Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Anonymous on September 28, 2009, 01:44:01 PM
-
I think programs help troubled teens. There are many Fornits members who are not open to that school of thought.
-
depends on how you define "help" and "troubled". The truth is that if the troubled parents would get help for themselves way before their kids become "troubled" there would be no need for "programs".
The problem with "programs" is that it is the kids who are punished for major parental fuck-ups. This breeds a whole host of more "troubling" issues: rage at the injustice, abandonment at the realization when they leave what a waste it was because they are usually warehoused and not educated. It is a one-size fits all "solution" for a while community of people who have distinctly different needs, learning styles and problems.
-
I think programs help troubled teens. There are many Fornits members who are not open to that school of thought.
They reject that school of thought because they have knowledge of programs. They have gone through the programs and understand them much better than an individual who only puts kids in programs. Programs may help people like you financially but there is damned sure no evidence that programs help teens, troubled or otherwise.
-
I think it is a win, win gold mind for any parents who actually do have a child who needs help because these places are presently filled with kids whose only problem is misinformed or screwed up parents. So if your kid is acting out then sending them to a program would be ideal because they will be around very well adjusted kids who have never done drugs or broke the law and are excelling academically which would be a great model for your children to be exposed to. I believe this is the main reason that over 95% of the kids do extremely well after graduating.
-
There are parents who the best job they can. In addition, there are children who make choices that ultimately place them in programs. It is not always the parents fault. Children should take responsibility for their actions. This is a point of view a majority of Fornits members are not willing to entertain.
-
to the above two posters. WOW! you are misinformed. I'd like to know what constitutes "extremely well", how, and for how long the program keeps track of the students after graduation. If the success rate is as high as you say, why doesnt the entire world just create more programs just like it? hmmmmm......
there are some programs that do help troubled teens. and in case you havnt noticed, they are not listed anywhere on this site for a reason - because they are honest organizations that do more than just help kids.
for wildernesses, there's Outward Bound and National Outdoor Leadership School (NOLS). they both have excellent reputations and a history spanning back three or four decades. They are wilderness schools first, catering to all ages, from teens to geriatrics. They mainly cater to normal, un-troubled individuals, but they both have programs for troubled teens. I could imagine that sailing the carribian, trekking through alaska or patagonia, riding horseback through mongolia, climbing the rockies or paddling the boundary waters would be alot more therapeutic than anything offered by the programs and wildernesses that are ever mentioned on fornits. They are therapeutic to normal people - not just troubled teens - which is why they exist in the first place. What's particularly interesting about these NOLS and OB, that to my knowledge, they have some programs where both the parents and the teen take part in an expedition, partially separated and partially together.
Then theres a whole variety of support groups. some are run by religious institutions, but most of them are non-religious regardless of affiliation. There are summer camps geared towards troubled teens. There are mentoring programs. There is private therapy. there are a million options for troubled teens that dont involve brainwashing, warehousing, and abuse. We dont take an issue with those institutions because they present no problems.
-
Boulder Creek Academy and CALO are good programs. They help kids.
-
Boulder Creek Academy and CALO are good programs. They help kids.
that would be a Negative
-
Boulder Creek Academy and CALO are good programs. They help kids.
that would be a Negative
Do you have proof CALO doesn't help troubled teens?
-
Boulder Creek Academy and CALO are good programs. They help kids.
that would be a Negative
Do you have proof CALO doesn't help troubled teens?
Do you have proof that CALO does help troubled teens?
Usually when someone offers a product for consumer consumption, which claims to help a certain segment of the population, proof is offered as to the claims of its efficacy.
Where is proof of CALO's efficacy?
-
So there is no proof it does and no proof that it does not. So typically a person requests advice from professionals or those who have had kids that went thru the process. The knee jerk reaction would be to call the school and ask to speak to other parents who have kids there so that you can ask them questions about the program and weigh the risks and/or determine if it is a good fit for your family.
-
I think it is a win, win gold mind for any parents
Its much more of a win, win gold mine (not mind) for the people who own and invest in these all fro profit places
So if your kid is acting out then sending them to a program would be ideal because they will be around very well adjusted kids who have never done drugs or broke the law and are excelling academically which would be a great model for your children to be exposed to
Except that the "well-adjusted" kids are quickly twisted out of alignment in the programs and are more pissed at the injustice. At least the not so "well-adjusted" know they did something that made their parents want to get rid of them.
-
I think it is a win, win gold mind for any parents
Its much more of a win, win gold mine (not mind) for the people who own and invest in these all fro profit places
So if your kid is acting out then sending them to a program would be ideal because they will be around very well adjusted kids who have never done drugs or broke the law and are excelling academically which would be a great model for your children to be exposed to
Except that the "well-adjusted" kids are quickly twisted out of alignment in the programs and are more pissed at the injustice. At least the not so "well-adjusted" know they did something that made their parents want to get rid of them.
No, I dont agree here. The well adjusted kids are unphased by all of it and just focus in on their academics and serve as a good model to the kids who are acting out and at-risk. This is good exposure for the well adjusted kids because it pulls them out of their books just enough for them to experience life around them. It serves as a very good balance for everyone.
-
So there is no proof it does and no proof that it does not. So typically a person requests advice from professionals or those who have had kids that went thru the process. The knee jerk reaction would be to call the school and ask to speak to other parents who have kids there so that you can ask them questions about the program and weigh the risks and/or determine if it is a good fit for your family.
It costs a lot of money to send your child to CALO. It doesn't cost a dime to not send him or her. Big difference. How does CALO justify its asking price? Where is the proof of CALO's efficacy?
CALO engages in a pretense of operating within the mental health field. Shouldn't it have to offer proof of the success of its methodology? Perhaps more importantly, shouldn't it have to offer proof of its inability to inflict harm? Remember,
First, Do No Harm.[/list]
-
I think programs help troubled teens. There are many Fornits members who are not open to that school of thought.
Defined "programs", "help" and "troubled". If they're like most of the program discussed on fornits, no. They don't help. Even if they're "non-abusive"** and don't practices thought reform, you can't change a person in the long term unless they don't want to change themselves. No matter how many graduates you claim are saved, that's anecdotal evidence and there are no independent studies done showing that residential treatment or wilderness or whatever actually works.
Boulder Creek Academy and CALO are good programs. They help kids.
that would be a Negative
Do you have proof CALO doesn't help troubled teens?
But see there, you're reversing the burden of proof. Imagine if I went out and advertised perfumed toilet water (or at the very least plain water) as disinfectant brand A. You claim it doesn't work. I then point to my many happy testimonials from customers who swear by the stuff. You ask for studies. I ask for studies that it doesn't work. All this is avoid the simple fact that it's still fucking toilet water... or snake oil, or whatever.
If you want to be honest, instead of pulling a sucess rate number out of you ass, say "I can't prove it works, but I believe it does." (of course no program is this honest since they couldn't compete against the schools that were lying about success and gaining parents as a result)
** this would require you to believe that forcing a person into confinement, often violently, without due process, is not abusive.
-
No, I dont agree here. The well adjusted kids are unphased by all of it and just focus in on their academics and serve as a good model to the kids who are acting out and at-risk. This is good exposure for the well adjusted kids because it pulls them out of their books just enough for them to experience life around them. It serves as a very good balance for everyone.
You are assuming there are academics at these places. The truth is that the education is subpar, usually taught by unlicensed, uncertificated staff with nobody caring or requiring lesson plans etc. Kids are not allowed enough time to get into their books so ther is nothing to pull them out. They re too busy doing meaningless menial tasks or being ripped apart in raps, in "profeet" type workshops. No way do they let any kid have time on their own to "get into" anything.
I do agree that it would be good for "troubled" ( I mean kids who have troubles, not are troubles)
to have exposure to 'well-adjusted" kids I think that can be done without imprisoning the "well-adjusted" kids. If its such a good idea then why don't we lock you up (assuming you are "well-adjusted" ) so you can be a good example to bubba and his crew? You will be unphased by it all and be a good role model. It will pull you out just enough to experience life around you.
-
I know 5 CALO graduates who have nothing but positive things to say about CALO.
-
I know 5 CALO graduates who have nothing but positive things to say about CALO.
And that's still anecdotal evidence.
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=28779#p346520 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=28779#p346520)
-
Hello,
I was reading this thread earlier. It is clear many of you still have anger towards abusive programs. CALO was established by professionals who have a record of helping troubled teens become successful in life. CALO graduates hold steady jobs, have good relationships with their parents and are drug/alcohol free. I am saddened by the anger you have towards staff that helped you.
Landon Kirk
-
You are assuming there are academics at these places. The truth is that the education is subpar, usually taught by unlicensed, uncertificated staff with nobody caring or requiring lesson plans etc. Kids are not allowed enough time to get into their books so ther is nothing to pull them out. They re too busy doing meaningless menial tasks or being ripped apart in raps, in "profeet" type workshops. No way do they let any kid have time on their own to "get into" anything.
The schools not only provide an education they bring kids up to their highest level. 95% of the Kids get accepted to their first or second choice of college and some classes have attained 100%.
I do agree that it would be good for "troubled" ( I mean kids who have troubles, not are troubles)
to have exposure to 'well-adjusted" kids I think that can be done without imprisoning the "well-adjusted" kids. If its such a good idea then why don't we lock you up (assuming you are "well-adjusted" ) so you can be a good example to bubba and his crew? You will be unphased by it all and be a good role model. It will pull you out just enough to experience life around you.
Yes, but it is good for the ones who are struggling and the ones who are not get plenty of time to do what they do well... study and get ready for college.
-
I know 5 CALO graduates who have nothing but positive things to say about CALO.
And that's still anecdotal evidence.
It is, I agree, but there is nothing wrong with anecdotal evidence in the absence of any other types. It is widely used and accepted here on fornits.
-
I know CALO #17 lies about CALO. He wants to paint a bad picture for the school which helps the "fornits cause."
-
I know CALO #17 lies about CALO. He wants to paint a bad picture for the school which helps the "fornits cause."
are you a student at CALO?
-
Geesh, people. This thread is simply TheWho's response to gettting fully owned in the Aspen threads du jour. All he wants is to muddy the waters here and let the Aspen topics fade back into the pack. So he engages you on a topic so stupid that it makes everyone who replies seriously to it look stupid, which is his plan. Good luck with that. But I'd rather you spend this time in the Aspen threads, which are meritorious in a factual sense, and keep bashing this guy's head in where it matters. For him this thread is just to catch his breath and have a drink before he goes back to work.
He loves Aspen more than he loved his now deceased child, folks. Hit him where it hurts, right in the Aspens.
-
Doesn't matter. We have this nifty thing here in America called the Constitution. Maybe you should pick up a copy. Pay special attention to the parts regarding the right to security of person and possessions (4th amendment), the right to be protected against cruel and unusual punishment (8th amendment), and the right to equal protection under the law. (14th amendment) Whether or not the programs are "good" for teens doesn't matter. They're unconstitutional. End of debate, fuck you, thanks for trying.
And don't be fooled by the supposedly "compassionate liberal" fucksticks who tell you the programs are for the "common good". Guess who else operated re-education camps for the "common good". Mao, asshole. He also killed 30 million people. And you know who else valued (or claimed to value) the common good over the basic human rights of individuals? Nearly every self-serving, genocidal despot in the history of human civilization.
Anyone who supports programs doesn't support freedom, and is ultimately an anti-individualistic, sociopathic asshole. Why don't you just move to China and see how well this sort of shit works if you like it so much?
-
The right to security of person and possessions
This applies if you kid is stealing stuff from the house and selling it for drug money.
the right to be protected against cruel and unusual punishment
This applies to parents having to endure hours of an out of control kid screaming until 3 am because they dont want to live by the family rules.
and the right to equal protection under the law.
This applies to the siblings of the at risk kid who should be protected from hypos being scattered about the living room.
So bottom line is the programs insure that everyone’s rights are protected. Without them this would be no better than China where people don’t care about each other’s rights.
-
If your 'child' (I put the word child in quotes because chances are he's a biological adult and no I don't give a fuck what the government says on the subject so don't try that "he's not 18" bullshit here) he should be tried, sentenced, and if found guilty, sent to a traditional correctional facility. Instead, you jumped the gun, denied him his right to a fair trail, (6th amendment) and subjected him to much more brutal treatment than any correctional facility, including adult prisons. (8th and 14th) Instead of doing things right, you assume that you're special and the rules don't apply to you. Of course, if you weren't an abject failure as a parent, as well as a probable mental defective, maybe you wouldn't have these problems.
-
Fucking define help. Do you mean learning to do all that others demand? How to "behave"? pfftttt..... :bs:
-
If your 'child' (I put the word child in quotes because chances are he's a biological adult and no I don't give a fuck what the government says on the subject so don't try that "he's not 18" bullshit here) he should be tried, sentenced, and if found guilty, sent to a traditional correctional facility. Instead, you jumped the gun, denied him his right to a fair trail, (6th amendment) and subjected him to much more brutal treatment than any correctional facility, including adult prisons. (8th and 14th) Instead of doing things right, you assume that you're special and the rules don't apply to you. Of course, if you weren't an abject failure as a parent, as well as a probable mental defective, maybe you wouldn't have these problems.
Ask any kid you know if they would rather be in a correctional facility, prison or a program and every single one would choose a program hands down. Hell they can all go to prison if they just break the rules in the program, break into the offices at night and destroy stuff ec. But they chose to stay and get an education and better themselves than go to prison.
You have a lot to learn my friend.
-
Whooter, your arguments are tissue-thin. Really, how many kids in programs were such bad addicts they left "hypos laying around the livingroom"? I'd wager very, very few, if any. And if they this bad off, why would you send them to a program and not a hospital? It just doesn't make sense. And then we get down to the brass tacks: Your programs (Aspen programs) don't provide any treatment. They argued in court using an expert witness to dispute the assertion that they provide treatment.
You've been hard at it for days now. Obsessing. Compulsing. You've gotten too sloppy with too much on your plate. Aspen already admitted they don't do therapy or treatment, so why send a kid there?
-
I think all those with some brain power realize that these programs do not help kids.
For you kids out there, if your parents sent you to the programs for simple offensives, truancy, and one time events, then they deserve what you say about them, and you deserve to be angry. I just can't imagine that a parent would do this. That is why I have a hard time believing what you say.
In many cases there is a real risk of someone getting hurt or killed. If you were out there committing crimes, actual crimes, or stringing some other poor kid out on drugs, then you are there because you got yourself there. Your parents probably turned to a program as a last final resort because they knew where you were headed, jail. So think what you want, but if you think a program is worse than jail, then get sent there and report back to us in 10 years.
CALO will claim they have helped, but when cornered, Iike I have cornered them, they quickly crumble. They don't provide anything to demonstrate that their model actually works. They refuse to demonstrate to the parents proof their model works, they have even admitted their model is new and unproven, they will never disclose financial information regarding their program, and they don't have to unless a judge orders or the IRS audits. Still, it may not be made public information. But so what, we all know why it's so expensive and we know parents will pay anything to help a child if they really love them. Whether you think it's right or wrong. CALO knows we know too, but they can tell us to go pound sand until we make them disclose it.
You all moan about the loopholes and cite your constitutional rights and arguments etc etc, but the fact is that most states consider you the parents property (for the lack of a better term) unless you commit adult crimes. This is shitty for you, but actual real life for the rest of us who have paid our dues. Maybe you should consider doing something about this, the law is the law, if you have problems with it, then change it, close the loopholes you detest so much. Decide for yourself if you are a person that's going to sit on the sidelines or a person that will take action. Be careful though, make sure you take action that is legal or else you'll have more consequences to gripe about. There is a process in this country for you to take, so do it, make it happen and running away isn't the answer.
If you are criminals and have done criminal things, you belong there, or possibly even jail. if you have not, then I don't think you belong there, it's simple. What isn't simple is how other parents feel about this and what their position is or what their morality is. Until you are 18, your parents direction counts for something. But don't expect society to put up with further criminal behavior if that is where you are headed.
Get up and take action if you are as smart, intelligent, dedicated and motivated as you say you are. If you are serious, adults will take you seriously. If your acting like a spoiled brat, adults will treat you as such.
CG
-
For you kids out there, if your parents sent you to the programs for simple offensives, truancy, and one time events, then they deserve what you say about them, and you deserve to be angry. I just can't imagine that a parent would do this. That is why I have a hard time believing what you say.
Did you send your kid to a program?
-
CALO will claim they have helped, but when cornered, Iike I have cornered them, they quickly crumble. They don't provide anything to demonstrate that their model actually works. They refuse to demonstrate to the parents proof their model works, they have even admitted their model is new and unproven, they will never disclose financial information regarding their program, and they don't have to unless a judge orders or the IRS audits. Still, it may not be made public information. But so what, we all know why it's so expensive and we know parents will pay anything to help a child if they really love them. Whether you think it's right or wrong. CALO knows we know too, but they can tell us to go pound sand until we make them disclose it.
Good point but don't you think this is the kind of footwork a parent do should BEFORE they ship their kid off? If parents would do their homework, a lot of these places would not be ("non" :rofl: ) profitable enough to open or keep open. Problem is they, like you, ship 'em out first, ask questions later.
-
If your 'child' (I put the word child in quotes because chances are he's a biological adult and no I don't give a fuck what the government says on the subject so don't try that "he's not 18" bullshit here) he should be tried, sentenced, and if found guilty, sent to a traditional correctional facility. Instead, you jumped the gun, denied him his right to a fair trail, (6th amendment) and subjected him to much more brutal treatment than any correctional facility, including adult prisons. (8th and 14th) Instead of doing things right, you assume that you're special and the rules don't apply to you. Of course, if you weren't an abject failure as a parent, as well as a probable mental defective, maybe you wouldn't have these problems.
Ask any kid you know if they would rather be in a correctional facility, prison or a program and every single one would choose a program hands down.
It's an easy way to get out of the just (due process, jury of peers) punishment. Sure they would love it... until they try the program and realize they often play for keeps fare more than any correctional institution does. Some on Fornits have been to both and "hands down" they prefer the prison as the more "humane" solution. I can't agree more with "RandomInternetPaultard" here.
Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. Their very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be ‘cured’ against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level with those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals. But to be punished, however severely, because we have deserved it, because we ‘ought to have known better’, is to be treated as a human person made in God’s image. - C.S. Lewis
In prison they don't try to change your ideals without your knowledge and consent. You're free to disagree with the system and express that disagreement. You're free to hold yourself as innocent, without being forced to confess in order to leave. You're provided with due process, free representation, a jury of peers. You can communicate freely with the outside world. You're free to choose your friends. You can have personal property and a far greater degree of privacy than in a program where every word you utter or jot down is scrutinized. These are the things that are truly important; the sanctity of self and of free thought, not superficial creature comforts.
Hell they can all go to prison if they just break the rules in the program, break into the offices at night and destroy stuff ec. But they chose to stay and get an education and better themselves than go to prison.
And since when can't people educate themselves in prison? Last I checked prisons had libraries, prisoners could own their own books (of their choice), etc. What many programs (and by program i mean Synanon derived nonprofessional therapy cult) specialize in is re-education, indoctrination, and flat out thought reform. Schooling takes a back-burner and is often held as a "privilege" to be earned by conforming not just in action, but in thought, to the arbitrary ideals of the program.
-
no no no. you guys have it all wrong.
first you go to a program
THEN you go to jail.
It's kinda like graduating.
Don't worry, the program will prep you for it. That's what they're getting paid for.
-
In an ideal situation and in an pefect world, doing your homework, gathering the data, getting testimonials, pros and cons etc etc, before sending a child to a program would be the best case scenario. I can expect that this process could take in the range of 6 months to a year or longer.
However, it is never an ideal situation when you are challenged the most and when lives are at risk. Most people that have lived life beyond the teen years know that your challenge will come when you are least prepared and at the worst time you can imagine. That is why people should hope for the best and prepare for the worst.
If someone was dying of a heart attack, I wouldn't sit around and consult a medical book, call some friends and ask them what to do, wait for a couple of weeks to get testimonials, I'd just call an ambulance, give the poor soul some CPR and hope for the best. But if it's their time, then no matter what we do, it's their time. Some people don't want help and just can't be helped, but and here's what many don't understand. Let's forget about the morality of the issue because we all know no one will agree on that, it is our LEGAL obligation to do so as well.
Parents are thrown into impossible situations sometimes. If you discipline your child, Ken will call you an abuser and the child needs to contact DCFS, your teachers at school will encourage this, and even make the report for you. If you let your child run wild, neighbors call DCFS and your other children are pulled out of the house. If the wild child does something illegal or commits an adult crime, the state can charge the parents as well as the kid for certain offences.
But with that said, you're assuming all parents just send kids off to camp as a knee-jerk decision. Some parents didn't really have a choice in the matter to begin with. Choices have to be made and the squeaky wheel doesn't always get the oil.
I agree also that in jail you may have more freedoms than in a program, but you will be brainwashed there too. Gangs will do it for you and you won't have a choice, you'll hook up or die. You can even become a jailhouse attorney, but all your clients will be locked up with you.
In a program, you may only stay for a year or two. In jail, you may stay for life, risk rape and/or death on a daily basis. But hell, some people need to be told what to do 24/7, and actually forced to do it, way beyond what your programs do. Jail will virtually guarantee you turn out to be a career criminal, then we are on the concealed carry argument again.
So choose well. Remember at 18 you'll be free to choose whatever path you like. But don't complain to us when a judge hands down a 30 year sentence.
A judge won't care about your teenage belief system, your arguments, brusing your inner-child or taking he punishment out of relationships. Your parents will be devastated to see you go, but hell, what do we know, we are the reason you got there in the first place, right?
All Excuses. Grow up, get an education and become something useful to future generations, If you can't do that, join the military and let them help you if you can't stay self-disciplined.
CG
-
If someone was dying of a heart attack
ROFL.. that is the most asinine analogy Ive ever heard.
If you feel like the urgency of your teen's "situation" compares to the urgency of a heart attack, then they ALSO belong in a fucking hospital. At least for 72 hours observation. Certainly not shipped off to a program.
If they aren't 5150, then the heart-attack comparison doesn't even apply. Apples and oldsmobiles.
Stupid motherfucker. :beat:
-
If someone was dying of a heart attack
ROFL.. that is the most asinine analogy Ive ever heard.
If you feel like the urgency of your teen's "situation" compares to the urgency of a heart attack, then they ALSO belong in a fucking hospital. At least for 72 hours observation. Certainly not shipped off to a program.
If they aren't 5150, then the heart-attack comparison doesn't even apply. Apples and oldsmobiles.
Stupid motherfucker. :beat:
You dont need to take it literally Courious George isnt saying they are identical he is making a comparison between the two to help support a point he is trying to make. As in a person having a heart attack people standing around are not going to discuss the best hospital or form of treatment, ... the same with a program. Parents, although have more time, dont typically have 6 months to a year to become educated on the industry and find the perfect placement or even determine if the child needs to be placed.
-
Programs help troubled teens who have suicidal tendencies.
-
Programs help troubled teens who have suicidal tendencies.
Programs create suicidal tendencies in teens, who may or may not be troubled.
It may also create suicidal tendencies in their parents, once they realize what their kids went through.
-
1,500 teenagers commit suicide every year without ever seeing a program.
-
1,500 teenagers commit suicide every year without ever seeing a program.
Are you simply stating a "fact," or are you attempting to actually say something?
-
1,500 teenagers commit suicide every year without ever seeing a program.
Only if their levels are over 9000 and they are using only 2% of their power.
"Amma chargin mah lazer!"
-
1,500 teenagers commit suicide every year without ever seeing a program.
Are you simply stating a fact, or are you attempting to actually say something?
Thanks Eliscu2 for the info:
My point was that we havent seen any evidence which connects suicides to programs or evidence which ties back these events to root cause in the absence of a note or communication of some type.
-
1,500 teenagers commit suicide every year without ever seeing a program.
I have studied Teen Suicide statistics, infact all suicide statistics are formatted the same way.
Demographics are broken down by Age, Race, Gender, State and Method.
Infact....... go google suicide statistics and come back here with the real #'s
There is no data collected on whether they were brainwashed in a program or not.
example:
http://http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/suicide-in-the-us-statistics-and-prevention/index.shtml
In 2006, suicide was the third leading cause of death for young people ages 15 to 24.1 Of every 100,000 young people in each age group, the following number died by suicide:1
Children ages 10 to 14 — 1.3 per 100,000
Adolescents ages 15 to 19 — 8.2 per 100,000
Young adults ages 20 to 24 — 12.5 per 100,000
As in the general population, young people were much more likely to use firearms, suffocation, and poisoning than other methods of suicide, overall. However, while adolescents and young adults were more likely to use firearms than suffocation, children were dramatically more likely to use suffocation.1
There were also gender differences in suicide among young people, as follows:
:smashcomp:
Over four times as many males as females ages 15 to 19 died by suicide.1
More than six times as many males as females ages 20 to 24 died by suicide.1
Maybe he got confused and meant heart attacks?
Some argue that around 70% of teens who try to commit suicide do it by heart attack.
Another interesting fact is that the main cause of fatalities in this country is death.
-
Maybe he got confused and meant heart attacks?
Some argue that around 70% of teens who try to commit suicide do it by heart attack.
Another interesting fact is that the main cause of fatalities in this country is death.
Castle, When reading analogies you need to try to understand the point which is trying to be made. If it isn’t clear than a good approach is to ask for clarification.
If I said “I trust Mike like I would Abe Lincoln” It doesn’t mean that Mike wears a stove top hat or Mike believes that slaves should be free or even that Mike has a beard. It refers to the connection that Abe Lincoln was honest and he feels Mike is too. There are many connections to lincoln and it can be a challenge sometimes to figure out which characteristic is being selected for referenced.
Curious George wasn’t saying that having a heart attack is the same as going to a program he was referring to the urgency (or time element) of the event (it is time sensitive). There is very little time for a parent to come up to speed from knowing nothing about programs to getting to the point where most of us are here on fornits as far as knowledge goes. So expecting parents to spend a year researching programs while their son or daughter get worse is like discussing treatment options while a person lies on the floor with a heart attack.
The analogy works and conveys the message of urgency.
-
Maybe he got confused and meant heart attacks?
Some argue that around 70% of teens who try to commit suicide do it by heart attack.
Another interesting fact is that the main cause of fatalities in this country is death.
Castle, When reading analogies you need to try to understand the point which is trying to be made. If it isn’t clear than a good approach is to ask for clarification.
If I said “I trust Mike like I would Abe Lincoln” It doesn’t mean that Mike wears a stove top hat or Mike believes that slaves should be free or even that Mike has a beard. It refers to the connection that Abe Lincoln was honest and he feels Mike is too. There are many connections to lincoln and it can be a challenge sometimes to figure out which characteristic is being selected for referenced.
Curious George wasn’t saying that having a heart attack is the same as going to a program he was referring to the urgency (or time element) of the event (it is time sensitive). There is very little time for a parent to come up to speed from knowing nothing about programs to getting to the point where most of us are here on fornits as far as knowledge goes. So expecting parents to spend a year researching programs while their son or daughter get worse is like discussing treatment options while a person lies on the floor with a heart attack.
The analogy works and conveys the message of urgency.
You know what your problem is? You have no sense of humor.
Well, that and your concept of analogy is as flawed as your double's.
Also, there's your general fucktardedness regarding conflating analogy with hyperbole. The only thing they happen to have in common in this case is that they are both totally devoid of any meaning whatsoever.
But that's about it. If I come up with anything else, I'll be sure to let you know.
-
My point was that we haven't seen any evidence which connects suicides to programs
Duh. Corporations will not allow access to records to audit for program effectiveness or to study correlation to resulting suicide, post traumatic stress disorder, depression, etc.
And don't give me the crap about HIPAA regulations. Just don't. Reputable studies are done all the time in which identifying personal data is stripped out. And no reputable institutions have done proper research with a research group and a control group to compare outcomes. Why? Because corporate programs will not participate. They only participate in studies they commission with students they select. Wildly biased data. They produce marketing data, not mental health outcomes data.
And vulnerable parents swallow it hook, line and sinker.
Auntie Em
-
You know what your problem is? You have no sense of humor.
Well, that and your concept of analogy is as flawed as your double's.
Also, there's your general fucktardedness regarding conflating analogy with hyperbole. The only thing they happen to have in common in this case is that they are both totally devoid of any meaning whatsoever.
But that's about it. If I come up with anything else, I'll be sure to let you know.
You may be right that I missed the humor in one of your previous posts. But it did appear that you didnt understand the anology, at least that is how I read it. I am glad you see CG's point. I sometimes think that parents are given a really raw deal on fornits.
-
I am glad you see CG's point. I sometimes think that parents are given a really raw deal on fornits.
What the fuck? Your reading comprehension is as shitty as your understanding of analogy.
I understood the analogy perfectly. However, you and curious george have no fucking clue.
Pay attention class: Urgency for heart attack: NOT equal to: urgency for pain in ass teenager... UNLESS teenager = 5150. If 5150 TRUE, THEN go hospital, ELSE stop panicking your fussy ass off and put some time into what to do with your fucking kid.
Plainspeak. It's not as fucking urgent as a heart attack, and warrants time when deciding what to do, whereas a heart attack does not.
I fail for even taking the time to spell this out, but not as much as the bobsey twins over here for thinking this was even a valid analogy. To think that using a piss poor exaggeration like that would excuse them from not doing enough research.
Pathetic.
I have a better idea... why don't we stop analogizing what it's like to be a parent of a teenager altogether? Especially when the future of said teenager is in question. How about addressing it directly instead of conflating it with something that bears absolutely no resemblance to this situation?
-
My point was that we haven't seen any evidence which connects suicides to programs
Duh. Corporations will not allow access to records to audit for program effectiveness or to study correlation to resulting suicide, post traumatic stress disorder, depression, etc.
I think we agree here, AuntieEm, I would like to see the studies which show the correlation to success also, but the studies just are not being done. So just like we dont have the data to show the "success rates" on many of these places we also dont have any correlation to suicide, depression so how can we tie the suicides back to a specific event like the program or family issue or girlfriend break up, family medical history etc.
But to just chose one haphazardly is reckless.
-
YA what she said! :notworthy:
so what I am reading is in the absence of data or facts you just make it up?
-
Programs saved my life. I was a violent troubled teen and staff provided me with tools to be successful.
-
Programs saved my life. I was a violent troubled teen and staff provided me with tools to be successful.
Can you be specific about what tools you were given and how they helped? I mean really specific?
-
Most of these programs, whether they actually spell it out or not, use group peer pressure as a means of control, as well as a means of projecting "the program" down kids' throats.
Group peer pressure -- in such an environment, where there is no escaping it -- is actually a form of program-sanctioned bullying, regardless of whether you call it "positive peer culture," a "supportive therapeutic milieu," "brother's keeper," or what have you. The basic gist of it all boils down to the kid having no choice over whether or not to participate (if s/he wants to progress in the program and get the hell out of there), and the group-think being enforced by more or less the entire environment of peers.
Bullying does have a statistical correlation with increased risk of suicide.
-
I was raped, fucked in the ass and made to suck cock in a program.
-
How about addressing it directly instead of conflating it with something that bears absolutely no resemblance to this situation?
I think the connection you miss is that an analogy isn’t a direct or 1 to 1 comparison. The need to respond to a heart attack is measured in minutes as is a 5150. So you are right that they both need the same attention in the same time frame and therefore a direct comparison. To express this comparison you would not need an analogy because the reaction time is the same and the time frame is the same.
An analogy compares two things which are not alike but have something in common (in this case they are both time sensitive or need to be reacted upon). But other than that they are different. Although the time frame is different when a parent has a child in crisis they have a few days or weeks to react (heart attack a few seconds or minutes to react). The parents do not have the luxury of 6 months to a year to determine the best course for their son or daughter.
This was the point CG was making.
-
So, CG, you really think it would take 6 months to a year (the length of many program stays) to do the homework necessary to make a decsion about whether or not to send your kid there?
How long did it take you to "corner" CALO? and make them "crumble"? How long did it take you to get them to admit their model is new and unproven? You complained that they did not do anything to demonstrate that their model works and refuse to provide proof that the model works...your words. How long did it take you to ferret out that info? 6 months? A year? I doubt it. Things move fast when you are truly motivated. Ok, I'll help you out here. You can do it in a phone call or two.
1. What exactly is your model?
2. What are your methods?
3. How do they work?
4. What is your proof?
5. Can I see a demonstration?
6. How long have you been using this model and these methods?
Also, since insufficient punishment seems to be a sticking point with you, "How and when do you punish the kids? You get the point.
Simple questions, a phone call or two and I just saved you 6 months to a year.
-
How about addressing it directly instead of conflating it with something that bears absolutely no resemblance to this situation?
I think the connection you miss is that an analogy isn’t a direct or 1 to 1 comparison. The need to respond to a heart attack is measured in minutes as is a 5150. So you are right that they both need the same attention in the same time frame and therefore a direct comparison. To express this comparison you would not need an analogy because the reaction time is the same and the time frame is the same.
An analogy compares two things which are not alike but have something in common (in this case they are both time sensitive or need to be reacted upon). But other than that they are different. Although the time frame is different when a parent has a child in crisis they have a few days or weeks to react (heart attack a few seconds or minutes to react). The parents do not have the luxury of 6 months to a year to determine the best course for their son or daughter.
This was the point CG was making.
Allow me to be more concise.
The two scenarios have nothing in common. Not.. one.. thing. Therefore, bad analogy.
-
For CG: what questions did you ask before you sent your kid to CALO?
What answers did you get and what about those answers made you feel it was a good idea to go through with it.
-
Curious George should get stove-piped in the ass by a horse. That would help Curious George relax.
-
Therapist: Hello Mr. Myers what I think is best is to recommend that Jimmy be placed in a residential treatment program, Somplace where he will be safe from others and himself.
Dad:What is this place a school of some type?
Therapist: Yes, sort of, they provide therapy and specialize in the types of needs that would benefit Jimmy.
DAD:Is this place local?
Therapist: Well, I have looked into it an the one I recommend and know to be successful is Aspen Ranch in Utah
DAD: Wow,that’s kind of far.
Therapist: They are exspensive so it would be a commitment so I need you to think about whether this is something you are willing to commit and follow through with. Jimmy will get the help he needs there but it will be a long time away from home. I will send you some information, a brochure and if you would like to speak with them or take a trip out there first they would be more than happy to accomidate you.
Give it some thought over the weekend and give me a call on Monday and we can get the ball rolling. In the mean time try not to confront Jimmy on any of the issues until we speak.
Now what does this Dad really know? The average father doesnt know what TBS means or residential treatment. Maybe his wife does if she watches Dr. Phil..... so he knows the name of the place? Aspen Ranch, Utah. The only other thing he knows is Aspen Ranch….. So lets google that which is what any parent would do.
Page 1 we go from Aspen Ranchs web site down to
CRCHealth .com
Everything in between is Aspen related.
Next: lets google Residential Treatment
We get:
Circle tree ranch
American residential treatment association
Down to youth villages.com
So it is fair to assume it is an honest and thriving industry which is well know. He isn’t a bad guy, look up the industry, but there wasn’t anything about straight, kids of NJ or brain washing, abuse…. No stories like we read here on fornits.
So why is this guy such a shit for placing his kid? What warning signs did he ignore? He loves his son and wants him back in the fold and the only thing he is really sure of is it isn’t working the way it is going now.
What should he do differently? and how do we reach him?
-
Contracts and such have been posted on Fornits repeatedly.
Any sane parent reading one would go FUCK NO.
-
Bear in mind parents are often intimidated or unaware what questions to ask. In my opinion, I don't think Curious George remembers all questions that were asked. The previous comment was not meant to humiliate CG. In my humble opinion, it would be more productive to post a list of questions for parents to ask. The aforesaid statement does not represent support for programs.
-
Parents can ask as many questions as they like from a program -- even really good ones -- it doesn't mean they're going to get an honest answer, even if it's in writing. I won't bother listing the BS my parents and myself were told. Almost everything was either a flat out lie or a massive distortion -- all very deliberate.
The truth of the matter is that there is no way for parents, or anybody for that matter, to tell a "bad" program from a "good" one -- that is what makes them all unacceptably dangerous. It's like playing Russian roulette on your kid. By the times one finds out for sure it's generally far too late.
This isn't even mentioning the fact that many programs would go out of business if they were honest and open about what they provided. They rely on deceptive marketing for operation and it's what allows the bad programs to suceed. "Good" programs can't exist in the current program culture where a lack of ethics is absolutely required to stay above water. For example, if a program doesn't pay ed-cons for referrals, they don't get kids. If programs admit their "group" is not "group therapy", nobody would put their kid in the situation -- and so forth. Programs love to talk out of both sides of their mouth. Just look at Aspen which advertises to treat kids and then when held to medical standards turns around in court and claims it doesn't provide medical services.
A few things that could help to fix this situation is both education of parents and a willingness of those who have made mistakes to hold the programs accountable by suing them in civil court on the basis of fraudulent misrepresentation and/or malpractice, etc... Without education parents won't realize until too late (statute of limitations in many states) and without people willing to hold them accountable they only ensure it will continue to happen to other families. Programs need some incentive to be honest. "We might get sued" is a pretty good motivation for most corporations.
Shit... and the ultimate hypocracy is how they yell at the kids telling them to "get honest" and accuse them of being manipulators.
-
YA what she said! :notworthy:
so what I am reading is in the absence of data or facts you just make it up?
Ha. Yes, in the absence of legitimate data or facts, corporate programs are just making up the success rates they boast.
But we can trust multi-billion doallar investment companies...right? They wouldn't deceive and rip off vulnerable, gullible people just for profit..would they?
Auntie Em
-
The who ignored this comment I wonder why?
Most of these programs, whether they actually spell it out or not, use group peer pressure as a means of control, as well as a means of projecting "the program" down kids' throats.
Group peer pressure -- in such an environment, where there is no escaping it -- is actually a form of program-sanctioned bullying, regardless of whether you call it "positive peer culture," a "supportive therapeutic milieu," "brother's keeper," or what have you. The basic gist of it all boils down to the kid having no choice over whether or not to participate (if s/he wants to progress in the program and get the hell out of there), and the group-think being enforced by more or less the entire environment of peers.
Bullying does have a statistical correlation with increased risk of suicide.
-
YA what she said! :notworthy:
so what I am reading is in the absence of data or facts you just make it up?
Ha. Yes, in the absence of legitimate data or facts, corporate programs are just making up the success rates they boast.
But we can trust multi-billion doallar investment companies...right? They wouldn't deceive and rip off vulnerable, gullible people just for profit..would they?
Auntie Em
You got that right. Our local hospital has a sign up touting that it is one of the top 100 hospitals for cancer research and patient satisfaction. Same crap the programs do, send out surveys and then the doctors count them out. We all know they are just trying to drum up business.
We dont have any dependable studies that we can trust so we just dont know. The next best thing is to call the program and ask to speak with parents who have had kids attend. This way you can get a first hand scoop on the place and they will be able to relate to the way you feel. People should do the same thing with hospitals, ask to speak with some former patients, never rely totally on these surveys,especially when it is your health or the health of your child.
-
^^^ the who obfuscating and avoiding once again so obvious
Suicide makes you uncomfortable doesnt it whooter?
-
The next best thing is to call the program and ask to speak with parents who have had kids attend. This way you can get a first hand scoop on the place and they will be able to relate to the way you feel.
Nice try, guest. But the parents the program will refer you to are pre-screened to deliver a positive report, and they will often receive free tuition or a kickback fee for their recommendation.
So one must at minimum encourage parents considering a program to read the sworn testimony before Congress by parents whose children DIED at the hands of corporate programs, and learn what they say about how they were lied to and manipulated into enrolling their children.
Parent testimony 1: http://http://edlabor.house.gov/testimony/101007CynthiaHarveyTestimony.pdf
Parent testimony 2: http://http://edlabor.house.gov/testimony/101007BobBaconTestimony.pdf
Parent testimony 3: http://http://edlabor.house.gov/testimony/101007PaulLewisTestimony.pdf
And you, too, any fool can see, are paid by a corporation to respond quickly to any criticism of a program. You, guest, have a profit motive, and you yourself have said we should not trust people like you!
I am just a lowly auntie whose niece was ripped away from a caring, loving family for more than three years (at a cost of more than a quarter million dollars). No one except a parent was allowed to see or talk to or write this child for three years--not siblings, not grandparents, not clergy, not teachers, and definitely not aunties with troublesome questions. Outcomes in this study of one? Abused child, ruptured family, broke parents, and a very profitable corporation.
Auntie Em
-
I am just a parent, I have no profit motive and I was never pre screened by any program but received calls from parents all the time asking what my experience was (especially after the TV interview). I told them the good with the bad. I have spoken to other parents who report good and bad facets of the program. Shortly after my daughter returned home a news crew showed up at my door asking for me to do and interview after a child in Texas (or somewhere down south) died after leaving a program. I initially refused but after they came back the next day (or a different network) I agreed. I spoke honestly about the program and reported the good along with the bad as most people would do. Most people are balanced and honest. You are use to the information here on fornits which is never positive or balanced in nature when the topic is programs. Everything is coated with a negative spin. You have been around this world long enough to know that there are really good people who work in programs, good staff people etc. I know first hand because I have met them.... how often are they brought up? How many discuss the good times and friends they made? I think even you are able to realize this, auntieEm.
I am sure if I lost a child to a program I would not have anything nice to say about them even if the program was a good one so these parents would be just as bias and I dont blame them. I understand that the parents the program recommends would be handpicked, but they are still parents who went thru the same process that that the calling parent went thru and would be able to provide valuable information. Do you think a survivor here on fornits who was abused or didn’t do well would report the positive side of their stay in a program? Do you think the reader gets a real and balanced view of what programs are all about?
We both know the answer to those questions. So in the absence of data the next best thing is to speak with those who have experienced the programs first hand and had children attend them.
I am just a lowly auntie whose niece was ripped away from a caring, loving family for more than three years (at a cost of more than a quarter million dollars). No one except a parent was allowed to see or talk to or write this child for three years--not siblings, not grandparents, not clergy, not teachers, and definitely not aunties with troublesome questions. Outcomes in this study of one? Abused child, ruptured family, broke parents, and a very profitable corporation
We had a totally different experience so it is evident that programs vary widely or have improved over time. It is safe to say we should avoid programs like the one your niece attended.
-
I'd say its safe to avoid 99.9 percent of all program. I'll let you have your .1 percent as I'm feeling generous today.
-
I'd say its safe to avoid 99.9 percent of all program. I'll let you have your .1 percent as I'm feeling generous today.
Considering that this is posted on fornits, I take this as a big, no I mean huge, step. The skies are finally parting. Someday we will hopefully get to the point where we are discussing the good and bad programs side by side and making a difference by exposing the abusive programs from a credible discussion of unbiased posters. Fornits will become the "Onesource"® for program information and a database rich in credible information on programs that parents can tap into. 24 hour hot lines, overnight info packages, a tire ranch "safe haven" in the desert designed by TSW for children who fall through the safety net.
Fornits Onesource® will head line on Oprah and expose doctor phil as a sellout. Onesource® will eventually purchase PURE and task SS to investigate and spend 6 months in each program which is on the final stages of probation for abuse and as a verification process (required by new regulation) this phase will be documented via video tape and distributed thru the freedom of information act.
Oh, looking on the bright side makes my day!!!
-
Do you think a survivor here on fornits who was abused or didn’t do well would report the positive side of their stay in a program?
Hello....When you are abused in a prograom there is no "positive side". The abuse negates anything that could be considered positive. And of course you make friends, even prisoners of war, concentration camp inhabitants and slaves make friends and try to and squeeze whatever "positive" they can out of their experience. None of that excused abuse.
-
Hello....When you are abused in a prograom there is no "positive side". The abuse negates anything that could be considered positive. And of course you make friends, even prisoners of war, concentration camp inhabitants and slaves make friends and try to and squeeze whatever "positive" they can out of their experience. None of that excused abuse.
Exactly... the abuse negates anything positive that occurred there. If you spoke to a person who went to a program who wasn’t abused you would get a more balanced account (nothing negated). This person could tell you that the staff was nice but some were under qualified and some were over qualified and probably wouldn’t stay long... the food was okay, better than the food in highschool...... the place was too crowded but it looked like they were adding on new dorms. I didn’t like my history teacher because he didn’t seem to know much and we had limited time on the computer to do our own research....
You just dont walk up to the kid who was raped by her teacher in public high school and ask what she thought of the school... everything is negated by the rape, as you stated.
So the chances of getting a balanced picture of a program here on fornits is slim to none.
-
I'd say its safe to avoid 99.9 percent of all program. I'll let you have your .1 percent as I'm feeling generous today.
Considering that this is posted on fornits, I take this as a big, no I mean huge, step. The skies are finally parting. Someday we will hopefully get to the point where we are discussing the good and bad programs side by side and making a difference by exposing the abusive programs from a credible discussion of unbiased posters. Fornits will become the "Onesource"® for program information and a database rich in credible information on programs that parents can tap into. 24 hour hot lines, overnight info packages, a tire ranch "safe haven" in the desert designed by TSW for children who fall through the safety net.
Fornits Onesource® will head line on Oprah and expose doctor phil as a sellout. Onesource® will eventually purchase PURE and task SS to investigate and spend 6 months in each program which is on the final stages of probation for abuse and as a verification process (required by new regulation) this phase will be documented via video tape and distributed thru the freedom of information act.
Oh, looking on the bright side makes my day!!!
Nobody on fornits, nor anybody else, is going to be able to tell a good program from a bad one. Yes, there are warning signs, but i'm not convinced programs aren't slippery enough to find a way to evade them and still remain the same at their core. Like I wrote on the previous page:
Parents can ask as many questions as they like from a program -- even really good ones -- it doesn't mean they're going to get an honest answer, even if it's in writing. I won't bother listing the BS my parents and myself were told. Almost everything was either a flat out lie or a massive distortion -- all very deliberate.
The truth of the matter is that there is no way for parents, or anybody for that matter, to tell a "bad" program from a "good" one -- that is what makes them all unacceptably dangerous. It's like playing Russian roulette on your kid. By the times one finds out for sure it's generally far too late.
This isn't even mentioning the fact that many programs would go out of business if they were honest and open about what they provided. They rely on deceptive marketing for operation and it's what allows the bad programs to suceed. "Good" programs can't exist in the current program culture where a lack of ethics is absolutely required to stay above water. For example, if a program doesn't pay ed-cons for referrals, they don't get kids. If programs admit their "group" is not "group therapy", nobody would put their kid in the situation -- and so forth. Programs love to talk out of both sides of their mouth. Just look at Aspen which advertises to treat kids and then when held to medical standards turns around in court and claims it doesn't provide medical services.
A few things that could help to fix this situation is both education of parents and a willingness of those who have made mistakes to hold the programs accountable by suing them in civil court on the basis of fraudulent misrepresentation and/or malpractice, etc... Without education parents won't realize until too late (statute of limitations in many states) and without people willing to hold them accountable they only ensure it will continue to happen to other families. Programs need some incentive to be honest. "We might get sued" is a pretty good motivation for most corporations.
Shit... and the ultimate hypocracy is how they yell at the kids telling them to "get honest" and accuse them of being manipulators.
-
The one I work for does. We love our kids and cry when they leave. If there were bad things going on, I would be the first to expose the corruption. I think most of the angry people on fornits are mentally disturbed people who had failure at their program, so they go here to cause pain for all.
-
The one I work for does. We love our kids and cry when they leave. If there were bad things going on, I would be the first to expose the corruption. I think most of the angry people on fornits are mentally disturbed people who had failure at their program, so they go here to cause pain for all.
Well said, Sparky. I wouldnt go as far as to say they are mentally disturbed. Many just had bad experiences and can not get past them and feel all programs are the same and all the kids have the same experinces they had, which is sad.
99% of the people know that these places are built and designed to help kids thru a rough time. Very few hold the view that they are abusive.
-
The one I work for does. We love our kids and cry when they leave. If there were bad things going on, I would be the first to expose the corruption.
What program would that be?
-
The one I work for does. We love our kids and cry when they leave. If there were bad things going on, I would be the first to expose the corruption.
CEDU was all about teh crying. You should see my graduation tape.
What? You think that the issue is as simple as "grr, evil hulk staff SMASH!" Not every program is a teenage abu ghraib, with clear captors and prisoners, who are self-aware about their positions. The dynamic in many are downright schizophrenic. Sure, there were staff who visibly got their jollies being big jerkfaces, but there were definitely some who were emotional and weepy when I graduated. They were also the same staff who said some of the cruelest shit ever to me, at 90 decibels in raps or workshops. Despite this, I truly believe that they cared, really. I also believe that they were extremely misguided and as fucked in the head about the program as I was.
Not everything that comes from love is beneficial. Love is a very warpable thing, and it has many manifestations.
Can't speak to whatever place you are working in, but I feel that it's important to mention that presence of care does not always equal absence of maltreatment, and perception is relative to where you're standing at the time. (I thought cedu was the most awesome thing that ever happened to me... while I was there.)
Moments of lucidity are rare when you're right in the middle of something, which is why there's that trite but true saying about hindsight. I saw through the same glasses as the staff, although I guess I lucked out, cause I was only there for two years, while others are trapped in the system for a lifetime.
-
What? You think that the issue is as simple as "grr, evil hulk staff SMASH!" Not every program is a teenage abu ghraib, with clear captors and prisoners, who are self-aware about their positions. The dynamic in many downright schizophrenic. Sure, there were staff who visibly got their jollies being big jerkfaces, but there were definitely some who were emotional and weepy when I graduated. They were also the same staff who said some of the cruelest shit ever to me, at 90 decibels in raps or workshops. Despite this, I truly believe that they cared, really.
TAC, this is in fact *why* such an aggressive response is required.
It is one thing to hurt someone who you hate. This is the natural order of things.
It is another thing entirely to do it from something one considers "love". Yes, they will do it, exactly as you said. And at some point said abuser may say something along the lines of "well I'm sorry if you felt hurt but I did what was necessary, can you respect that?"
The answer to that is not in the affirmative. It is not even "No". The most correct answer is to stab that person in the face over and over again until a closed casket funeral is guaranteed, and then light up a fat blunt while jerking off on the corpse. Only complete and total negation (the attacks on Miller Newton twenty years later are excellent at this) with associated removal of the problem (takedowns, bankruptcies, closures) can solve this permanently.
Otherwise we get this shit with "maybe it helped" and "they were only trying to do the right thing", which only prolongs it.
-
TAC, this is in fact *why* such an aggressive response is required.
It is one thing to hurt someone who you hate. This is the natural order of things.
It is another thing entirely to do it from something one considers "love". Yes, they will do it, exactly as you said. And at some point said abuser may say something along the lines of "well I'm sorry if you felt hurt but I did what was necessary, can you respect that?"
The answer to that is not in the affirmative. It is not even "No". The most correct answer is to stab that person in the face over and over again until a closed casket funeral is guaranteed, and then light up a fat blunt while jerking off on the corpse. Only complete and total negation (the attacks on Miller Newton twenty years later are excellent at this) with associated removal of the problem (takedowns, bankruptcies, closures) can solve this permanently.
Otherwise we get this shit with "maybe it helped" and "they were only trying to do the right thing", which only prolongs it.
Agreed that staff who are at this shit today need to be called to the curb. But I personally only have interest in the people who are running the joints. Newton, Sembler, Lichfield, Rookey, Stambusky/McKenna, the Kays, etc etc.
The drones don't interest me as much, unless they become queens and form their own hive.
My argument regarding the crying thing was to point out that if that's there, that doesn't mean that the place isn't a problem, nor is it an indication that well-meaning staff would even be able to spot abuse in and around them. As you know, these places suck your ass in, so when a staff says "we cry when our kids leave" I say "Its good to know that, but that is ONLY an indication that you cry and miss the kids when they leave. It says nothing about the facility as a whole. Good or bad."
Not a huge fan of the face stabbing idea, either. The last thing I want are for these people to be considered victims or martyrs, although I certainly empathize with the venom.
Complete and total exposure is the order of the day. Nobody has achieved that yet, unfortunately. It's difficult to show these snakes for what they are. Mainly because a lot of the people trying to expose them (us) are looked upon as nutjobs who are butthurt about their own experience. The Semblers have a much better publicity machine than any of us do.
It's going to take a real, honest to god investigative journalist, IMO... and more than one, because the programmies will come out of the woodwork, throw around a bunch of red herrings and shout bias, when in reality, bias isnt even the issue, since everything has it.
Are there still any real journalists around??
Unfortunately, I don't think so. Maia is, but she's only one person. That expose on AARC was pretty damn sweet, too.
We need more of that.
-
Anyone else notice that the puppets who have made the most recent threads all have chosen a name that is the same as the topic they are wanting to thread about? And even pro-program responders in these threads have chosen names for themselves, not as Guest, but as the topic of their comment?
So instead of it saying Guest-- I think all programs help kids and are wonderful and perfect and miracle cures. It instead says something like MiracleCureForTeens--I think all programs help kids and are wonderful and perfect and miracle cures.
Just a wee bit suspicious looking.
And now these same, or rather this one same person is posting new topics that are just sales pitches and brochures for various programs. And the name of the poster closely matches the name of the thread. Suggesting a one-time poster? A new identity for each new topic and again for each new pro-program post within the thread. Doesn't this seem obvious and pathetic to anyone else?
-
I see what my troll has gotten up to lately. Not that I mind, but its funny to watch him at work.
-
You know, if I had a dime for every long winded blubbering from a programmie about how the program, the good and the bad, saved their child I'd be a man with about 5 maybe 10 dollars. Mind you that's genuine stories and not made up shit by the trolls to get the anons going.
When I read this made up shit the only thing that comes to mind is this... (http://http://www.toilette-humor.com/cartoon.html)
Seriously fuckers, try to be more original in your bullshit.
edit... fuck I gotta stop posting while fucked up.
-
Do you think programs help troubled teens?
Yes. In fact, I know they do!
But not every kid, sadly no system can help 100% of youths. I'd say about 95% though make it through fine. The others end up on fornits, what are you guys up to now, about half a dozen program dropouts? Great job there, guys.
-
Do you think programs help troubled teens?
Programs help emotionally disturbed teens become successful in their communities.
-
That’s the appearance used by ones who are perpetrator identified victims who go on to re-enact and perpetuate the abusive cycle by perpetrating their own crimes and creating their own victims. (Counselors and program directors...trolls)
What about the very many others who are simply damaged by the experiences of being in a TC environment that is harmful….? Oh, yeah. You don’t actually care about that.
-
Do you think programs help troubled teens?
Programs help emotionally disturbed teens become successful in their communities.
I think I read somewhere that it was better than 9 out of 10 children were helped. The ones who were not helped either left early or never applied themselves.
-
but better than 50% never graduate their program, so that"s a 50% failure rate off the top, plus many go back to their old ways and many even commit suicide. so you have maybe 75% as a baseline that wern't helped at all then a fair percentage of the remaining 25% just do well despite being in a prgram. so maybe a 10% "success rate" based on behavior, but probably that number goes to zero when you factor in the psychological harm and unresolved issues. big progra,a like aspen have already admitted they provide no treatment, so treatment outcome numbers are invalid anyway.
-
I think I read somewhere that it was better than 9 out of 10 children were helped. The ones who were not helped either left early or never applied themselves.
Right... "somewhere". For a source for that very bold claim? These numbers flying out of nowhere mean absolutely nothing without solid peer reviewed studies backing them up.
-
I think programs help troubled teens. There are many Fornits members who are not open to that school of thought.
Why are people responding to this thread at all? It was clearly posted by a troll. Rather than choosing a name and sticking with it, they post as Troubled Teens? Come on! This is obviously just a troll trying to post topics for their own amusement. I'd rather see us discussing deaths, abuse and the latest news and keeping those topics on the top of the topic lists rather than feed in to these bozos and their blatantly fabricated topics.
The opening post simply said the troll finds the programs useful and helpful and that members of Fornits don't. Who cares? Why would this be worth discussion?
Troubled Teens never posted again. Instead he came back as Point Of View for his name to write a reply which included Point of View in his pro-program response. Then he came back again with the name BCA to cheer lead for Boulder Creek Academy? Come on people, why feed in to this? This is obviously just one person posting pro-program topics.
This and other recent topics are clearly meant to distract from the real topics we should be discussing. I say ignore them, don't reply to them and keep the topics on matters we think are actually worth discussing.
-
I think I read somewhere that it was better than 9 out of 10 children were helped. The ones who were not helped either left early or never applied themselves.
Right... "somewhere". For a source for that very bold claim? These numbers flying out of nowhere mean absolutely nothing without solid peer reviewed studies backing them up.
Where are the numbers that suggest so many kids are being abused that all programs should be shuttered? Asking for information that doesn't exist doesn't help your argument, which obviously doesn't hold up to scrutiny very well. That's why you hem, and haw and weeve and dodge the fact Programs save lives, a lot of them. Just because a few disgruntled students waste their time blogging on a website doesn't stop this either. The industry continues to save lives and you live in your dark basements in your parents house. I bet you are thinking you should of done better in the program right about now!!
-
I think programs help troubled teens. There are many Fornits members who are not open to that school of thought.
Why are people responding to this thread at all? It was clearly posted by a troll. Rather than choosing a name and sticking with it, they post as Troubled Teens? Come on! This is obviously just a troll trying to post topics for their own amusement. I'd rather see us discussing deaths, abuse and the latest news and keeping those topics on the top of the topic lists rather than feed in to these bozos and their blatantly fabricated topics.
The opening post simply said the troll finds the programs useful and helpful and that members of Fornits don't. Who cares? Why would this be worth discussion?
Troubled Teens never posted again. Instead he came back as Point Of View for his name to write a reply which included Point of View in his pro-program response. Then he came back again with the name BCA to cheer lead for Boulder Creek Academy? Come on people, why feed in to this? This is obviously just one person posting pro-program topics.
This and other recent topics are clearly meant to distract from the real topics we should be discussing. I say ignore them, don't reply to them and keep the topics on matters we think are actually worth discussing.
-
"Hello,
I was reading this thread earlier. It is clear many of you still have anger towards abusive programs. CALO was established by professionals who have a record of helping troubled teens become successful in life. CALO graduates hold steady jobs, have good relationships with their parents and are drug/alcohol free. I am saddened by the anger you have towards staff that helped you.
Landon Kirk"
Well Landon, you were not help at all, you even actively denied help when needed.
You are all liars. When your feet was held to the fire you all decided to refuse to help, withheld information, denied requests, skirted issues, pointed fingers like the cowards you are. When asked the real hard questions, you provided no answers, and manipulated the truth. Your trust of care is a slogan, no one in your managment lives up to the B.S. you sell to the parents.
To the other "guest" who stated "I'm not happy because CALO didn't abuse or punish enough"....then....as a CALO representative are you warranting that you do abuse and punish, just not enough for my standards?
I've met some people at CALO that I think do care, but they are very low staff membersf and I can only name two. I have not met anyone in CALOs upper management that cares about anything other than the cash flow or covering their own asses.
If you have proof CALO, publish it. Because when I asked for it you couldn't cite even one case.
Explain that.
CG
-
I don't think YOU get it.
"Pain in the ass teenager" shouldn't go the the programs, that is where discipline and consequences comes in. Dangerous, drug addict, drug dealing, law breaking, property destructing, actively hurting-weaker-kids teenager" should go to program or to juvee. Because these kids are out of control and whomever is raising them failed to to their job.
You all seem to think only the misunderstood rebellious youth with a chip on their shoulder goes to programs. If your parents sent you there because you're a pain in the ass, your parents have some real issues which are beyond my comprehension. I'm not putting them down, I just don't understand this impotent mentality.
If are a dangerous, teenage, in-the-making career criminal, then you need to get set straight, period. If your parents can't do it and the program didn't do, then jail might, if jail doesn't, then the individual who's child your harm next, or string out on drugs, or molest, definately will, and they won't care about the law. When you are begging for your life, all your bullshit that you spew here won't matter will it? If you don't believe in some form of higher being, I'll bet money you will in your last moment.
For some of you, choose well, your life will depend on it. If you are as tough and smart as you claim to be, and from the much more "diverse" east or west coast, you should already know this. For the misunderstood rebellious types, have as much fun as you want to, don't hurt no one, don't make drugs a lifestyle, grow up a little bit, in time you will learn what we know, and you'll make it just fine.
But, If you really want to help shut these useless places down, get off your ass and do something about it.
CG
-
I don't think YOU get it.
"Pain in the ass teenager" shouldn't go the the programs, that is where discipline and consequences comes in. Dangerous, drug addict, drug dealing, law breaking, property destructing, actively hurting-weaker-kids teenager" should go to program or to juvee. Because these kids are out of control and whomever is raising them failed to to their job.
You all seem to think only the misunderstood rebellious youth with a chip on their shoulder goes to programs. If your parents sent you there because you're a pain in the ass, your parents have some real issues which are beyond my comprehension. I'm not putting them down, I just don't understand this impotent mentality.
If are a dangerous, teenage, in-the-making career criminal, then you need to get set straight, period. If your parents can't do it and the program didn't do, then jail might, if jail doesn't, then the individual who's child your harm next, or string out on drugs, or molest, definately will, and they won't care about the law. When you are begging for your life, all your bullshit that you spew here won't matter will it? If you don't believe in some form of higher being, I'll bet money you will in your last moment.
For some of you, choose well, your life will depend on it. If you are as tough and smart as you claim to be, and from the much more "diverse" east or west coast, you should already know this. For the misunderstood rebellious types, have as much fun as you want to, don't hurt no one, don't make drugs a lifestyle, grow up a little bit, in time you will learn what we know, and you'll make it just fine.
But, If you really want to help shut these useless places down, get off your ass and do something about it.
CG
:blabla: :blabla: :blabla: :blabla: :blabla: :blabla: :blabla: :blabla: :blabla: :blabla: