xx
-
Moreover, there is no information in this overt piece of viral marketing regarding HOW these assays were conducted. "Informal surveys" sent out? Disregarding for the moment the general bias inherent in such surveys, what percentage were actually returned?
Not to metion: who filled out the surveys? (Parents or the kids themselves?)... Also, who is to say aspen gave a full list of students to the company performing the "research"? Also, what is this independent group that did the research. Do you mean independent like Behrens the ed-con (like last time)?
So where is the source for this information, Whooter? I want details. I don't see any sources or links in your original post. Also, I see the post only mentioning Suws of the Carolinas benefiting kids in the title. Is Aspen at the very least willing to concede the majority of their "treatment" at the very least just plain does not work?
-
Whooter appears desperate. Even an idiot like him should know this shill-piece by Aspen employees and other industry workers doesn't pass even the most cursory examination.
Once again, this is the BEST the industry has to offer from some 40 years of its history. This alone should hip parents to the fact that no evidence whatsover exists that proves programs treat anything or anyone effectively.
Surprising softball from idiot boy.
Now link up those posts Whooter. No excuses.
-
Moreover, there is no information in this overt piece of viral marketing regarding HOW these assays were conducted. "Informal surveys" sent out? Disregarding for the moment the general bias inherent in such surveys, what percentage were actually returned?
Not to metion: who filled out the surveys? (Parents or the kids themselves?)... Also, who is to say aspen gave a full list of students to the company performing the "research"? Also, what is this independent group that did the research. Do you mean independent like Behrens the ed-con (like last time)?
So where is the source for this information, Whooter? I want details. I don't see any sources or links in your original post. Also, I see the post only mentioning Suws of the Carolinas benefiting kids in the title. Is Aspen at the very least willing to concede the majority of their "treatment" at the very least just plain does not work?
All very good questions, but I didnt conduct the study and it wasnt done by Aspen Education Group:
Here are the people who did the study:This was an independent study conducted by Ellen Behrens, Ph.D., Canyon Research & Consulting, Inc.; Sarah (Salli) Lewis, Ph.D. and Ellen Leen-Feldner, Center for Research, Assessment, and Treatment Efficacy and Arkansas Institute of Developmental Science; Keith Russell, Ph.D., Outdoor Behavioral Healthcare Research Cooperative, University of Minnesota.
I have a few quesions also about their plans to repeat the study and or if they are currently working on another study for TBS's. I will see if I can get my hands on some contact information and pass it along. I always like to see the data tables myself so I can view the data independently, but thats just me, I am sure everyone has their own wish list.
It is nice to see that Independent studies are starting to be performed, though. Its a big step that we have all been asking for.
-
Moreover, there is no information in this overt piece of viral marketing regarding HOW these assays were conducted. "Informal surveys" sent out? Disregarding for the moment the general bias inherent in such surveys, what percentage were actually returned?
Not to metion: who filled out the surveys? (Parents or the kids themselves?)... Also, who is to say aspen gave a full list of students to the company performing the "research"? Also, what is this independent group that did the research. Do you mean independent like Behrens the ed-con (like last time)?
So where is the source for this information, Whooter? I want details. I don't see any sources or links in your original post. Also, I see the post only mentioning Suws of the Carolinas benefiting kids in the title. Is Aspen at the very least willing to concede the majority of their "treatment" at the very least just plain does not work?
All very good questions, but I didnt conduct the study and it wasnt done by Aspen Education Group:
Here are the people who did the study:This was an independent study conducted by Ellen Behrens, Ph.D.
... and that was where I stopped reading. Really, Whooter. An ed-con who pushes and refers to Aspen is Independent?!?! Please. Call me when you have a study done by people who don't have a financial interest in the outcome.
-
Some links to the people who conducted the study:
Outdoor Behavioral Healthcare is a relatively new field in the treatment of adolescents struggling with behavioral, substance abuse, and mental health issues. OBHIC has been instrumental in facilitating research to study the efficacy of this treatment modality.
The research has established that wilderness treatment programs are effective and are successful in helping struggling adolescents.
Link (http://http://www.obhic.com/research/)
Canyon Research & Consulting, Inc
Link (http://http://canyonrc.com/index.html)
Substance abuse and dependence is significantly reduced, with results lasting through the 12-month follow-up.
Students experienced substance-related pathology within the clinically significant and elevated range pretreatment, but symptoms fell within a normal range upon graduation. Most importantly, these results were sustained through the three and 12 month follow-up assessments.
-
Sorry, Whooter, but the links you provided don't show anything. Remember now, this is only pointed at 'wilderness programs,' which are a tiny sliver of the troubled teen industry as a whole, and, I am sorry to inform you after perusing the links, there is no clinical data whatsoever. There are no peer-reviewed studies of any kind, much less any reviewed at all by non-industry publications. Sad attempt, Whooter.
Now, on to linking up your posts. You told RB the only reason he couldn't get it done is because he didn't try hard enough. So go ahead and prove to everyone that stand by your own words. Get your posts linked up or you are even worse than Brucie. 'High-horse Preacher Falls on Face, AGAIN' I can see the headlines now :rocker:
-
Moreover, there is no information in this overt piece of viral marketing regarding HOW these assays were conducted. "Informal surveys" sent out? Disregarding for the moment the general bias inherent in such surveys, what percentage were actually returned?
Not to metion: who filled out the surveys? (Parents or the kids themselves?)... Also, who is to say aspen gave a full list of students to the company performing the "research"? Also, what is this independent group that did the research. Do you mean independent like Behrens the ed-con (like last time)?
So where is the source for this information, Whooter? I want details. I don't see any sources or links in your original post. Also, I see the post only mentioning Suws of the Carolinas benefiting kids in the title. Is Aspen at the very least willing to concede the majority of their "treatment" at the very least just plain does not work?
All very good questions, but I didnt conduct the study and it wasnt done by Aspen Education Group:
Here are the people who did the study:This was an independent study conducted by Ellen Behrens, Ph.D.
... and that was where I stopped reading. Really, Whooter. An ed-con who pushes and refers to Aspen is Independent?!?! Please. Call me when you have a study done by people who don't have a financial interest in the outcome.
Ha,Ha,Ha,... saw the word "consultant" and you closed your mind and ran lol. (I don’t expect to convince any of you guys). Its a good study and it scares the hell out of a lot of people here, I understand that. The industry is changing and it is going to get tougher and tougher to support your case with just pictures of the "Hobbit" and kids being forced to work in the company store at "Straight" from the 1970’s...or a 300lb guy sitting on a kid…… it just aint the same any more. Those days are long gone.
Everyone here is slowly realizing that the kids are getting the help they need at these places.. there are over 500 programs today and the number of kids who have not benefitted from them are almost nill.
Psy, I understand there is a ton of room for improvement but we cant deny that kids lives are being immensely effected everyday for the better. This is not the last study to be conducted and you can continue to find fault in everyone of them or start to read and understand the direction of the industry and how kids are being helped. Its up to you.
You and I both know that you take the worst possible thing that happens in a program and then apply it to all of them. Not all programs listen to phone calls or censor mail.. has it happened? Sure. But it doesn’t happen everywhere… you are failing yourself by not seeing the shades of gray.. the changes that are occurring.
There was a poster earlier who said we should do a study of the effectiveness of calling a kid a slut and a whore and screaming at them because they were raped. Do you really belief that every rape victim is treated this way? It blows my mind that so many of you buy into this belief and hold it up like some religious icon.
The industry will always be changing (for the better or for the worse) and we need to keep our finger on the pulse to make sure its moving in the right direction… but you are not doing any of that. You only see what you want to see, living in the past.
Catch up!!!
-
Oh, we're caught up (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=28735)alright. No worries there.
I wonder now how this "study" should be viewed about the "effectiveness" of Aspen's "treatment" given that Aspen has now admitted it provides no treatment or mental health services?
Anybody else see a bit of a "credibility gap" regarding this study and Whooter?
Explain again how we have measured the effectiveness of non-treatment...? :suicide:
-
Wow, this study has caused such a stir to have everyone come out to try to discredit their findings. Can anyone tell me which part of the study is so damaging to everyone here that they need to trash the Research firm and also the people who conducted the study?
-
Still no links to this pruported "study." Safe to assume no real "study" exists.
-
Wow, this study has caused such a stir to have everyone come out to try to discredit their findings. Can anyone tell me which part of the study is so damaging to everyone here that they need to trash the Research firm and also the people who conducted the study?
The study is long but these findings of the study seem to upset many here: (not sure why)
Link1 (http://http://www.outbacktreatment.com/studies.html)
Link2 (http://http://www.suwscarolinas.com/outcome.html)
These results suggest that Aspen Education Group's wilderness therapy programs are teaching important emotion regulation skills, as well as providing a climate for adolescents to rehearse newly acquired strategies to manage negative emotions such as worry, sadness, and anger. Overall findings provide considerable support for the use of wilderness therapy programs in treating resistant adolescents.
Research conducted by: Ellen Behrens, Ph.D., Canyon Research & Consulting, Inc.; Sarah (Salli) Lewis, Ph.D. and Ellen Leen-Feldner, Center for Research, Assessment, and Treatment Efficacy and Arkansas Institute of Developmental Science; Keith Russell, Ph.D., Outdoor Behavioral Healthcare Research Cooperative, University of Minnesota.
Mental health issues including stress, depression and anxiety are significantly improved. OBH treatment helped reduce stress, depression and anxiety in teens, especially in those with more extreme levels, with continued reduction shown at the six-month follow-up assessment.
Substance abuse and dependence is significantly reduced, with results lasting through the 12-month follow-up. Students experienced substance-related pathology within the clinically significant and elevated range pretreatment, but symptoms fell within a normal range upon graduation. Most importantly, these results were sustained through the three and 12 month follow-up assessments.
Social conflict and aggressive behaviors decrease. Reduction of these self-defeating behaviors continues post-graduation, with greatest improvement shown at the 12-month follow-up assessment.
-
Wow you actually provided a link!
Wow, this study has caused such a stir to have everyone come out to try to discredit their findings. Can anyone tell me which part of the study is so damaging to everyone here that they need to trash the Research firm and also the people who conducted the study?
Right over your head program shill. ^ How can a study of “treatment” administered by a program that claims in court that it does not administer treatment be seen as anything other than dis-information?
Oh, we're caught up (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=28735)alright. No worries there.
I wonder now how this "study" should be viewed about the "effectiveness" of Aspen's "treatment" given that Aspen has now admitted it provides no treatment or mental health services?
Anybody else see a bit of a "credibility gap" regarding this study and Whooter?
Explain again how we have measured the effectiveness of non-treatment...? :suicide:
Care to answer that one, shill?
-
Wow you actually provided a link!
you should read the link first!!
The therapist is licensed and needs to adhere to the HIPPA laws which they do. The counselors and staff who are not licensed do not need to adhere to these (see DJ misread it, the counselors and staff don’t need to be licensed). Aspen education knows this and you just choose to misinterpret the posting.
DJ tried to blur the difference between therapist and counselor, Nice try.
One of the struggles here with posters is differentiating between counselors/staff and therapists. One is licensed by the state and the other doesnt need to be. We all know that but you like to mislead the readers.... we all know that and that is why I am here.
-
The therapist is licensed and needs to adhere to the HIPPA laws which they do. The counselors and staff who are not licensed do not need to adhere to these (see DJ misread it, the counselors and staff don’t need to be licensed). Aspen education knows this and you just choose to misinterpret the posting.
DJ tried to blur the difference between therapist and counselor, Nice try.
One of the struggles here with posters is differentiating between counselors/staff and therapists. One is licensed by the state and the other doesnt need to be. We all know that but you like to mislead the readers.... we all know that and that is why I am here.
Does Aspen differentiate between counselors/staff and therapists when the kid is required to have counseling sessions, therapy et al? Is the kid fully informed prior to any disclosures, as to which conversations are bound by client-patient confidentiality, and which may be freely discussed with any Tom, Dick, and Harry that comes along?
Does Aspen ever disclose this distinction to parents and kids before the checks are signed and handed over? During the kid's stay? Or only after said disclosures have been made public?
Just who is misleading who here?
-
DJ’s question is regarding Aspen as an entity, not individuals within that organization.
If Aspen is a treatment provider then they are a covered entity (as in req’d to abide by HIPAA)
If Aspen is not a treatment provider then the study of the “treatment” (they alleged in court to not be providers of while contending in their marketing that they do offer “treatment”) has no validity.
…and do please try to answer Ursus’ direct questions w/out distorting them
Does Aspen differentiate between counselors/staff and therapists when the kid is required to have counseling sessions, therapy et al? Is the kid fully informed prior to any disclosures, as to which conversations are bound by client-patient confidentiality, and which may be freely discussed with any Tom, Dick, and Harry that comes along?
Does Aspen ever disclose this distinction to parents and kids before the checks are signed and handed over? During the kid's stay? Or only after said disclosures have been made public?
Just who is misleading who here?
-
Ha,Ha,Ha,... saw the word "consultant" and you closed your mind and ran lol. (I don’t expect to convince any of you guys). Its a good study and it scares the hell out of a lot of people here, I understand that.
The only thing that's remotely frightening about that "study" is that parents might take it seriously. I'd love to see a peer reviewed, independent, study done on this industry, but sadly, one does not exist to date. Behrens does not qualify because of her associations with apsen which represent blatant conflicts of interest. I just don't understand how any can call that "independent". It's BS, whooter, and you know it. Nobody who knows anything about that study takes it seriously. I bet even Aspen gets a chuckle out of it.
The industry is changing and it is going to get tougher and tougher to support your case with just pictures of the "Hobbit" and kids being forced to work in the company store at "Straight" from the 1970’s...or a 300lb guy sitting on a kid…… it just aint the same any more. Those days are long gone.
And they said that earlier this decade, and the decade before that, and so forth all the way back to the events that took place at the Seed ultimately culminating in congressional hearings on "brainwashing" (thought reform) and so forth. The very terms you ridicule us for using and the very term Greg Kutz used at the GAO hearings. Sure things change a little here and there but the real core of it, what creates the walking talking billboard zombies (program saved me from deadinsane in jail. i'd do anything for the program. anybody who criticizes the program is a druggie in denial, etc...)... that stays the same (only now most programs are smart enough to try and limit the outward appearance of eyez-glazed-over-cultie). Things are getting more refined, yes, but better? Not in my book.
Everyone here is slowly realizing that the kids are getting the help they need at these places.. there are over 500 programs today and the number of kids who have not benefitted from them are almost nill.
You just love to pull numbers out the butt, don't you.
Psy, I understand there is a ton of room for improvement but we cant deny that kids lives are being immensely effected everyday for the better.
I won't deny that's the outward appearance. I would deny much good at all comes of it in the long term. YMMV, but as i've said before, If there are supposedly all these kids who's lives have been "saved by the program" in the long term, why aren't they on Fornits? Why aren't they anywhere? I'd like to speak to one, I really would.
This is not the last study to be conducted and you can continue to find fault in everyone of them or start to read and understand the direction of the industry and how kids are being helped. Its up to you.
If you were in a relationship with an abuser who hit you again and again, only to apologize each and every time and say "i've changed"... just how long would you actually believe it? I've heard the "we're different now" speech far to many times and each and every time it's just superficial window dressing at best.
You and I both know that you take the worst possible thing that happens in a program and then apply it to all of them.
No, I don't, but if a system is set up in a certain way, certain things are bound to happen.
Not all programs listen to phone calls or censor mail.. has it happened? Sure. But it doesn’t happen everywhere… you are failing yourself by not seeing the shades of gray.. the changes that are occurring.
Yeah. now there's some change I can believe in </sarcasm>
There was a poster earlier who said we should do a study of the effectiveness of calling a kid a slut and a whore and screaming at them because they were raped. Do you really belief that every rape victim is treated this way? It blows my mind that so many of you buy into this belief and hold it up like some religious icon.
Maybe because it's happened in so many programs and reflects an underlying philosophy (HPM) that you are always wrong and no matter what happens it's always your fault. Where this philosophy comes from is clear and even Lon Woodbury freely admits that the Human Potential Movement had a large and lasting influence on the industry.
-
DJ’s question is regarding Aspen as an entity, not individuals within that organization.
Go back and read his post. It was about a counsellor who wasn’t licensed... DJ made it seem like it was a therapist to mislead the readers here on fornits. The scary thing is that DJ sells himself to be a therapist himself, yet he tries to damage others careers. Nothing like the professionals I am use to dealing with. Just a little weird if you ask me.
I mean we can look up the license of any of the Aspen therapists but we can’t do that for Dysfunction Junction. We just need to take his word for it.
-
Go back and read his post.DJ’s question is regarding Aspen as an entity, not individuals within that organization.
.
The question of his (that I quoted) referred to Aspen not individuals.
I’m following the thread better than you would like people to.
The scary thing is that DJ sells himself to be a therapist himself, yet he tries to damage others careers. Nothing like the professionals I am use to dealing with. Just a little weird if you ask me.
LOL, I’ll bet that’s truly a "scary" thing for you to consider... considering. I can see how concepts like peer review and ethical accountability might seem “weird” to you.
I mean we can look up the license of any of the Aspen therapists but we can’t do that for Dysfunction Junction. We just need to take his word for it.
Why not? Well then, since you say “we can” then by all means do so. Do it for me, just this once…for the sake of open discourse.
-
I mean we can look up the license of any of the Aspen therapists but we can’t do that for Dysfunction Junction. We just need to take his word for it
Good to know that the hacking skills of programmies is sub-par.
Studies my ass. I'd kill for a real study, and Ive been talking about it for ages.
There are two types of studies:
1. A study that is deliberately slanted to agree with the hypothesis of the party financing the study
2. A study that is independent and run by sociologists, using scientific method. Financiers play no part in reinforcing any sort of hypothesis. It is investigative.
For instance. I want a study. The main reason I want a study is to really get some solid numbers on WHATEVER the deal is. That's why I want it, for fucks sake, to determine what the hell is going on. I don't want to play any part in the process. That's what soc majors are for. I honestly wouldnt even know how to proceed in getting a control group and an experimental group.
Regardless of what your feelings are, you are trying to establish a CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP. This involves more than just interviews, testimony and such bullshit about how it saved the life of your twat. This involves scientific method.
For example:
http://www.skepdic.com/control.html (http://www.skepdic.com/control.html)
Nobody who is involved or survived the industry right now is equipped to create their own study. Even if they are a scientist or sociologist. They would have to recuse themselves, because of bias.
Programmies are scared to death of science.
-
Wow you actually provided a link!
you should read the link first!!
The therapist is licensed and needs to adhere to the HIPPA laws which they do. The counselors and staff who are not licensed do not need to adhere to these (see DJ misread it, the counselors and staff don’t need to be licensed). Aspen education knows this and you just choose to misinterpret the posting.
DJ tried to blur the difference between therapist and counselor, Nice try.
One of the struggles here with posters is differentiating between counselors/staff and therapists. One is licensed by the state and the other doesnt need to be. We all know that but you like to mislead the readers.... we all know that and that is why I am here.
One of the struggles here with you is your being too stupid to defend the Aspen Education Group torture cult you fed your boy too. Come up with better duplicities, Reuben.
There‘s no relevant distinction between a "therapist" and "counselor." These terms are fairly interchangeable, and, anyway, to call yourself either one you need to have a LICENSE—something the people overseeing Pence’s "therapy" did not.
http://www.counselingseattle.com/consumer/2.htm (http://www.counselingseattle.com/consumer/2.htm)
In this case, Aspen education program, plaintiff and judge use the terms "counselor" and "therapist" interchangeably about the woman in question.
NorthStar did not promise to do the things that plaintiffs complain they failed to do, such as provide counseling by a LICENSED counselor
Matthew Pence met with NorthStar COUNSELOR Trudy Godat sometime around 5:00 or 5:30PM on July 2, 2003.
Plaintiffs complain that Matthew Pence was seen by an unlicensed THERAPIST, Trudy Godat
Plaintiffs find the duty of confidentiality in Oregon's confidentiality statute, Oregon statutes regulating professional COUNSELORS, and the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). Oregon's confidentiality statutes provide only that a confidential relationship is not breached if a disclosure is permitted by state or federal law. Or. Rev. Stat. § 192.523; Or. Rev. Stat. § 192.520. Because she is not a LICENCED COUNSELOR and there is no evidence she is an employee of a licensed counselor, Harless is not subject to confidentiality laws applicable to licensed counselors and their employees.
Aspen Education Group’s whole defense stands on the premise it NEVER promised to, NOR does it provide therapeutic treatment conformative to accepted medical practices, that it is not a treatment program for mental or drug disorders, by any legal definition, that the “counseling sessions” it provides are not therapeutic processes, and that the employees that provide them are not licensed therapists or medical personnel enough for it to be libel HIPPA statutes.
-
Studies my ass. I'd kill for a real study, and Ive been talking about it for ages.
There are two types of studies:
1. A study that is deliberately slanted to agree with the hypothesis of the party financing the study
2. A study that is independent and run by sociologists, using scientific method. Financiers play no part in reinforcing any sort of hypothesis. It is investigative.
For instance. I want a study. The main reason I want a study is to really get some solid numbers on WHATEVER the deal is. That's why I want it, for fucks sake, to determine what the hell is going on. I don't want to play any part in the process. That's what soc majors are for. I honestly wouldnt even know how to proceed in getting a control group and an experimental group.
All of us would like to have as independent a study as possible done in every situation. There are still people who will not accept any cancer treatments because the studies were overseen by the government or financed by the drug companies. Some demand a private third party with no ties or advocates or to government agencies.
There are others who wouldn’t accept any study which showed the programs to be effective because their minds are made up. There is always a way to discredit a study if you look hard enough.
Since we cannot control the studies we look at the source, read the study and determine for ourselves whether we accept it or not. Some studies are done by the institutions themselves and others (like this one) is given to an independent consulting firm which specialises in this area. I think it would be difficult to get a private donation to pay for the study and even then if the donor had a neighbor who attended a program many would think it dirty and toss it aside.
The studies are not intended to sway anyone’s opinion here on fornits... your minds are already made up for the most part and view anything positive about programs as being fabricated somehow.
-
The studies are not intended to sway anyone’s opinion here on fornits...
The only opinions I give a flying fuck about are the opinions of parents (i.e. "customers"). I stand to benefit zero from a study, regardless of what it says. Im not a parent, and Ive been off the duck farm near 20 years now. I don't need a study to tell me what I went through. All of that is over.
However, WE (the collective we) need a study done, because parents keep sending kids there. These places make glowing promises. They pay PR people and stage their little "studies" which contain about as much science as a program contains certified, competent staff. There's testimony along both sides of the fence, and you know what? It's shit. It's all shit. You want to tell me it was great for your kid? You want to say you were abused? You want to recount how it saved your life? Fuck all of you. That's not worth shit. It's goddamn personal testimony, and it's crap, and no parent is going to listen to you unless it supports their preconceived notion. Fact is, when a parent is looking to send a kid away, it's rare that they change their mind. (It happens, but its rare.) Kids are property. Loved property, but still, property. Politicians are ass-suckers and I dont give a fuck what they do. (The less, the better) All of this is in the hands of parents, present and future.
This is contingent on something that can be measured and is beyond dispute. "Success" is a subjective piece of bullshit, and that is not what is to be measured in a study. I don't even want to hear the motherfucking word. Any study of this that involves the concept of "success" or "failure" is immediately suspect IMO.
Nothing means anything until it can be determined if you are getting your money's worth... if the seller delivers on his promise. People take out second mortgages on their homes for this shit, for fuck's sake. They blow their kids college money. They liquidate their retirement funds.
I make no qualitative statement about this, I'm just saying it's how things are done in this country.
So lets find out.
-
The studies are not intended to sway anyone’s opinion here on fornits...
The only opinions I give a flying fuck about are the opinions of parents (i.e. "customers"). I stand to benefit zero from a study, regardless of what it says. Im not a parent, and Ive been off the duck farm near 20 years now. I don't need a study to tell me what I went through. All of that is over.
However, WE (the collective we) need a study done, because parents keep sending kids there. These places make glowing promises. They pay PR people and stage their little "studies" which contain about as much science as a program contains certified, competent staff. There's testimony along both sides of the fence, and you know what? It's shit. It's all shit. You want to tell me it was great for your kid? You want to say you were abused? You want to recount how it saved your life? Fuck all of you. That's not worth shit. It's goddamn personal testimony, and it's crap, and no parent is going to listen to you unless it supports their preconceived notion. Fact is, when a parent is looking to send a kid away, it's rare that they change their mind. (It happens, but its rare.) Kids are property. Loved property, but still, property. Politicians are ass-suckers and I dont give a fuck what they do. (The less, the better) All of this is in the hands of parents, present and future.
This is contingent on something that can be measured and is beyond dispute. "Success" is a subjective piece of bullshit, and that is not what is to be measured in a study. I don't even want to hear the motherfucking word. Any study of this that involves the concept of "success" or "failure" is immediately suspect IMO.
Nothing means anything until it can be determined if you are getting your money's worth... if the seller delivers on his promise. People take out second mortgages on their homes for this shit, for fuck's sake. They blow their kids college money. They liquidate their retirement funds.
I make no qualitative statement about this, I'm just saying it's how things are done in this country.
So lets find out.
Castle, I would like to see more studies done also. Without the studies the individual programs can only have the prospective parents talk to those parents and kids who have already been through it to try to gage if it is the right thing for their son or daughter. This is okay but the school will only give you the names of the parents who did well so there is no way of knowing how many kids are successful and how many are not.
It is good to see these studies finally starting to get done. I would like to see more detail but it is better than what we have had over the past decade or so.
Does anyone know if they are doing another one on their boarding schools?
-
I'd be curious to see exactly what they'd be studying, considering AEG's admission that they provide no treatment. How does one assess the outcome of non-treatment?
"What do you call a therapuetic program that provides no therapy?" "That's easy! Aspen Education!"
No need to have any studies done until we have some actual treatment to assess.
Right now AEG programs can be correctly and accurately labeled as "child bullpens" because all they provide is three hots and a cot (plus the humiliation they throw in for free).
-
Castle, I would like to see more studies done also. Without the studies the individual programs can only have the prospective parents talk to those parents and kids who have already been through it to try to gage if it is the right thing for their son or daughter. This is okay but the school will only give you the names of the parents who did well so there is no way of knowing how many kids are successful and how many are not.
It is good to see these studies finally starting to get done. I would like to see more detail but it is better than what we have had over the past decade or so.
Does anyone know if they are doing another one on their boarding schools?
I heard that they have completed (or near completed) a study on their residential programs. Its a big study that included more than 500 kids I am told. I just hope they include more detail to the public when they release it instead of just the results.
-
who's "they"? Studies from "they" are bullshit.
The only entity who really SHOULD be doing studies about these places are consumer advocacy groups.
-
who's "they"? Studies from "they" are bullshit.
The only entity who really SHOULD be doing studies about these places are consumer advocacy groups.
I agree, but if they are not interested in doing it then they need to hire an independent place to do it for them. Its better than not doing any study.
-
who's "they"? Studies from "they" are bullshit.
The only entity who really SHOULD be doing studies about these places are consumer advocacy groups.
Its frustrating as hell for these programs to get an advocacy group to spend money on them. There are tons of industries and products out there which would love to be spotlighted with a free study by an advocacy group but they just cant do everything.
There are people who make these on-demand (tankless) water heating systems (just to take an example) and they have been trying to get “consumer reports” to test them and rate them on their web site. But they are so backed up with products that they cant do it. So these water heater makers are stuck doing their own testing and reporting or hiring it out. Doesn’t make them any less credible. It would be better to get Consumer reports blessing though, I agree. Just like it would be better to have an advocacy group take on the teen help industry.
Maybe letters to some of these groups, from fornits, would help.
-
Its frustrating as hell for these programs to get an advocacy group to spend money on them
Good. Those fuckers steal enough people's money.
-
Its frustrating as hell for these programs to get an advocacy group to spend money on them
Good. Those fuckers steal enough people's money.
So thats why they hire third parties to run the studies and not wait for advocacy groups to knock on their door. Really cant blame them. I would want to get the word out too if I had a business plan that was successful.
-
Aw shucks, what's the hurry? Programs have only been around like,uhm, forty years. What's that? Oh, you didn't care about "studies" until faced with a little opposition. Ok, now I get it.
-
I'd be curious to see exactly what they'd be studying, considering AEG's admission that they provide no treatment. How does one assess the outcome of non-treatment?
"What do you call a therapuetic program that provides no therapy?" "That's easy! Aspen Education!"
No need to have any studies done until we have some actual treatment to assess.
Right now AEG programs can be correctly and accurately labeled as "child bullpens" because all they provide is three hots and a cot (plus the humiliation they throw in for free).
Again, how can anybody do a treatment outcome study on an AEG program when AEG has already admitted that they offer NO TREATMENT. To engage Whooter on that topic is pure nonsense. Until they actually provide treatment, which they clearly do not, there's NOTHING TO STUDY.
-
I'd be curious to see exactly what they'd be studying, considering AEG's admission that they provide no treatment. How does one assess the outcome of non-treatment?
"What do you call a therapuetic program that provides no therapy?" "That's easy! Aspen Education!"
No need to have any studies done until we have some actual treatment to assess.
Right now AEG programs can be correctly and accurately labeled as "child bullpens" because all they provide is three hots and a cot (plus the humiliation they throw in for free).
Again, how can anybody do a treatment outcome study on an AEG program when AEG has already admitted that they offer NO TREATMENT. To engage Whooter on that topic is pure nonsense. Until they actually provide treatment, which they clearly do not, there's NOTHING TO STUDY.
Well it may not be considered treatment but they do a great job addressing the kids problems and getting them back on track. Their outcome studies are impressive. I think they call it a model. All the kids go through the same stages and then emerge together and are back on track. They can see licensed therapists if their family wants them to or if it is part of their plan. Some are part of the school and others are independent depending on the program.
-
Wow you actually provided a link!
you should read the link first!!
The therapist is licensed and needs to adhere to the HIPPA laws which they do. The counselors and staff who are not licensed do not need to adhere to these (see DJ misread it, the counselors and staff don’t need to be licensed). Aspen education knows this and you just choose to misinterpret the posting.
DJ tried to blur the difference between therapist and counselor, Nice try.
One of the struggles here with posters is differentiating between counselors/staff and therapists. One is licensed by the state and the other doesnt need to be. We all know that but you like to mislead the readers.... we all know that and that is why I am here.
One of the struggles here with you is your being too stupid to defend the Aspen Education Group torture cult you fed your boy too. Come up with better duplicities, Reuben.
There‘s no relevant distinction between a "therapist" and "counselor." These terms are fairly interchangeable, and, anyway, to call yourself either one you need to have a LICENSE—something the people overseeing Pence’s "therapy" did not.
http://www.counselingseattle.com/consumer/2.htm (http://www.counselingseattle.com/consumer/2.htm)
In this case, Aspen education program, plaintiff and judge use the terms "counselor" and "therapist" interchangeably about the woman in question.
NorthStar did not promise to do the things that plaintiffs complain they failed to do, such as provide counseling by a LICENSED counselor
Matthew Pence met with NorthStar COUNSELOR Trudy Godat sometime around 5:00 or 5:30PM on July 2, 2003.
Plaintiffs complain that Matthew Pence was seen by an unlicensed THERAPIST, Trudy Godat
Plaintiffs find the duty of confidentiality in Oregon's confidentiality statute, Oregon statutes regulating professional COUNSELORS, and the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). Oregon's confidentiality statutes provide only that a confidential relationship is not breached if a disclosure is permitted by state or federal law. Or. Rev. Stat. § 192.523; Or. Rev. Stat. § 192.520. Because she is not a LICENCED COUNSELOR and there is no evidence she is an employee of a licensed counselor, Harless is not subject to confidentiality laws applicable to licensed counselors and their employees.
Aspen Education Group’s whole defense stands on the premise it NEVER promised to, NOR does it provide therapeutic treatment conformative to accepted medical practices, that it is not a treatment program for mental or drug disorders, by any legal definition, that the “counseling sessions” it provides are not therapeutic processes, and that the employees that provide them are not licensed therapists or medical personnel enough for it to be libel HIPPA statutes.
Also, Aspen Education Group specifies on its website that it does not differentiate between 'counselor' and 'therapist,' 'counseling' and 'therapy'.
http://www.northstarcenter.com/drugtrea ... #honorcode (http://www.northstarcenter.com/drugtreatmentterms.html#honorcode)
Definition of Counselor: This term is used interchangeably with therapist to indicate the staff member who is primarily responsible for the emotional growth of the student. The counselors meet with students one to two times weekly and work on a wide range of recovery, emotional and family issues
Definition of Therapy
This is used interchangeably with counseling. The counselors meet with students one to two times weekly and work on a wide range of recovery, emotional and family issues. A variety of therapy techniques are used depending on the counselor. Due to confidentiality restrictions, what takes place in therapy sessions is between the student and his/her counselor.
-
Well it may not be considered treatment but they do a great job addressing the kids problems and getting them back on track. Their outcome studies are impressive. I think they call it a model. All the kids go through the same stages and then emerge together and are back on track. They can see licensed therapists if their family wants them to or if it is part of their plan. Some are part of the school and others are independent depending on the program.
So the parents get to decide if they want their child to receive therapy or not?
-
Well it may not be considered treatment but they do a great job addressing the kids problems and getting them back on track. Their outcome studies are impressive. I think they call it a model. All the kids go through the same stages and then emerge together and are back on track. They can see licensed therapists if their family wants them to or if it is part of their plan. Some are part of the school and others are independent depending on the program.
So the parents get to decide if they want their child to receive therapy or not?
Well each program is different. If you son or daughter is presently seeing a therapist then that will continue and his and her medication will be monitored by a therapist at the school. But if your child is not presently seeing a therapist then you can decide if this is something that is right for you. But most of these questions can be answered by the individual program depending on what they offer.
-
I found this finding interesting:
About 95% of the youth in our study had received and "failed" prior treatment at other levels of care and/ or types of treatment."
Youth who entered the programs with extreme and sometimes disabling psychological and social problems ranked in the 97th percentile, meaning they were functioning worse than 97% percent of teenagers.
"Typically, in outcome research, you'll see a change but not like what we found in this study, which showed a dramatic change of 30-40 percentile points. Not only did the youth change significantly for the better while they were in treatment, but that change was not dependent on their demographic background, treatment history or types of problems.
-
The point being made here is that there was no treatment. Aspen has stated they do not treat people. Not for medical or drug or any other issues. They like to call themselves counselors and therapists, but they are not. So any study claiming they have treated anyone is nonsense as they have already claimed they don't do that at all. You cannot have it both ways.
And I am sure that 90% to 95% of all people who see professional therapists show a 40% to 45% immediate improvement in their attitudes and behaviors. How you measure this is beyond me. Such a study would likely be bogus unless you have measurable criteria to base such statements on. People crave attention, especially when suffering from depression, drug use, anxiety issues. Any attention, in the short terms is helpful. But depending on the quality of that attention, long term benefits would be questionable. But professionals have years of experience learning about what works and why, and what doesn't work and why. Hacks, like those found in these programs, have no such backgrounds. They base their pseudo counseling and pseudo therapy on pseudo claims. Just because a staff member has taken drugs, does not qualify them to "counsel" teens on drug usage. Though talking to someone who has had a similar experience may have a very short term benefit. But I would emphasize "may".
-
The point being made here is that there was no treatment. Aspen has stated they do not treat people. Not for medical or drug or any other issues. They like to call themselves counselors and therapists, but they are not. So any study claiming they have treated anyone is nonsense as they have already claimed they don't do that at all. You cannot have it both ways.
Where does it say that Aspen doesnt provide treatment?
And I am sure that 90% to 95% of all people who see professional therapists show a 40% to 45% immediate improvement in their attitudes and behaviors.
Now how can you say that with a straight face with no links and data to back you up, yet you critisize a research firm because it had employees who may have worked in the industry. You dont even see yyoiur own bias. You discredit people because of results dont align with your believe, not because of the work that was done.
-
Yes, the link was already provided several time to the lawsuit where Aspen used a defense based on the fact that they do not provide treatment. You even said before, Whooter, that "Aspen doesn't have to provide treatment only results." You've already conceded the point and so did Aspen, in court, under oath. It's cut and dried.
Aspen admitted it provides no treatment of any kind, therapy or medical. Too late for you, Whooter. Your boss already admitted what you don't want to hear. Don't cry about it. You should be outraged. They killed you son and did it with non-treatment.
-
< YAWN >
-
And my purpose in stating that 90 to 95 percent will show a 40 to 45 percent improvement was meant to convey that such a statement, without some kind of context, some basis in reality, without showing methods used to reach such a statement, are therefore bogus. And you validated my point.
You post "articles" about Aspen conducting studies, yet we see no methods used for reaching their conclusions. Thus the argument is invalid by the very lack of details regarding how such conclusion were made. You might have solid, unwavering support for everything Aspen related, but some of us do not. And because Aspen has no employees working for them with the qualifications needed to conduct studies, research or make valid conclusions on any topic, including what toilet paper has been favored by the majority of students over a twenty year time period... Everything they claim is suspect.
-
And my purpose in stating that 90 to 95 percent will show a 40 to 45 percent improvement was meant to convey that such a statement, without some kind of context, some basis in reality, without showing methods used to reach such a statement, are therefore bogus. And you validated my point.
You post "articles" about Aspen conducting studies, yet we see no methods used for reaching their conclusions. Thus the argument is invalid by the very lack of details regarding how such conclusion were made. You might have solid, unwavering support for everything Aspen related, but some of us do not. And because Aspen has no employees working for them with the qualifications needed to conduct studies, research or make valid conclusions on any topic, including what toilet paper has been favored by the majority of students over a twenty year time period... Everything they claim is suspect.
I have seen it stated that Aspen doesn’t provide treatment or have licensed people. But there isnt anything to back that up. All we see is a lawsuit from Northstar but no reference to other programs, so the methods of drawing conclusions can be consistent and all statements are suspect unless followed up with evidence.
As long as we are clear on both sides of the issue.
-
And my purpose in stating that 90 to 95 percent will show a 40 to 45 percent improvement was meant to convey that such a statement, without some kind of context, some basis in reality, without showing methods used to reach such a statement, are therefore bogus. And you validated my point.
You post "articles" about Aspen conducting studies, yet we see no methods used for reaching their conclusions. Thus the argument is invalid by the very lack of details regarding how such conclusion were made. You might have solid, unwavering support for everything Aspen related, but some of us do not. And because Aspen has no employees working for them with the qualifications needed to conduct studies, research or make valid conclusions on any topic, including what toilet paper has been favored by the majority of students over a twenty year time period... Everything they claim is suspect.
I have seen it stated that Aspen doesn’t provide treatment or have licensed people. But there isnt anything to back that up. All we see is a lawsuit from Northstar but no reference to other programs, so the methods of drawing conclusions can be consistent and all statements are suspect unless followed up with evidence.
As long as we are clear on both sides of the issue.
-
http://http://www.northstarcenter.com/drugtreatmentterms.html#honorcode
Hmmmm...Whooter claimed DJ tried to "blur the line between therapist and counselor" but Northstar's VERY OWN WEBSITE states that the terms "counselor" and "therapist" are "used interchangeably" and that the term "counseling" is "used interchangeably" with the term "therapy."
Looks like Whooter is caught with his pants down again. His own beloved Aspen program admits what DJ said, but Whooter denies it. Now Whooter wants us to believe him over the program's own words again. I'll go with what the facility says in cold print rather than a troll (Whooter).
We all know it stings, Whooter. And that your credibilty is damaged beyond repair. But don't lash out at us, it's Aspen that discredited you, not us. Your anger should be reserved for them, not us. It's hard to deal with for you. I understand. But we're patient and once you can admit the truth to yourself and to others, you will heal from this emotional damage Aspen inflicted on you by admitting the truth. Try to keep your chin up and take your medicine like a man. Maybe some people would respect you for trying to tell the truth for the first time in your Fronits career.
-
I have seen it stated that Aspen doesn’t provide treatment or have licensed people. But there isnt anything to back that up. All we see is a lawsuit from Northstar but no reference to other programs, so the methods of drawing conclusions can be consistent and all statements are suspect unless followed up with evidence.
As long as we are clear on both sides of the issue.
I have something from court documents which may help:
2 The parties seem to agree that although Trudy Godat (Director of North Star) was not licenced, one member of Matthew Pence's "treatment team" was a licenced therapist.
So we can all see that Aspen Education Group provides treatment and their therapists (or counselors if you like) are licensed.
Court Records (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=345882&sid=4c39ef461f4a65f09c316158fa73f48d&sid=4c39ef461f4a65f09c316158fa73f48d#p345882)
-
http://http://www.northstarcenter.com/drugtreatmentterms.html#honorcode
Hmmmm...Whooter claimed DJ tried to "blur the line between therapist and counselor" but Northstar's VERY OWN WEBSITE states that the terms "counselor" and "therapist" are "used interchangeably" and that the term "counseling" is "used interchangeably" with the term "therapy."
Looks like Whooter is caught with his pants down again. His own beloved Aspen program admits what DJ said, but Whooter denies it. Now Whooter wants us to believe him over the program's own words again. I'll go with what the facility says in cold print rather than a troll (Whooter).
We all know it stings, Whooter. And that your credibilty is damaged beyond repair. But don't lash out at us, it's Aspen that discredited you, not us. Your anger should be reserved for them, not us. It's hard to deal with for you. I understand. But we're patient and once you can admit the truth to yourself and to others, you will heal from this emotional damage Aspen inflicted on you by admitting the truth. Try to keep your chin up and take your medicine like a man. Maybe some people would respect you for trying to tell the truth for the first time in your Fronits career.
So, when they say therapist=counselor and counseling=therapy on their website (that link above goes right to it) are they lying to the public, i.e. advertising falsely? If not, they lied in court.
I wonder why if Aspen can admit that they don't provide treatment that TheWho keeps saying they do. they just said they didn't. I believe the court records over TheWho's trolling.
-
Whenever there is confusion I like to go back to the source. The courts and the lawyers for Aspen and the Pences Lawyers all agree that Aspen Provides "Treatment" and that they employ "Licensed Therapists (or counselors if you like)". Lets take another look:
I have something from court documents which may help:
2 The parties seem to agree that although Trudy Godat (Director of North Star) was not licenced, one member of Matthew Pence's "treatment team" was a licenced therapist.
So we can all see that Aspen Education Group provides treatment and their therapists (or counselors if you like) are licensed.
Court Records (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=345882&sid=e50e4eb5172dffb607a91ecf9ea73a37&sid=e50e4eb5172dffb607a91ecf9ea73a37#p345882)[/quote]
-
http://http://www.northstarcenter.com/drugtreatmentterms.html#honorcode
Hmmmm...Whooter claimed DJ tried to "blur the line between therapist and counselor" but Northstar's VERY OWN WEBSITE states that the terms "counselor" and "therapist" are "used interchangeably" and that the term "counseling" is "used interchangeably" with the term "therapy."
Looks like Whooter is caught with his pants down again. His own beloved Aspen program admits what DJ said, but Whooter denies it. Now Whooter wants us to believe him over the program's own words again. I'll go with what the facility says in cold print rather than a troll (Whooter).
We all know it stings, Whooter. And that your credibilty is damaged beyond repair. But don't lash out at us, it's Aspen that discredited you, not us. Your anger should be reserved for them, not us. It's hard to deal with for you. I understand. But we're patient and once you can admit the truth to yourself and to others, you will heal from this emotional damage Aspen inflicted on you by admitting the truth. Try to keep your chin up and take your medicine like a man. Maybe some people would respect you for trying to tell the truth for the first time in your Fronits career.
So, when they say therapist=counselor and counseling=therapy on their website (that link above goes right to it) are they lying to the public, i.e. advertising falsely? If not, they lied in court.
I wonder why if Aspen can admit that they don't provide treatment that TheWho keeps saying they do. they just said they didn't. I believe the court records over TheWho's trolling.
I like to go right to the defendant's website that clearly states all of their counselors are therapists and all couseling sessions are therapy. If they do it without a license, they're criminals and should be jailed. TheWho is really bent out of shape that Aspen admits this. He wants to keep denying it, but what's the sense. Aspen admitted they provide no treatment. What's done is done.
-
I like to go right to the defendant's website that clearly states all of their counselors are therapists and all couseling sessions are therapy. If they do it without a license, they're criminals and should be jailed. TheWho is really bent out of shape that Aspen admits this. He wants to keep denying it, but what's the sense. Aspen admitted they provide no treatment. What's done is done.
The main thing is that the courts feel that Aspen provides treatment and employs licensed counselors (or Therapists if you like)
The courts looked into it and here is what they had to say:
2 The parties seem to agree that although Trudy Godat was not licenced, one member of Matthew Pence's "treatment team" was a licenced therapist.
So we can all see that Aspen Education Group provides treatment and their therapists (or counselors if you like) are licensed.
Court Records (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=345882&sid=b7897126ac960789763dce1c98e6d668&sid=b7897126ac960789763dce1c98e6d668#p345882)
-
http://http://www.northstarcenter.com/drugtreatmentterms.html#honorcode
Hmmmm...Whooter claimed DJ tried to "blur the line between therapist and counselor" but Northstar's VERY OWN WEBSITE states that the terms "counselor" and "therapist" are "used interchangeably" and that the term "counseling" is "used interchangeably" with the term "therapy."
Looks like Whooter is caught with his pants down again. His own beloved Aspen program admits what DJ said, but Whooter denies it. Now Whooter wants us to believe him over the program's own words again. I'll go with what the facility says in cold print rather than a troll (Whooter).
We all know it stings, Whooter. And that your credibilty is damaged beyond repair. But don't lash out at us, it's Aspen that discredited you, not us. Your anger should be reserved for them, not us. It's hard to deal with for you. I understand. But we're patient and once you can admit the truth to yourself and to others, you will heal from this emotional damage Aspen inflicted on you by admitting the truth. Try to keep your chin up and take your medicine like a man. Maybe some people would respect you for trying to tell the truth for the first time in your Fronits career.
So, when they say therapist=counselor and counseling=therapy on their website (that link above goes right to it) are they lying to the public, i.e. advertising falsely? If not, they lied in court.
I wonder why if Aspen can admit that they don't provide treatment that TheWho keeps saying they do. they just said they didn't. I believe the court records over TheWho's trolling.
I like to go right to the defendant's website that clearly states all of their counselors are therapists and all couseling sessions are therapy. If they do it without a license, they're criminals and should be jailed. TheWho is really bent out of shape that Aspen admits this. He wants to keep denying it, but what's the sense. Aspen admitted they provide no treatment. What's done is done.
Excellent Point, guest. It's all over save for the crying, which Whooter is currently doing.
-
I like to go right to the defendant's website that clearly states all of their counselors are therapists and all couseling sessions are therapy. If they do it without a license, they're criminals and should be jailed. TheWho is really bent out of shape that Aspen admits this. He wants to keep denying it, but what's the sense. Aspen admitted they provide no treatment. What's done is done.
The main thing is that the courts feel that Aspen provides treatment and employs licensed counselors (or Therapists if you like)
The courts looked into it and here is what they had to say:
2 The parties seem to agree that although Trudy Godat was not licenced, one member of Matthew Pence's "treatment team" was a licenced therapist.
So we can all see that Aspen Education Group provides treatment and their therapists (or counselors if you like) are licensed.
Court Records (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=345882&sid=b7897126ac960789763dce1c98e6d668#p345882)
ONE licensed member out of a whole friggin' team of what Aspen likes to call "counselors" or "therapists" is NOT the same thing as a team of licensed counselors or therapists.
Stop fudging by twisting the semantics, Whooter. This is a false and misleading statement:
"So we can all see that Aspen Education Group provides treatment and their therapists (or counselors if you like) are licensed."[/list]
Just because one member of Mathew Pence's treatment team is licensed does not by any stretch of the imagination imply that all are licensed.
In fact, it was found that only one member was licensed, the others were not.
-
So we agree that Aspen Education Group hires licensed therapists. We also agree that not all staff members are licensed nor need to be. What needs to be established is how many licensed therapists does each school need to have. Is it one?...two? ten?
If one licensed therapist is sufficient then North Star is in compliance.
-
In compliance with what? They have unlicesned counselors doing therapy sessions. That's illegal. It's a crime in fact.
The lawsuit is still ongoing. Aspen is being sued for illegally providing therapy using unlicensed counselors which they call "therapists" on the website.
You're flailing and failing, Who boy.
Please show us the Oregon law where unlicensed people can deliver therapy.
-
In compliance with what? They have unlicesned counselors doing therapy sessions. That's illegal. It's a crime in fact.
Whenever possible we go back to the source and in this instance the courts just dont agree with you. Lets take another look at it:
2 The parties seem to agree that although Trudy Godat (Director of North Star) was not licenced, one member of Matthew Pence's "treatment team" was a licenced therapist.
The court agrees with defendants (Aspen Education Group) that Harless's alleged disclosure of Matthew Pence's confessions to police was not an extreme transgression of the bounds of socially tolerable conduct. Matthew Pence's IIED claim therefore fails as a matter of law.
Court Records (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=345882&sid=2d27cd31698eae119980bc4f4e6a786b&sid=2d27cd31698eae119980bc4f4e6a786b#p345882)
-
Here's a quote from the link you provided, Whooter:
There is evidence that NorthStar employees went through HIPAA training and took HIPAA quizzes prior to the disclosure at issue. Rose Aff., ¶ 4. This suggests the possibility that NorthStar may be a covered entity within the meaning of HIPAA.
Northstar gave HIPAA training to all of it's unlicensed therapy providers. They must think they are a covered entity. The court will decide this. HIPAA has nothing to do with individuals, only the facility.
-
Here's a quote from the link you provided, Whooter:
There is evidence that NorthStar employees went through HIPAA training and took HIPAA quizzes prior to the disclosure at issue. Rose Aff., ¶ 4. This suggests the possibility that NorthStar may be a covered entity within the meaning of HIPAA.
Northstar gave HIPAA training to all of it's unlicensed therapy providers. They must think they are a covered entity. The court will decide this. HIPAA has nothing to do with individuals, only the facility.
One may think that and many would agree with you, but here is what the court says:
The court agrees with defendants (Aspen Education Group) that Harless's alleged disclosure of Matthew Pence's confessions to police was not an extreme transgression of the bounds of socially tolerable conduct. Matthew Pence's IIED claim therefore fails as a matter of law.[/i]
Court Records (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=345882&sid=7ea412a56109f8d37ed42190ba0b0c0f&sid=7ea412a56109f8d37ed42190ba0b0c0f#p345882)
-
The court said many things, but people are taking them out of context.
Those who are not licensed, are not covered, thus they are allowed to make police reports and give information whereas someone who is licensed might not be able to do so because of patient/doctor confidentiality. I say might, because a therapist is required by law in many cases, such as expressions or suicide by the patient, to in fact call the police and report this. However the case is explaining that those who are not licensed are not covered by this, thus the fact North Star called the police was legal and therefore the lawsuit claim invalid.
Second, the case is suggesting that although Matthew had an actual licensed therapist, and thus receiving treatment, North Star was indeed offering treatment. What the case did not cover is whether the other staff, who are not licensed, are allowed to offer treatment or counseling under the law. It also did not cover whether those other staff who are not licensed health professionals were providing treatment or counseling. We however know that they do provide it and this is not legal. But it does not appear to have been discussed or ruled upon specifically in the court case.
HIPAA rules cover entire entities and not individuals thus by having one person covered by the rules, the entity (North Star) had to be covered. Whether the other staff who are not licensed or trained are covered is obvious by virtue of North Star being covered for their one licensed therapist. And if North Star, or even Aspen as a whole give their staff training in HIPAA, that's cool. However I highly doubt they actually follow those guidelines.
But the main argument here is whether staff, who are not licensed or trained should be performing any level of mental health work on teens? And I think those who are not suck puppets tend to think this is illegal and immoral.
If Aspen group had staff who simply worked with teens, providing them with an education, taking them on hikes, building simple teacher/student relationships and nothing else, and then the teen received ALL of their therapy and counseling directly from a licensed and trained medical person and NONE from the other staff, that would be a better setting. But we know this is not the case. We know even when a real trained person is on hand, the students receive the bulk of their counseling and treatment from unlicensed, untrained staff and this is wrong and immoral.
-
Here's a quote from the link you provided, Whooter:
There is evidence that NorthStar employees went through HIPAA training and took HIPAA quizzes prior to the disclosure at issue. Rose Aff., ¶ 4. This suggests the possibility that NorthStar may be a covered entity within the meaning of HIPAA.
Northstar gave HIPAA training to all of it's unlicensed therapy providers. They must think they are a covered entity. The court will decide this. HIPAA has nothing to do with individuals, only the facility.
One may think that and many would agree with you, but here is what the court says:
The court agrees with defendants (Aspen Education Group) that Harless's alleged disclosure of Matthew Pence's confessions to police was not an extreme transgression of the bounds of socially tolerable conduct. Matthew Pence's IIED claim therefore fails as a matter of law.[/i]
Court Records (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=345882&sid=7ea412a56109f8d37ed42190ba0b0c0f#p345882)
Again, you quoted discussion pertinent to only one of the claims, intimating that it applied to all, and ignored that the court was unable to reach a finding on three out of the five claims. These three were:
III. Third Claim - Negligent Provision of Mental Health Tx
IV. Fourth Claim - Breach of Confidential Relationship
V. Fifth Claim - Punitive Damages[/list]
The HIPAA issues were pertinent to the 4th claim, not the 2nd as you attempt to imply.
Pence v. Aspen Education Group, Inc. (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=28756)
-
Here's a quote from the link you provided, Whooter:
There is evidence that NorthStar employees went through HIPAA training and took HIPAA quizzes prior to the disclosure at issue. Rose Aff., ¶ 4. This suggests the possibility that NorthStar may be a covered entity within the meaning of HIPAA.
Northstar gave HIPAA training to all of it's unlicensed therapy providers. They must think they are a covered entity. The court will decide this. HIPAA has nothing to do with individuals, only the facility.
One may think that and many would agree with you, but here is what the court says:
The court agrees with defendants (Aspen Education Group) that Harless's alleged disclosure of Matthew Pence's confessions to police was not an extreme transgression of the bounds of socially tolerable conduct. Matthew Pence's IIED claim therefore fails as a matter of law.[/i]
Court Records (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=345882&sid=7ea412a56109f8d37ed42190ba0b0c0f&sid=7ea412a56109f8d37ed42190ba0b0c0f#p345882)
You just make things up as yo go along, whooter. Anyone who can read can see that was not the finding.
Of note is the fact that the judge ruled Aspen Education Group was liable for Harless's actions not because it provides "treatment," but only because some of its employees took HIPPA classes.
Also of note is that Aspen Education Group's legal position is that it's employees are free to inform the law about the details of participant confessions; the individual therapists who do so are only individually responsible for acts of confidentiality breach, not aspen itself, not being a healthcare treatment provider, and all non licensed therapists are free of even individual accountability.
That puts a new spin on all those stipulated "confession letters," and all those public confessions of wrongdoing which non licensed personnel are privy to during the course of the "program" as they are free to be handed over to the authorities and legally used against participants at any moment.
-
Whooter's "interpretation" of HIPAA is so astoundingly ignorant, one must wonder if he recently took a sever blow to the head. Let me educate you, Whooter. HIPAA covers facilities, not individuals. And any individual who works for the covered entity, from the janitor to the director is forbidden from disclosing anything that happens with any client of that facility. Get it now?
And so far as this lawsuit is concerned, the judge simply sated that if Aspen provides no treatment, then HIPAA doesn't apply. If that's the case, fine, disclose client information whenever you want. The problem is that this facility performed therapy with its clients and the therapists are not licensed. Providing therapy (or counseling) when unlicensed to do so is a crime, plain and simple. Like practicing medicine without a license. Same deal.
So we clearly see Aspen is guilty of at least one criminal/tortious action. They either provided therapy without a license to do so (a crime) or they were licensed and violated HIPAA (a tort). Either way, they're guilty as sin.
-
Bingo! Well said.
-
Anybody know how this case turned out?
As I mentioned previously, whether it was this thread or one of the other ones discussing this case, I was unable to find any further mention of it despite extensive searching. The case as it stands right now, i.e., what has been posted (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=28756), is a summary judgment requested by both parties in the hopes of foregoing a jury trial.
The judge ruled on two of the five claims. The remaining three are assumed to continue to a jury trial.
It's possible that this case is stashed in one of those pay-per-view or subscriber archives such as WestLaw. It's also possible that it hasn't come to trial yet. And it's also possible that Aspen may have offered some kind of settlement to prevent said damning issues from seeing any more light of day.
-
Whooter's "interpretation" of HIPAA is so astoundingly ignorant, one must wonder if he recently took a sever blow to the head. Let me educate you, Whooter. HIPAA covers facilities, not individuals. And any individual who works for the covered entity, from the janitor to the director is forbidden from disclosing anything that happens with any client of that facility. Get it now?
And so far as this lawsuit is concerned, the judge simply sated that if Aspen provides no treatment, then HIPAA doesn't apply. If that's the case, fine, disclose client information whenever you want. The problem is that this facility performed therapy with its clients and the therapists are not licensed. Providing therapy (or counseling) when unlicensed to do so is a crime, plain and simple. Like practicing medicine without a license. Same deal.
So we clearly see Aspen is guilty of at least one criminal/tortious action. They either provided therapy without a license to do so (a crime) or they were licensed and violated HIPAA (a tort). Either way, they're guilty as sin.
Well so far the court system disagrees with you. Neither you or I make or interpret the laws so we will see what happens. So far what we know is Aspen hires Licensed therapists and they perform treatments. So far as we know Aspen has not been found guilty of anything.
On the other hand Matthew is in jail, so that should tell us about who is guilty and who is not. But if anyone finds any more info lets throw the links up here and take a look at them.
-
I don't think anyone was arguing whether Matthew was guilty or not. And what you continuously fail to understand, obviously deliberately, is that people are arguing that treatment and counseling by the unlicensed is illegal, immoral and unethical. That one doctor on site performing it may be legal, but if others who are not licensed are performing it, that is illegal. And it is clear to all of the anti-program people this site is here for, everyone will agree that Aspen and North Star are using both a licensed professional and unlicensed hacks, the second group being used to give illegal treatment and counseling. And the parents who are suing them, are alleging that the hacks were performing treatment. And that the school itself has suggested through their vague brochures that they offered this place as a treatment facility when North Star is now claiming they did not offer that.
Your continued efforts to not grasp this are obvious to all. You are not just dumb, you are intentionally dumb, which is peculiar.
-
I don't think anyone was arguing whether Matthew was guilty or not. And what you continuously fail to understand, obviously deliberately, is that people are arguing that treatment and counseling by the unlicensed is illegal, immoral and unethical. That one doctor on site performing it may be legal, but if others who are not licensed are performing it, that is illegal. And it is clear to all of the anti-program people this site is here for, everyone will agree that Aspen and North Star are using both a licensed professional and unlicensed hacks, the second group being used to give illegal treatment and counseling. And the parents who are suing them, are alleging that the hacks were performing treatment. And that the school itself has suggested through their vague brochures that they offered this place as a treatment facility when North Star is now claiming they did not offer that.
Your continued efforts to not grasp this are obvious to all. You are not just dumb, you are intentionally dumb, which is peculiar.
That was never proven. No everyone in a doctors office is a doctor or nurse. They are not all licensed. Not everyone who works on your car is a licensed mechanic... not everyone is a licensed plummer...etc.... some are there to help out or to learn, apprentice etc..... you are looking for fault where there is not any.
-
Again, you seem to be the only posting and again you seem to not be able to form a cohesive, logical argument. A nurse in a doctors office has a degree in nursing. The doctor holds a doctorate degree, the nurse usually a Masters. They are fully licensed and trained. I cannot believe everyone on planet earth but you knows this, so again I am forced to conclude that you just like post even if you have nothing useful to add to a conversation.
Auto mechanics require licensing on some level. The amateur in his garage does not. But if that amateur attempts to smog check his own vehicle, he will soon find out what not being licensed is all about.
If Aspen Group is using unlicensed staff to perform mental health treatment and counseling on teens, they are breaking the law. You can keep trying to work your ignorant circle-logic, but nobody here is going to buy it. The court case is not over and at no time does it appear that the judge ruled on whether Aspen is using unlicensed staff to treat mental illness or offer counseling to minors.
I will now wait another four minutes to respond to your next useless argument and go to another thread and respond to your latest useless argument there. See you shortly...
-
Again, you seem to be the only posting and again you seem to not be able to form a cohesive, logical argument. A nurse in a doctors office has a degree in nursing. The doctor holds a doctorate degree, the nurse usually a Masters. They are fully licensed and trained. I cannot believe everyone on planet earth but you knows this, so again I am forced to conclude that you just like post even if you have nothing useful to add to a conversation.
Auto mechanics require licensing on some level. The amateur in his garage does not. But if that amateur attempts to smog check his own vehicle, he will soon find out what not being licensed is all about.
If Aspen Group is using unlicensed staff to perform mental health treatment and counseling on teens, they are breaking the law. You can keep trying to work your ignorant circle-logic, but nobody here is going to buy it. The court case is not over and at no time does it appear that the judge ruled on whether Aspen is using unlicensed staff to treat mental illness or offer counseling to minors.
I will now wait another four minutes to respond to your next useless argument and go to another thread and respond to your latest useless argument there. See you shortly...
Besides the nurse and doctors the other staff are not licensed... the ones taking your blood pressure, filling out your chart are not. If they start playing doctor then they will go to jail and if the nonlicensed staff in a program start to write scripts for meds or perform psycotherapy then they will go to jail to...but this hasnt happened.
-
Yes it has. And it has happened at all of these programs. The person taking your blood pressure is a nurse or medical assistant. They are trained and licensed. You really are incredibly dumb not to know this. Do you actually research any of the drivel you spew here or do you just make it up as you go along? I would say get a life, but I now find I have to say, "Get a fucking intellect!"
-
The court said many things, but people are taking them out of context.
Those who are not licensed, are not covered, thus they are allowed to make police reports and give information whereas someone who is licensed might not be able to do so because of patient/doctor confidentiality. I say might, because a therapist is required by law in many cases, such as expressions or suicide by the patient, to in fact call the police and report this. However the case is explaining that those who are not licensed are not covered by this, thus the fact North Star called the police was legal and therefore the lawsuit claim invalid.
Second, the case is suggesting that although Matthew had an actual licensed therapist, and thus receiving treatment, North Star was indeed offering treatment. What the case did not cover is whether the other staff, who are not licensed, are allowed to offer treatment or counseling under the law. It also did not cover whether those other staff who are not licensed health professionals were providing treatment or counseling. We however know that they do provide it and this is not legal. But it does not appear to have been discussed or ruled upon specifically in the court case.
HIPAA rules cover entire entities and not individuals thus by having one person covered by the rules, the entity (North Star) had to be covered. Whether the other staff who are not licensed or trained are covered is obvious by virtue of North Star being covered for their one licensed therapist. And if North Star, or even Aspen as a whole give their staff training in HIPAA, that's cool. However I highly doubt they actually follow those guidelines.
.
It's even worse than that.
Here’s the deal, Aspen was sued over the disclosure of Mathew’s confessions from a couple of roads of address:
1) The Pences argued Harless / mathew had a confidential patient/ therapist relationship because harless was offering therapeutic care to Mathew
Aspen argued she was not a therapist, and was not offering therapeutic treatment
The judge ruled that whatever she was offering, because she was not employed by a licensed therapist, she didn't breach of the confidential patient / therapist relationship.
2) The Pences argued that because Aspen Group was a healthcare provider and harless was offering therapeutic treatment, Mathew’s confession was privileged health information.
Aspen argued that it was NOT a healthcare provider, and Mathew was NOT being provided with treatment, by either Harless or the program in general, in any legal sense of the term.
The judge ruled that it could not reach summary conclusion as to whether Aspen was a healthcare provider, as to whether Harless was offering therapeutic treatment, but, either way, because Aspen personnel took HIPPA classes, that suggests Aspen may be covered under HIPPA. He ruled that this issue would have to be settled through further legal measures.
Apsen’s defense for EVERYTHING it was accused of was that it was not offering Mathew treatment, and never promised to.
-
Yes it has. And it has happened at all of these programs. The person taking your blood pressure is a nurse or medical assistant. They are trained and licensed. You really are incredibly dumb not to know this. Do you actually research any of the drivel you spew here or do you just make it up as you go along? I would say get a life, but I now find I have to say, "Get a fucking intellect!"
Most people think theit is John Reuben, working (possibly hired) by Aspen to PR spin on this forum. Its very creepy--that much is sure.
-
I will read it again, but I didn't quite get that same impression. I think Aspen was saying that they did have at least one licensed mental health practitioner on site, who I also gathered did provide counseling once a week to students. Aspen was merely arguing that the specific person who provided information to the police was not licensed and therefore was not covered by the rules for confidentiality and also that this person in no way offered any treatment or therapy, despite having a title that suggested she did.
The court was correct, in my opinion in stating that she was not covered because she was not licensed. But, the court is not clear on whether she was performing therapy without a license or not and this is what they were planning to address later in the case. That Matthew received treatment from at least one licensed professional on his "team" I don't think is in dispute. But if he received any treatment for mental health, counseling or whatever from any unlicensed staff, this would be illegal, likely a breach of contract, and might end up supporting earlier arguments about a breach of contract and a violation of patient/doctor confidentiality. Though this last part, having been ruled upon already, may not come up again.
But the Pence family need only win on one or two points to succeed in their case. And with Aspen already admitting the staff were not licensed or trained, and that they were not providing treatment, if it can be shown that they were in fact providing treatment, I think Aspen is screwed.
-
Yes it has. And it has happened at all of these programs. The person taking your blood pressure is a nurse or medical assistant. They are trained and licensed. You really are incredibly dumb not to know this. Do you actually research any of the drivel you spew here or do you just make it up as you go along? I would say get a life, but I now find I have to say, "Get a fucking intellect!"
Most people think theit is John Reuben, working (possibly hired) by Aspen to PR spin on this forum. Its very creepy--that much is sure.
You are really now suggesting that people think I am John Reuben? With the name Rocky Mountain Academy Survivor?
-
Yes it has. And it has happened at all of these programs. The person taking your blood pressure is a nurse or medical assistant. They are trained and licensed. You really are incredibly dumb not to know this. Do you actually research any of the drivel you spew here or do you just make it up as you go along? I would say get a life, but I now find I have to say, "Get a fucking intellect!"
Most people think theit is John Reuben, working (possibly hired) by Aspen to PR spin on this forum. Its very creepy--that much is sure.
You are really now suggesting that people think I am John Reuben? With the name Rocky Mountain Academy Survivor?
I think guest means "theit" is John d Reuben. Though, TheIt has alleged long time posters are really him. It's purpose does seem to be nothing more than irritate survviors of torture (that's his cue to announce when we say 'torture', we mean is not having a cell phone ha, ha, ha,)
-
Ha,Ha,Ha, no that wasnt me that posted that. See, RMA, I am not the only guest poster. There are hundreds here (maybe not tonight). I dont think you are JohnR.
-
Did we even have cell phones in 1984? I so fucking old I don't remember. All I remember is that it was uphill both ways to the main house. Literally. Torture for me was not having a cell phone. It was not having Mountain Dew. If it is ever listed as a drug, I can say I was an addict. And wouldn't that have made RMA happy as hell?
-
My apologies. You Guests can be hard to differentiate sometimes. My bad. And I am not John Reuben. And I am not now, nor have I ever been a member of the Communist Party.
-
Did we even have cell phones in 1984? I so fucking old I don't remember. All I remember is that it was uphill both ways to the main house. Literally. Torture for me was not having a cell phone. It was not having Mountain Dew. If it is ever listed as a drug, I can say I was an addict. And wouldn't that have made RMA happy as hell?
cell phones? Amazingly enough, the "brick" came out in 83, and was disgustingly expensive.
A bit before that was the cordless phone.
But before that, there were bag phones and walkie talkies. From as far back as the 40s or 50s, I think.
So, essentially, the mobile has been around for quite some time.
I've wanted a bag phone for a while.
-
Damn Castle, you found me over here?
I knew all that. President Roosevelt even had a car phone in his limo.
I actually sold cell phones briefly after leaving Idaho. Working with my little brother from RMA of all people who got me the job. I sold those bricks. The most popular was the Motorola one used by Michael Douglas in the movie Wall Street. Not a bad phone either.
So when are we getting together for lunch? Now that I know we are neighbors.
-
I'm wondering how anyone can study the effects of something they claim not to provide? This will require some explaining.
-
I'm wondering how anyone can study the effects of something they claim not to provide? This will require some explaining.
Placebo!! You take a program which doesn’t provide any therapy at all and then track them against kids who have received therapy to see which program is more effective.
Researchers do this all the time with drug testing….brilliant idea!!!
-
Too bad Aspen didn't do this or we would have had more information than the extremely narrow scope version they published. And why not contact all former Aspen program students? Why such a tiny sampling? It gives the appearance that they selected a group based on prior knowledge. Because they had the ability to contact and interview a greater number of students, and didn't. And they could have contacted students in the post-program period of five to ten years, rather than the narrow scope they used. The survey has such limited value, except perhaps for propaganda purposes.
-
Too bad Aspen didn't do this or we would have had more information than the extremely narrow scope version they published. And why not contact all former Aspen program students? Why such a tiny sampling? It gives the appearance that they selected a group based on prior knowledge. Because they had the ability to contact and interview a greater number of students, and didn't. And they could have contacted students in the post-program period of five to ten years, rather than the narrow scope they used. The survey has such limited value, except perhaps for propaganda purposes.
These are all good questions,RMA, but we would need to ask the professionals to really get an understanding of why they choose the number they did or the scope and boundary conditions. It could be that there are so many other effects and stimuli that the students are exposed to after graduation that the direct effects of the program can only be measured only so long after leaving. Looking at someone 20 years out could not be conclusive. What would you attribute his success too? What influenced him over the last 5 years? Good marriage? Bad marriage? College? Years of an abusive relationship?
See what I am saying?
-
I dont see how anyone could conduct a valid heart study without involving heart doctors. I dont think the study would be considered tainted if there were doctors which were previously affiliated with a hospital involved or performing the study. I would think it would be the other way around.
-
I dont see how anyone could conduct a valid heart study without involving heart doctors. I dont think the study would be considered tainted if there were doctors which were previously affiliated with a hospital involved or performing the study. I would think it would be the other way around.
You are correct. In order to have any type of successful study you would need to include people who are familiar with the industry being studied otherwise how could the study be designed? How could the statistician know how often to check the patients heart rate or blood pressure. What enzymes should be tested and what time intervals?
The same applies to the teen help industry. As the program owner you would want to choose a research firm which is familiar with your industry, otherwise you would have to supply them with personel to train them on what you do and how you measure success and failure. This would cost the program additional costs and potentially taint or bias the outcome.
-
I dont see how anyone could conduct a valid heart study without involving heart doctors. I dont think the study would be considered tainted if there were doctors which were previously affiliated with a hospital involved or performing the study. I would think it would be the other way around.
You are correct. In order to have any type of successful study you would need to include people who are familiar with the industry being studied otherwise how could the study be designed? How could the statistician know how often to check the patients heart rate or blood pressure. What enzymes should be tested and what time intervals?
The same applies to the teen help industry. As the program owner you would want to choose a research firm which is familiar with your industry, otherwise you would have to supply them with personel to train them on what you do and how you measure success and failure. This would cost the program additional costs and potentially taint or bias the outcome.
Its too bad retarded analogies didn't prevent Aspen Education Group from killing your son. Remember him, John? Didn't you say your kid was helped by ASR, before he killed himself. What's the thinking re. your dead son, he was helped even though he died? Maybe he didn't use the "tools" Academy at Swift River gave him? Pathetic.
More on Aspen's bogus short term survey of "graduates."
http://www.suwscarolinas.com/outcome.html
Linked is the only "study" made available by John Reuben. This is a survey, not study. There is no control group. In no way can this be construed as a "study."
Even after accepting this as a survey Aspen Education Group is fraudulent. For it, as they admit, only "graduates" were interviewed. Therefore, this is not even a valid survey of the participants, only the small segment who "graduate." What's more, "graduation" is only granted to detainees when staff feels the detainee believes that he/she has been helped and was unfit previous to program. Even if you grant (improperly) that graduation is granted to "healed" detainees, that still leaves out all the participants who were not. Detainees imprisoned every bit as long as the "graduates" are not included in the survey of perception of the experience. The survey is structured to provide artificially inflated levels of "positive" perceptions.
This is also an invalid survey because of the lack of transparency of "assessment method,"(they provide no corroboration that any of the info they provide is accurate, or what sort of questions were asked ,or what sort of answers were given--[interpretation of answers can manipulated to reverse intended meanings]) vagueness of meaning (are teens less depressed at assessment because they are no longer in the process of being kidnapped?) and supply no provision of objective reality in addition to subjective perception (if a teen is in jail, or no longer speaking to their parents, or a drop out, this objective measurement of "Family healing" should be included) Its also invalid as a "long term" study because it supposedly only measures perceptions of detainees a year out
That this "survey" is only on isolated corners of the interwebs and not accepted by any journals speaks volumes.
Compare Aspen's invalid clandestine survey to Alison Pinto's legitimate survey, for transparency, independency, and appropriatness of clinical sampling:
http://www.cafety.org/research/121-rese ... -pinto-phd (http://www.cafety.org/research/121-research/414-a-summary-of-participant-perspectives-on-residential-treatment-for-youth-allison-pinto-phd)
Here's a breakdown of the AARC "clincial outcome study," which uses a similar "methodology." I'm bolding the flaws which are relevant to the ASPEN EDUCATION GROUP (torture chambers) "outcome study"
About AARC's "80% Success Rate"
That claim is based on what AARC’s website calls an “outcome evaluation,” which it says was “completed” by Dr. Michael Patton, a leading U.S. professional evaluator of programs.
As recently as last year, AARC described the study as an “independent outcomes validation study,” according to an AARC funding submission document sent to the Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission, which the fifth estate obtained through the province’s freedom of information legislation.
We obtained a version of the 2003 study and showed it to three psychology professors who specialize in addiction—the University of Calgary’s David Hodgins, the University of Lethbridge’s Robert Williams and Bruce Alexander, professor emeritus at Simon Fraser University.
The success rate doesn’t include people who didn’t finish the program.
The grads were interviewed by people linked to AARC. This could bias what was reported, Alexander said. “Imagine calling up somebody who’s graduated from a program and saying: ‘Hey, are you taking drugs any more?’ And this person has already been put in the program against their will perhaps precisely because they took drugs. And what are they going to say? ‘Oh yes, I’m taking lots of drugs now,’” Alexander said.
The fifth estate also asked the man who AARC says completed the study—Dr. Patton. He told the fifth estate his involvement was largely limited to supervising a graduate student who crunched the data—data gathered by people associated with AARC.
“I did not conduct the study. I oversaw the analysis,” he said.
[Aspen both conducted the survey and oversaw the analysis]
“It’s expensive of course to commission an external evaluation. But, that would be the next step. I do remember that the internal evaluation results were quite positive. But, the evaluation that was done did not independently examine the process. The graduate student that I supervised did not independently talk to any of the young people or the parents. He simply analyzed the data that they sent him. And I was the supervisor of him which is how my name ends up on the report,” Patton said.
AAARC’s research has faced criticisms before. In 1994, the Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission raised questions about an earlier AARC evaluation of its success rate.
At the time, the commission wanted AARC to have an independent study of its program done by an experienced, credible research group of its program as a condition of a $100,000 grant.
AARC did submit a study. It is even mentioned on AARC’s website, where it is described as “an external review.”
The commission wasn’t so sure. One of its researchers reviewed the study and noted that, in her opinion, it “was not conducted by an independent researcher, but by people associated with AARC,” according to a commission memo obtained through the freedom of information legislation.
That researcher’s conclusion: AARC’s study was not “technically adequate based on widely accepted standards of research and evaluation.”
-
I would conclude by the need to locate an example (or argument point) outside of the country in Canada which isnt related to Aspen in any way or General programs here in the States that the Aspen study is fairly relevant and unshakable.
@ previous poster, I concur that trying to conduct a valid study without support or knowledge of the industry would not be very useful or valid.
-
http://www.suwscarolinas.com/outcome.html (http://www.suwscarolinas.com/outcome.html)
Linked is the only "study" made available by John Reuben. This is a survey, not study. There is no control group. In no way can this be construed as a "study."
Even after accepting this as a survey Aspen Education Group is fraudulent. For it, as they admit, only "graduates" were interviewed. Therefore, this is not even a valid survey of the participants, only the small segment who "graduate." What's more, "graduation" is only granted to detainees when staff feels the detainee believes that he/she has been helped and was unfit previous to program. Even if you grant (improperly) that graduation is granted to "healed" detainees, that still leaves out all the participants who were not. Detainees imprisoned every bit as long as the "graduates" are not included in the survey of perception of the experience. The survey is structured to provide artificially inflated levels of "positive" perceptions.
This is also an invalid survey because of the lack of transparency of "assessment method,"(they provide no corroboration that any of the info they provide is accurate, or what sort of questions were asked ,or what sort of answers were given--[interpretation of answers can manipulated to reverse intended meanings]) vagueness of meaning (are teens less depressed at assessment because they are no longer in the process of being kidnapped?) and supply no provision of objective reality in addition to subjective perception (if a teen is in jail, or no longer speaking to their parents, or a drop out, this objective measurement of "Family healing" should be included) Its also invalid as a "long term" study because it supposedly only measures perceptions of detainees a year out
That this "survey" is only on isolated corners of the interwebs and not accepted by any journals speaks volumes.
Compare Aspen's invalid clandestine survey to Alison Pinto's legitimate survey, for transparency, independency, and appropriatness of clinical sampling:
http://www.cafety.org/research/121-rese ... -pinto-phd (http://www.cafety.org/research/121-research/414-a-summary-of-participant-perspectives-on-residential-treatment-for-youth-allison-pinto-phd)
Here's a breakdown of the AARC "clincial outcome study," which uses a similar "methodology." I'm bolding the flaws which are relevant to the ASPEN EDUCATION GROUP (torture chambers) "outcome study"
About AARC's "80% Success Rate"
That claim is based on what AARC’s website calls an “outcome evaluation,” which it says was “completed” by Dr. Michael Patton, a leading U.S. professional evaluator of programs.
As recently as last year, AARC described the study as an “independent outcomes validation study,” according to an AARC funding submission document sent to the Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission, which the fifth estate obtained through the province’s freedom of information legislation.
We obtained a version of the 2003 study and showed it to three psychology professors who specialize in addiction—the University of Calgary’s David Hodgins, the University of Lethbridge’s Robert Williams and Bruce Alexander, professor emeritus at Simon Fraser University.
The success rate doesn’t include people who didn’t finish the program.
The grads were interviewed by people linked to AARC. This could bias what was reported, Alexander said. “Imagine calling up somebody who’s graduated from a program and saying: ‘Hey, are you taking drugs any more?’ And this person has already been put in the program against their will perhaps precisely because they took drugs. And what are they going to say? ‘Oh yes, I’m taking lots of drugs now,’” Alexander said.
The fifth estate also asked the man who AARC says completed the study—Dr. Patton. He told the fifth estate his involvement was largely limited to supervising a graduate student who crunched the data—data gathered by people associated with AARC.
“I did not conduct the study. I oversaw the analysis,” he said.
[Aspen both conducted the survey and oversaw the analysis]
“It’s expensive of course to commission an external evaluation. But, that would be the next step. I do remember that the internal evaluation results were quite positive. But, the evaluation that was done did not independently examine the process. The graduate student that I supervised did not independently talk to any of the young people or the parents. He simply analyzed the data that they sent him. And I was the supervisor of him which is how my name ends up on the report,” Patton said.
AAARC’s research has faced criticisms before. In 1994, the Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission raised questions about an earlier AARC evaluation of its success rate.
At the time, the commission wanted AARC to have an independent study of its program done by an experienced, credible research group of its program as a condition of a $100,000 grant.
AARC did submit a study. It is even mentioned on AARC’s website, where it is described as “an external review.”
The commission wasn’t so sure. One of its researchers reviewed the study and noted that, in her opinion, it “was not conducted by an independent researcher, but by people associated with AARC,” according to a commission memo obtained through the freedom of information legislation.
That researcher’s conclusion: AARC’s study was not “technically adequate based on widely accepted standards of research and evaluation.”
-
http://http://www.suwscarolinas.com/outcome.html
Hey thanks for the link, guest. the first thing to pop out at me was this:
Outcome Studies
Aspen Education Group has participated in multiple independent research studies to ensure that we provide the most cutting-edge, evidence-based therapeutic practices and clinical models within each of our programs. As the leading provider of therapeutic education programs for youth and young adults, we feel it is our responsibility to measure the effectiveness of our methods and the sustainability of our results.
It may be a good idea to run thru this study. I'll post results of the study in future posts after I have had a chance to read it. Stay tuned.
-
I would conclude by the need to locate an example (or argument point) outside of the country in Canada which isnt related to Aspen in any way or General programs here in the States that the Aspen study is fairly relevant and unshakable.
It's shitty you killed your own kid, and shitty you lie about Aspen Education Group's background. As you know, AARC and AEG are, in fact, identical and both based on "methods" invented by the same failed comedian, Charles E Deidrich.
Aspen Education Group was formed by disciples of CEDU / Synanon, on Mel Wasserman / Deidrich's cult model, and the AARC by disciples of KIDS, both Synanon expansions.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/200 ... n-industry (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2007/08/cult-spawned-tough-love-teen-industry)
Aspen Education group is made up of cultic groups formed by CEDU disiples, and you killed your kid. John D. Reuben (you) killed his kid.
-
I would conclude by the need to locate an example (or argument point) outside of the country in Canada which isnt related to Aspen in any way or General programs here in the States that the Aspen study is fairly relevant and unshakable.
It's shitty you killed your own kid, and shitty you lie about Aspen Education Group's background. As you know, AARC and AEG are, in fact, identical and both based on "methods" invented by the same failed comedian, Charles E Deidrich.
Aspen Education Group was formed by disciples of CEDU / Synanon, on Mel Wasserman / Deidrich's cult model, and the AARC by disciples of KIDS, both Synanon expansions.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/200 ... n-industry (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2007/08/cult-spawned-tough-love-teen-industry)
Aspen Education group is made up of cultic groups formed by CEDU disiples, and you killed your kid. John D. Reuben (you) killed his kid.
Wow sounds like a conspiracy, people getting kidnapped and brainwashed by cults and then this guy John takes his kid home and kills him. I think you should keep this going maybe this same guy can kill his wife when she gets wind of the cult and brainwashing going on. I smell a good Life time movie channel special... I think you are a genius!!
For effects I think we should add that the programs abuse the kids while they are there.. you know kneel on their hands, carry wood around all day, hire ex-cons with sunglasses and sticks...call them guards instead of staff this is good stuff... maybe call the kids.. Hmm .. detainees !! perfect... keep it coming!!
-
I'm wondering how anyone can study the effects of something they claim not to provide? This will require some explaining.
Nobody has answered this yet. How can Aspen study something they deny even offering? Study is obviously fraudulent.
-
I would conclude by the need to locate an example (or argument point) outside of the country in Canada which isnt related to Aspen in any way or General programs here in the States that the Aspen study is fairly relevant and unshakable.
It's shitty you killed your own kid, and shitty you lie about Aspen Education Group's background. As you know, AARC and AEG are, in fact, identical and both based on "methods" invented by the same failed comedian, Charles E Deidrich.
Aspen Education Group was formed by disciples of CEDU / Synanon, on Mel Wasserman / Deidrich's cult model, and the AARC by disciples of KIDS, both Synanon expansions.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/200 ... n-industry (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2007/08/cult-spawned-tough-love-teen-industry)
Aspen Education group is made up of cultic groups formed by CEDU disiples, and you killed your kid. John D. Reuben (you) killed his kid.
Wow sounds like a conspiracy, people getting kidnapped and brainwashed by cults and then this guy John takes his kid home and kills him. I think you should keep this going maybe this same guy can kill his wife when she gets wind of the cult and brainwashing going on. I smell a good Life time movie channel special... I think you are a genius!!
For effects I think we should add that the programs abuse the kids while they are there.. you know kneel on their hands, carry wood around all day, hire ex-cons with sunglasses and sticks...call them guards instead of staff this is good stuff... maybe call the kids.. Hmm .. detainees !! perfect... keep it coming!!
That is funny!! I use to like the term followers after they get acclimated to the whole idea. Try to get the kids to wear white robes so they slowly lose their identity. It works really great. I am watching over you.
-
I'm wondering how anyone can study the effects of something they claim not to provide? This will require some explaining.
Nobody has answered this yet. How can Aspen study something they deny even offering? Study is obviously fraudulent.
They are studying the effects of the program they were in. Some might have received therapy and treatment and others may not have received any at all. Think of it as a study where some of the patients receive a placebe and others receive treatment. Whether they got any treatment at all doesnt matter because they are measuring the outcome.
-
I will just think about the placebo aspect. As they received nothing, thus success is guaranteed.
-
I will just think about the placebo aspect. As they received nothing, thus success is guaranteed.
Exactly, the main thing is that the check cleared and the kid moves on down a healthier path.
-
This is the second time TheWho has made this comment. Interestingly, in both instances, he mentioned the money first, then the child. Very revealing indeed. This is the way he thinks: money first. Hence, he has a dead kid. The checks were clearing, so all was good. Now Mike is dead because of his father's actions.
If Mike was stack of money being controlled by others, Reuben would have made sure he came home right away. But Reuben, lacking normal human emotions, just sat at home with his favorite adopted son, the Geico Money Stack, and forgot about Mike. And Max, too, but that's another story.
-
This is what I've been saying all along. This guy has some real problems. It's not funny. It's sad. And now everyone can see how immature and selfish this guy is and why he failed a as a father. Sadly, this describes a lot of these parents using Aspen programs to raise their kids for them.
-
The outcome of any research is depending of who is paying the bill for this research.
That is no reason to discard it entirely, you just need to keep in mind that there could be a bias.
-
This is the second time TheWho has made this comment. Interestingly, in both instances, he mentioned the money first, then the child. Very revealing indeed. This is the way he thinks: money first. Hence, he has a dead kid. The checks were clearing, so all was good. Now Mike is dead because of his father's actions.
If Mike was stack of money being controlled by others, Reuben would have made sure he came home right away. But Reuben, lacking normal human emotions, just sat at home with his favorite adopted son, the Geico Money Stack, and forgot about Mike. And Max, too, but that's another story.
Yep, sad but true. Aspen sees only dollar signs just like their pimps (TheWho, John Reuben). It is indeed very revealing that in two comments TheWho stressed the importance of the money over the child. It's a window into his twisted world view.
-
Jan Moss applies the "study" of 9 Aspen programs to entire industry
Disclosure Statement: Aspen Education Group provided funding for this study.
http://www.natsap.org/Outcome%20Study.doc (http://www.natsap.org/Outcome%20Study.doc)
-
Jan Moss applies the "study" of 9 Aspen programs to entire industry
Disclosure Statement: Aspen Education Group provided funding for this study.
http://www.natsap.org/Outcome%20Study.doc (http://www.natsap.org/Outcome%20Study.doc)
Social conflict and aggressive behaviors decrease. Reduction of these self-defeating behaviors continues post-graduation, with greatest improvement shown at the 12-month follow-up assessment.
These results suggest that Aspen Education Group's wilderness therapy programs are teaching important emotion regulation skills, as well as providing a climate for adolescents to rehearse newly acquired strategies to manage negative emotions such as worry, sadness, and anger. Overall findings provide considerable support for the use of wilderness therapy programs in treating resistant adolescents.
Research conducted by: Ellen Behrens, Ph.D., Canyon Research & Consulting, Inc.; Sarah (Salli) Lewis, Ph.D. and Ellen Leen-Feldner, Center for Research, Assessment, and Treatment Efficacy and Arkansas Institute of Developmental Science; Keith Russell, Ph.D., Outdoor Behavioral Healthcare Research Cooperative, University of Minnesota.
-
There was hint that the results for kids with depression was "off the charts". Meaning the activity that programs offer seems to be just the thing for kids suffering from depression. There was a study in the early 1990's which suggested this but I never saw any outcome.
This is encouraging. Thanks for finding the thread,I thought it was lost.
-
There was hint that the results for kids with depression was "off the charts". Meaning the activity that programs offer seems to be just the thing for kids suffering from depression. There was a study in the early 1990's which suggested this but I never saw any outcome.
This is encouraging. Thanks for finding the thread,I thought it was lost.
OBVIOUSLY youve never been in a program or you would KNOW these programs CAUSE depression in some individuals.
-
There was hint that the results for kids with depression was "off the charts". Meaning the activity that programs offer seems to be just the thing for kids suffering from depression. There was a study in the early 1990's which suggested this but I never saw any outcome.
This is encouraging. Thanks for finding the thread,I thought it was lost.
OBVIOUSLY youve never been in a program or you would KNOW these programs CAUSE depression in some individuals.
No I havent. I am a parent so I need to rely on studies when I can find them and talking to other parents who had kids go to one of them.
-
Dear lord in Heaven. In a fraction of the time you people spend in a circle jerk with Who, you could go get the damn facts and post them. Course, by page 2, he knew that any rational person had stopped reading and only got his propoganda.
1999 Behrens Clinical Director for Youth care
http://cache.zoominfo.com/cachedpage/?a ... me=Behrens (http://cache.zoominfo.com/cachedpage/?archive_id=0&page_id=97347972&page_url=%2f%2fwww.bridgetounderstanding.com%2fcgi-bin%2finfoforum.cgi%3fread%3d260&page_last_updated=3%2f18%2f2001+10%3a59%3a38+AM&firstName=Ellen&lastName=Behrens)
2002 Founded Canyon Research
http://canyonrc.com/experience.html (http://canyonrc.com/experience.html)
2003 - 2005 Behrens conducting surveys
http://www.strugglingteens.com/news/pre ... 060817.htm (http://www.strugglingteens.com/news/press%20releases/natsap060817.htm)
2004 Behrens doing Consulting for AEG
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 0626.shtml (http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/publish/TheMapTerritoryES_070626.shtml)
2006 Behrens completes her survey results passed off as Independent Study
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5360.shtml (http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/publish/article_5360.shtml)
"We also tried to eliminate all students discharged from the programs before graduation because the clinical staff thought it was actually an inappropriate placement, or when they felt the program couldn't be helpful to the child. As a result, the operating assumption of the study is that the students included in the analyzed data were those who were appropriately placed."
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5494.shtml (http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/publish/article_5494.shtml)
Comment: ....It would be helpful to know more about Dr. Behren’s research design and methodology. I presume she drew a random sample for the study; otherwise, the results cannot be generalized to the school/residential population at large.
Jerry W Clark
Dba Behavioral Services Ltd
Reno, NV
No Jerry, she didn't. Families from 9 Aspen programs participated in her "study". She and all her staff have links to Aspen programs.
http://www.natsap.org/Behrens.doc (http://www.natsap.org/Behrens.doc)
Jan Moss applies the "study" of 9 Aspen programs to entire industry
Disclosure Statement: Aspen Education Group provided funding for this study.
http://www.natsap.org/Outcome%20Study.doc (http://www.natsap.org/Outcome%20Study.doc)
2006 Behrens is a contributor to NATSAPs "Journal of Therapeutic Schools and Programs.
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5456.shtml (http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/publish/printer_5456.shtml)
ASPEN EDUCATION GROUP APPLAUDS STUDY
(April 26, 2007) According to an article on PRNewswire, Elliot Sainer, President of Aspen Education Group (AEG), Cerritos, CA, announced "AEG is extremely pleased to learn of the very positive findings from the final phase of our industry's first long-term, multi-year clinical study on the effectiveness of private therapeutic residential programs for adolescents. AEG will continue to advocate for new industry research that will further illustrate and promote the best practices and methodologies and enhance our industry's abilities to produce positive and long-lasting results in adolescent therapeutic education."
I guess he was pleased. He paid her to present AEG in the best possible light.
-
Correction: The Disclaimer is here
http://www.natsap.org/Behrens.doc (http://www.natsap.org/Behrens.doc)
Jan Moss applies the "study" of 9 Aspen programs to entire industry
Disclosure Statement: Aspen Education Group provided funding for this study.
-
Center for Anti Defamation of Youth Workers
Are you interested in helping our society, stay posted, we will have a web site soon Center for Anti Defamation of Professional Youth Workers
We are going to get a seasoned Federal Court attorney, and who ever donates to a verifiable attorney trust fund will have access to our strategies and tactics to shut down Michael Crawford's little Fornit Defamers and their overall revenge insurgency against some good folks.
This dirty mouthed little punk Che, best friend of Michael Crawford the owner of this site, was afraid of the big bad streets of Redlands, because deep down he is a boob and yet he uses profanity that his name sake Che Guevara would consider childish. Keep your conversation going with him he will finally loose it and start talking about having sex with farm animals. Ursus thinks he cute and admires his cruddy little mouth.Anti Defamation Society
-
Here are some of the results of the study:
Social conflict and aggressive behaviors decrease. Reduction of these self-defeating behaviors continues post-graduation, with greatest improvement shown at the 12-month follow-up assessment.
These results suggest that Aspen Education Group's wilderness therapy programs are teaching important emotion regulation skills, as well as providing a climate for adolescents to rehearse newly acquired strategies to manage negative emotions such as worry, sadness, and anger. Overall findings provide considerable support for the use of wilderness therapy programs in treating resistant adolescents.
Research conducted by: Ellen Behrens, Ph.D., Canyon Research & Consulting, Inc.; Sarah (Salli) Lewis, Ph.D. and Ellen Leen-Feldner, Center for Research, Assessment, and Treatment Efficacy and Arkansas Institute of Developmental Science; Keith Russell, Ph.D., Outdoor Behavioral Healthcare Research Cooperative, University of Minnesota.
-
Dear lord in Heaven. In a fraction of the time you people spend in a circle jerk with Who, you could go get the damn facts and post them. Course, by page 2, he knew that any rational person had stopped reading and only got his propoganda.
1999 Behrens Clinical Director for Youth care
http://cache.zoominfo.com/cachedpage/?a ... me=Behrens (http://cache.zoominfo.com/cachedpage/?archive_id=0&page_id=97347972&page_url=%2f%2fwww.bridgetounderstanding.com%2fcgi-bin%2finfoforum.cgi%3fread%3d260&page_last_updated=3%2f18%2f2001+10%3a59%3a38+AM&firstName=Ellen&lastName=Behrens)
2002 Founded Canyon Research
http://canyonrc.com/experience.html (http://canyonrc.com/experience.html)
2003 - 2005 Behrens conducting surveys
http://www.strugglingteens.com/news/pre ... 060817.htm (http://www.strugglingteens.com/news/press%20releases/natsap060817.htm)
2004 Behrens doing Consulting for AEG
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 0626.shtml (http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/publish/TheMapTerritoryES_070626.shtml)
2006 Behrens completes her survey results passed off as Independent Study
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5360.shtml (http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/publish/article_5360.shtml)
"We also tried to eliminate all students discharged from the programs before graduation because the clinical staff thought it was actually an inappropriate placement, or when they felt the program couldn't be helpful to the child. As a result, the operating assumption of the study is that the students included in the analyzed data were those who were appropriately placed."
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5494.shtml (http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/publish/article_5494.shtml)
Comment: ....It would be helpful to know more about Dr. Behren’s research design and methodology. I presume she drew a random sample for the study; otherwise, the results cannot be generalized to the school/residential population at large.
Jerry W Clark
Dba Behavioral Services Ltd
Reno, NV
No Jerry, she didn't. Families from 9 Aspen programs participated in her "study". She and all her staff have links to Aspen programs.
http://www.natsap.org/Behrens.doc (http://www.natsap.org/Behrens.doc)
Jan Moss applies the "study" of 9 Aspen programs to entire industry
Disclosure Statement: Aspen Education Group provided funding for this study.
http://www.natsap.org/Outcome%20Study.doc (http://www.natsap.org/Outcome%20Study.doc)
2006 Behrens is a contributor to NATSAPs "Journal of Therapeutic Schools and Programs.
http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/p ... 5456.shtml (http://www.strugglingteens.com/artman/publish/printer_5456.shtml)
ASPEN EDUCATION GROUP APPLAUDS STUDY
(April 26, 2007) According to an article on PRNewswire, Elliot Sainer, President of Aspen Education Group (AEG), Cerritos, CA, announced "AEG is extremely pleased to learn of the very positive findings from the final phase of our industry's first long-term, multi-year clinical study on the effectiveness of private therapeutic residential programs for adolescents. AEG will continue to advocate for new industry research that will further illustrate and promote the best practices and methodologies and enhance our industry's abilities to produce positive and long-lasting results in adolescent therapeutic education."
I guess he was pleased. He paid her to present AEG in the best possible light
-
Here are some of the results of the study:
Social conflict and aggressive behaviors decrease. Reduction of these self-defeating behaviors continues post-graduation, with greatest improvement shown at the 12-month follow-up assessment.
These results suggest that Aspen Education Group's wilderness therapy programs are teaching important emotion regulation skills, as well as providing a climate for adolescents to rehearse newly acquired strategies to manage negative emotions such as worry, sadness, and anger. Overall findings provide considerable support for the use of wilderness therapy programs in treating resistant adolescents.
Research conducted by: Ellen Behrens, Ph.D., Canyon Research & Consulting, Inc.; Sarah (Salli) Lewis, Ph.D. and Ellen Leen-Feldner, Center for Research, Assessment, and Treatment Efficacy and Arkansas Institute of Developmental Science; Keith Russell, Ph.D., Outdoor Behavioral Healthcare Research Cooperative, University of Minnesota.
Your wasting your time with these little rich resentful brats. Just get ready to donate and lets get them into court. Start garnering anything they have said that is pornographic and preferrably slander per se. Each program go back over the last few years and copy comments made about you. The Attorney will file in the 10th District and will join the other cases.
Center for Anti Defamation of Youth Workers.note: Are you interested in helping our society, stay posted, we will have a web site soon Center for Anti Defamation of Professional Youth Workers
We are going to get a seasoned civil rights attorney and who ever donates a certain amount will have access to our strategies and tactics to shut down Michael Crawford's little Fornit Defamers and their overall revenge insurgency against some good folks.
This dirty mouthed little punk Che was afraid of the big bad streets of Redlands, because deep down he is a boob and yet he uses profanity that his name sake Che Guevara would consider childish. Keep your conversation going with him he will finally loose it and start talking about having sex with farm animals. Ursus thinks he is really funny and cute and admires his cruddy little mouth.Anti Defamation Society.
-
Jan Moss applies the "study" of 9 Aspen programs to entire industry
Disclosure Statement: Aspen Education Group provided funding for this study.
http://www.natsap.org/Outcome%20Study.doc (http://www.natsap.org/Outcome%20Study.doc)
Most here agree that all programs are alike. So if you have a successful outcome study from 9 programs then it is safe to assume it applies across the board.
This is very encouraging that the studies are finally getting done.