Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Anonymous on November 14, 2009, 04:09:33 AM
-
There are many fornits members who don't admit, "I was an uncontrollable asshole and that's why my parents sent me to a program."
-
There are many fornits members who don't admit, "I was an uncontrollable asshole and that's why my parents sent me to a program."
It must feel good to shed all the manipulation and games and finally take personal responsibility for your life. Its so unhealthy to continue to blame your parents, program and staff for everything. The constant manifestation of new anger generated each day only to be purged indiscriminately at people here on fornits and you immediate family would eventually consume you. This new attitude will carry over into your present personal and professional life and you will see yourself becoming more and more happy with yourself and life in general!!!
Thanks for posting that.
-
^^good post^^ I agree whole heartedly, think positive thoughts.
-
This marks the first post that is not TheWho. This idiot started the thread and made all the posts save for this one. Remember when you're dealing with him, he's so smart he thinks hospitals are profitable and John McCain was held prisoner by the North Koreans. What an idiot!
-
This marks the first post that is not TheWho. This idiot started the thread and made all the posts save for this one. Remember when you're dealing with him, he's so smart he thinks hospitals are profitable and John McCain was held prisoner by the North Koreans. What an idiot!
Whoops...me thinks that hospitals are for-profit (your bad). Link (http://http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/story/moodys-pans-profit-outlook-profit-hospitals/2009-03-03)
Yesterday, we told you about a study concluding that more than 50 percent of U.S. hospitals were in the red. Now, Moody's Investors Service has chimed in with its own gloom and doom, offering a prediction that for-profit hospitals will continue to deteriorate financially throughout."
You must work in one of the red ones, but not all hospitals are nonprofit and not all hospitals are operating in the red my friend.
Here are the top 10 for-profit hospitals by gross revenue (with figures rounded to the nearest hundred million), according to data from the American Hospital Directory.
1. Methodist Hospital (San Antonio, Texas) — $3.4 billion
2. Hahnemann University Hospital (Philadelphia) — $3.0 billion
3. Doctors Medical Center of Modesto (Modesto, Calif.) — $2.5 billion
4. CJW Medical Center, Chippenham Campus (Richmond, Va.) — $2.3 billion
5. Sunrise Hospital & Medical Center (Las Vegas) — $2.1 billion
6. Brookwood Medical Center (Birmingham, Ala.) — $2.0 billion
7. Medical City Hospital (Dallas) — $1.9 billion
8. Centinela Hospital Medical Center (Inglewood, Calif.) — $1.9 million
9. JFK Medical Center (Atlantis, Fla.) — $1.9 billion
10. Oklahoma University Medical Center (Oklahoma City) — $1.7 billion
Also everyone knows it was the Chinese who held McCain.
So with the help of out guest we have been able to establish that Hospitals and Programs are both for-profit enterprises.
-
U.S. hospital profits fall to zero: Thomson Reuters
DATE: 02 Mar 2009
Plunging revenues from investments have forced median profit margins for U.S. hospitals to zero.
OOPS! Caught again!
-
Are we talking about the mental hospitals fornits members went to?
-
Also everyone knows it was the Chinese who held McCain.
The Jews held McCain.
-
Link (http://http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/story/moodys-pans-profit-outlook-profit-hospitals/2009-03-03)
Yesterday, we told you about a study concluding that more than 50 percent of U.S. hospitals were in the red. Now, Moody's Investors Service has chimed in with its own gloom and doom, offering a prediction that for-profit hospitals will continue to deteriorate financially throughout."
I think the guest was confused thinking that hospitals were "all" non-profit. I think many here are a bit surprised that there are also quite a few for-profit hospitals, just like programs are forprofit.
Thanks for pointing this out. I dont think many here will like the info, but facts are facts.
-
Who,
Here's where your pernicious lies go too far troll! It was the Aliens...but you wouldn't know anything about sub-humanoids getting off on imprisonment and torture would you shill-troll?
Bendy troll yoga would like to engage on non-profit and for profit and not-for-profit discussion as if the designation of any program is indicative of how harmful that program is. It matters not, except when they engage in fraudulent business practices.
Would troll like to discuss Fraud?
-
I just read back thru this thread and nobody ever said all hospitals were non-profit. Nobody. But I think TheWho is lost on the terms "non-profit" and "not profitable" just like he can't tell the difference between North Korea and the former North Vietnam. He's pretty dumb.
-
It was the Aliens
It was the black people
-
You don't ever here how brothers are running gulags. It was aliens Who kidnapped and Tortured McCain and countless rural types before discovering they could do so to kids under the auspices of "treatment" and bill the insurance.
-
I think the post prior to the previous was who’s avoidance mechanism kicking in.
-
I just read back thru this thread and nobody ever said all hospitals were non-profit. Nobody.
That spun off a post made in another thread. This post plus multiple ones following: viewtopic.php?f=9&t=29166&p=350894#p350830 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=29166&p=350894#p350830)
-
So, according to the OP, programs made Fornits members from antagonistic teenagers into vicious adults.
Thanks for warning us, OP. I thought a program could turn my son's hate into love. Now I know better.
-
Your son’s hate has its origins and these will not remedied by outsourcing the abuses… now that he’s grown enough for you to fear him.
-
So, according to the OP, programs made Fornits members from antagonistic teenagers into vicious adults.
Thanks for warning us, OP. I thought a program could turn my son's hate into love. Now I know better.
It will never happen unless your son finishes the program and applies himself. Fornits is loaded with kids who manipulated their way out of the program or never applied themselves. This will turn your sons love into hate... just read here on fornits to get a taste..... Do posters here mostly take accountability for themselves or blame their parents and the program?
Imagine what happens if your son took only 4 courses of a 10 day antibiotic.. he would grow resistant to the cure and end up sicker than when he started.
-
So, according to the OP, programs made Fornits members from antagonistic teenagers into vicious adults.
Thanks for warning us, OP. I thought a program could turn my son's hate into love. Now I know better.
Programs serve to destroy children. They chip away at a kid's independence, turn them into group thinkers, take away their independence and kill their spirit.
-
So, according to the OP, programs made Fornits members from antagonistic teenagers into vicious adults.
Thanks for warning us, OP. I thought a program could turn my son's hate into love. Now I know better.
It will never happen unless your son finishes the program and applies himself. Fornits is loaded with kids who manipulated their way out of the program or never applied themselves. This will turn your sons love into hate... just read here on fornits to get a taste..... Do posters here mostly take accountability for themselves or blame their parents and the program?
Imagine what happens if your son took only 4 courses of a 10 day antibiotic.. he would grow resistant to the cure and end up sicker than when he started.
Great perspective! I agree with the analogy.
-
Sure you do. You wrote it. If your POV is so correct why are you the only one supporting it and why do you have to agree with your own posts 20 or 30 times in each thread?
You (the parent) were an uncontrollable asshole. That's why you put your kids in programs. And you chose two of the most notoriously abusive ones. Great job, dad. Real good.
-
So, according to the OP, programs made Fornits members from antagonistic teenagers into vicious adults.
Thanks for warning us, OP. I thought a program could turn my son's hate into love. Now I know better.
It will never happen unless your son finishes the program and applies himself. Fornits is loaded with kids who manipulated their way out of the program or never applied themselves. This will turn your sons love into hate... just read here on fornits to get a taste..... Do posters here mostly take accountability for themselves or blame their parents and the program?
Imagine what happens if your son took only 4 courses of a 10 day antibiotic.. he would grow resistant to the cure and end up sicker than when he started.
Let's examine, for a minute, the meaning of "applied themselves" in this context, the context of coercive mind-control programs being discussed here.
-
So, according to the OP, programs made Fornits members from antagonistic teenagers into vicious adults.
Thanks for warning us, OP. I thought a program could turn my son's hate into love. Now I know better.
It will never happen unless your son finishes the program and applies himself. Fornits is loaded with kids who manipulated their way out of the program or never applied themselves. This will turn your sons love into hate... just read here on fornits to get a taste..... Do posters here mostly take accountability for themselves or blame their parents and the program?
Imagine what happens if your son took only 4 courses of a 10 day antibiotic.. he would grow resistant to the cure and end up sicker than when he started.
It has to be 99.995% blaming their parents and programs on fornits. I dont recall any poster here even taking partial responsibility for their placement. I think if these kids were honest and up front about thier placement then their stories inside the program would take on more credibility. But if they are starting out with a lie then where does it end? See what I mean?
-
It has to be 99.995% blaming their parents and programs on fornits. I dont recall any poster here even taking partial responsibility for their placement. I think if these kids were honest and up front about thier placement then their stories inside the program would take on more credibility. But if they are starting out with a lie then where does it end? See what I mean?
I may have done some things that caused parental distress, but that doesn't make their choice (to resort to a program) a good one. This exchange is cyclical and pointless at best, try another one.
-
Imagine what happens if your son took only 4 courses of a 10 day antibiotic.. he would grow resistant to the cure and end up sicker than when he started.
Imagine what would happen if he took 40 courses ... of an antibiotic known to be harmful, if not fatal, for human physiology when taken in excess??!
-
Imagine what happens if your son took only 4 courses of a 10 day antibiotic.. he would grow resistant to the cure and end up sicker than when he started.
Btw... ;) It is not the son who "grows resistant to the cure" ...it is the bacterial population which may evolve to be resistant to the cure.
-
Imagine what happens if your son took only 4 courses of a 10 day antibiotic.. he would grow resistant to the cure and end up sicker than when he started.
Imagine what would happen if he took 40 courses ... of an antibiotic known to be harmful, if not fatal, for human physiology when taken in excess??!
Good point, I overlooked the other end, so if you take a kid out too soon it is harmful and if you leave them in there too long it is harmful. I dont think programs should have kids in there for years on end. If we look at the mean stay it is about 14 to 16 months... 2 years would be excessive.. a kid leaving after a few months would be harmful also.
-
Sure you do. You wrote it. If your POV is so correct why are you the only one supporting it and why do you have to agree with your own posts 20 or 30 times in each thread?
You (the parent) were an uncontrollable asshole. That's why you put your kids in programs. And you chose two of the most notoriously abusive ones. Great job, dad. Real good.
I agree. when will the PARENTS take responsibility for the lousy way they raised their kids. For example, John Reuben of STICC. He was such a bad parent that he "had" to put BOTH of his sons into abusive programs. One ended up dead and he's still so narcissistic that he doesn't take ANY responsibility for his incredible abject failure as a dad. How can parents like this expect their kids to be reponsible and accountable when all they ever taught their kids was to be irresposible, unaccountable and to blame others for their failures? It makes no sense!
-
Sure you do. You wrote it. If your POV is so correct why are you the only one supporting it and why do you have to agree with your own posts 20 or 30 times in each thread?
You (the parent) were an uncontrollable asshole. That's why you put your kids in programs. And you chose two of the most notoriously abusive ones. Great job, dad. Real good.
I agree. when will the PARENTS take responsibility for the lousy way they raised their kids. For example, John Reuben of STICC. He was such a bad parent that he "had" to put BOTH of his sons into abusive programs. One ended up dead and he's still so narcissistic that he doesn't take ANY responsibility for his incredible abject failure as a dad. How can parents like this expect their kids to be reponsible and accountable when all they ever taught their kids was to be irresposible, unaccountable and to blame others for their failures? It makes no sense!
Well in all fairness the kid was on drugs which eventually killed him. If anything the parent underreacted, maybe they pulled him too early. The other kid he got in time and the program was able to straighten him out.
-
Sure you do. You wrote it. If your POV is so correct why are you the only one supporting it and why do you have to agree with your own posts 20 or 30 times in each thread?
You (the parent) were an uncontrollable asshole. That's why you put your kids in programs. And you chose two of the most notoriously abusive ones. Great job, dad. Real good.
I agree. when will the PARENTS take responsibility for the lousy way they raised their kids. For example, John Reuben of STICC. He was such a bad parent that he "had" to put BOTH of his sons into abusive programs. One ended up dead and he's still so narcissistic that he doesn't take ANY responsibility for his incredible abject failure as a dad. How can parents like this expect their kids to be reponsible and accountable when all they ever taught their kids was to be irresposible, unaccountable and to blame others for their failures? It makes no sense!
Well in all fairness the kid was on drugs which eventually killed him. If anything the parent underreacted, maybe they pulled him too early. The other kid he got in time and the program was able to straighten him out.
No, you're mistaken. Mike FINISHED TWO Aspen programs. Neither treated his drug problem and both abused him. That's why he killed himself with heroin after completing two Aspen programs where he got no help.
And the other son is currently a drug user and failed out of college.
Not a very good record for John or Aspen or HLA. They are all failures.
-
Mike made the choice to kill himself. I am sure fornits members will blame programs for his actions.
-
Sure you do. You wrote it. If your POV is so correct why are you the only one supporting it and why do you have to agree with your own posts 20 or 30 times in each thread?
You (the parent) were an uncontrollable asshole. That's why you put your kids in programs. And you chose two of the most notoriously abusive ones. Great job, dad. Real good.
I agree. when will the PARENTS take responsibility for the lousy way they raised their kids. For example, John Reuben of STICC. He was such a bad parent that he "had" to put BOTH of his sons into abusive programs. One ended up dead and he's still so narcissistic that he doesn't take ANY responsibility for his incredible abject failure as a dad. How can parents like this expect their kids to be reponsible and accountable when all they ever taught their kids was to be irresposible, unaccountable and to blame others for their failures? It makes no sense!
Well in all fairness the kid was on drugs which eventually killed him. If anything the parent underreacted, maybe they pulled him too early. The other kid he got in time and the program was able to straighten him out.
No, you're mistaken. Mike FINISHED TWO Aspen programs. Neither treated his drug problem and both abused him. That's why he killed himself with heroin after completing two Aspen programs where he got no help.
And the other son is currently a drug user and failed out of college.
Not a very good record for John or Aspen or HLA. They are all failures.
The boys are beautiful, wonderful people--not "failures." Aspen Education Group of torture chambers and their abusive parent, John, are the failures. Has any survivor contacted the surviving boy?
Mike and Max, I am so sorry. You deserved better than your father, John D Reuben, and the cult, Aspen Education Group, he imprisoned you in. :peace: :peace: :rose: :rose:
-
Sure you do. You wrote it. If your POV is so correct why are you the only one supporting it and why do you have to agree with your own posts 20 or 30 times in each thread?
You (the parent) were an uncontrollable asshole. That's why you put your kids in programs. And you chose two of the most notoriously abusive ones. Great job, dad. Real good.
I agree. when will the PARENTS take responsibility for the lousy way they raised their kids. For example, John Reuben of STICC. He was such a bad parent that he "had" to put BOTH of his sons into abusive programs. One ended up dead and he's still so narcissistic that he doesn't take ANY responsibility for his incredible abject failure as a dad. How can parents like this expect their kids to be reponsible and accountable when all they ever taught their kids was to be irresposible, unaccountable and to blame others for their failures? It makes no sense!
Well in all fairness the kid was on drugs which eventually killed him. If anything the parent underreacted, maybe they pulled him too early. The other kid he got in time and the program was able to straighten him out.
No, you're mistaken. Mike FINISHED TWO Aspen programs. Neither treated his drug problem and both abused him. That's why he killed himself with heroin after completing two Aspen programs where he got no help.
And the other son is currently a drug user and failed out of college.
Not a very good record for John or Aspen or HLA. They are all failures.
The boys are beautiful, wonderful people--not "failures." Al Qaeda torture chambers are the failures. Has any survivor contacted the surviving boy?
Mike and Max, I am so sorry. You deserved better than Al Qaeda he imprisoned you in. :peace: :peace: :rose: :rose:
-
Sure you do. You wrote it. If your POV is so correct why are you the only one supporting it and why do you have to agree with your own posts 20 or 30 times in each thread?
You (the parent) were an uncontrollable asshole. That's why you put your kids in programs. And you chose two of the most notoriously abusive ones. Great job, dad. Real good.
I agree. when will the PARENTS take responsibility for the lousy way they raised their kids. For example, John Reuben of STICC. He was such a bad parent that he "had" to put BOTH of his sons into abusive programs. One ended up dead and he's still so narcissistic that he doesn't take ANY responsibility for his incredible abject failure as a dad. How can parents like this expect their kids to be reponsible and accountable when all they ever taught their kids was to be irresposible, unaccountable and to blame others for their failures? It makes no sense!
Well in all fairness the kid was on drugs which eventually killed him. If anything the parent underreacted, maybe they pulled him too early. The other kid he got in time and the program was able to straighten him out.
No, you're mistaken. Mike FINISHED TWO Aspen programs. Neither treated his drug problem and both abused him. That's why he killed himself with heroin after completing two Aspen programs where he got no help.
And the other son is currently a drug user and failed out of college.
Not a very good record for John or Aspen or HLA. They are all failures.
Obviously, finishing the program has no correlation with "success." Mike finished two programs (both Aspen) and dies of an overdose anyway. His brother flunked out of college and is also hooked on dope. Programs did nothing but hurt these kids, and killed one of them.
-
Sure you do. You wrote it. If your POV is so correct why are you the only one supporting it and why do you have to agree with your own posts 20 or 30 times in each thread?
You (the parent) were an uncontrollable asshole. That's why you put your kids in programs. And you chose two of the most notoriously abusive ones. Great job, dad. Real good.
I agree. when will the PARENTS take responsibility for the lousy way they raised their kids. For example, John Reuben of STICC. He was such a bad parent that he "had" to put BOTH of his sons into abusive programs. One ended up dead and he's still so narcissistic that he doesn't take ANY responsibility for his incredible abject failure as a dad. How can parents like this expect their kids to be reponsible and accountable when all they ever taught their kids was to be irresposible, unaccountable and to blame others for their failures? It makes no sense!
Well in all fairness the kid was on drugs which eventually killed him. If anything the parent underreacted, maybe they pulled him too early. The other kid he got in time and the program was able to straighten him out.
No, you're mistaken. Mike FINISHED TWO Aspen programs. Neither treated his drug problem and both abused him. That's why he killed himself with heroin after completing two Aspen programs where he got no help.
And the other son is currently a drug user and failed out of college.
Not a very good record for John or Aspen or HLA. They are all failures.
Obviously, finishing the program has no correlation with "success." Mike finished two programs (both Al Qaeda) and dies of an overdose anyway. His brother flunked out of college and is also hooked on dope. Al Qaeda did nothing but hurt these kids, and killed one of them.
-
Al Qaeda and Aspen are similar I guess. They both kill innocent victims. But Aspen specializes in killing children, while terrorists are a bit more non-discriminating, but I get your point,
-
Al Qaeda and Fornits posters are similar I guess. They both kill innocent victims. But Al Qaeda specializes in killing children, while terrorists are a bit more non-discriminating, but I get your point,[/quote]
-
Aspen, program of hope (and a big stack of dead bodies)
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com)
-
Al Qaeda , program of hope (and a big stack of dead bodies)
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com)
-
Al Qaeda , program of hope (and a big stack of dead bodies)
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com)
You're in a spammy place today, hunh? :spam:
-
The boy was mentally disturbed because he killed himself. It is to late for his lawyer to use the insanity defense.
-
The boy was mentally disturbed because he killed himself. It is to late for his lawyer to use the insanity defense.
But we are sure that people here can tie it all back to some program somewhere and place the responsibility on them lol
-
The boy killed himself because of the mental distubances relentlessly inflicted on him.
-
The boy killed himself because of the mental distubances relentlessly inflicted on him.
Source? Autopsy results? did he leave a note?
-
The boy killed himself because of the mental distubances relentlessly inflicted on him.
Source? Autopsy results? did he leave a note?
You must be new here (no one will supply evidence because they have none). Every death is attributed to a program whenever possible. If you look at the list there are instances where a kid was driving by a program and died in a car accident and his death was attributed to the program. Others where kids died of an overdose after graduation and they are added to the list.
Others died years after graduation and somehow posters here tied the cause back to an event that occurred in a program, Ha,Ha,Ha go figure.
But if you actually look at the number of children who died as a direct result of programs you would see how safe they are. The reason they need to add names to the list is because they realize this themselves but don’t want you to see the facts.
-
Mike Reuben died of an overdose after COMPLETING TWO Aspen programs. They obviously were of no help whatsoever. That's all anybody is saying. Whooter keeps stressing tht kids who complete programs do much better and that programs have a "99.998% success rate." But what's true is that even if kids complete multiple programs, like Mike did, the programs are of no benefit and are actually harmful (Aspen programs have been recently closed down for killing one boy and abusing and neglecting dozens of others).
Here's Whooters logic in a nutshell: If the kid does well after a program, it was the program's success. If the kid does poorrly (or kills himself like Mike did) then it's the kid's fault. It's nonsense. The bottom line is that many programs have been proven to be abusive and not a single one has ever been proven effective.
-
Mike Reuben died of an overdose after COMPLETING TWO Aspen programs.
Yes, everyone knows that Detective Stabler. Mike reminds me of Detective Stabler's daughter.
-
Mike Reuben died of an overdose after COMPLETING TWO Aspen programs. They obviously were of no help whatsoever. That's all anybody is saying.
Thank you! Finally a person with reason. If you read here long enough you will see that many posters actually believe that the programs caused this boys death. How could anyone possibly say this without evidence? It could have been an ex girlfriend that he just broke up with, a fight with his father, his mothers death or an accidental over dose. But there are so few program related deaths that many here on fornits feel that on paper programs are safe and this isn’t something they are willing to believe. So they try so desperately to pin every possible death on a program which results in lost credibility.
-
The boy killed himself because of the mental distubances relentlessly inflicted on him.
Source? Autopsy results? did he leave a note?
http://www.cafety.org/research/121-rese ... casualties (http://www.cafety.org/research/121-research/216-thought-reform-programs-and-the-production-of-psychiatric-casualties)
Thought reform Induced Psychopathologies
Reactive schizo affective-like psychoses. These occur in individuals with no prior history of mental disorder and from families free of such history, as well as in individuals with no prior history of mental disorder, but whose families have members with affective disorders.
These psychotic episodes vary in length from days to nearly a year's duration, with most ranging from 1 to 5 months. The decompensation typically occurs in immediate response to a peak stress-inducing experience. Strong affective components, mostly of a hypomanic or manic quality, are noted near and after the decompensation. These components appear related to the behavior modeled in the group and to attitudes advocated by the group. Certain programs appear to interact with personal histories and situational properties of the group to produce depressive reactions.
Postraumatic stress disorders. This type of disorder is described in section 309.89 of the DSM-III-R.
Atypical dissociative disorders. This type of disorder is described in section 300.15 of the DSM-III-R.
Relaxation-induced anxiety. This is a type of atypical anxiety if one uses DSM-III-R classification, but is best described in the recently growing reports appearing in research literature.
Miscellaneous reactions. These include anxiety combined with cognitive inefficiencies, such as difficulty in concentration, inability to focus and maintain attention, and impaired memory (especially short-term); self-mutilation; phobias; size=150]suicide[/size] and homicide; and psychological factors affecting physical conditions (described in section 316.00 of the DSM-III-R) such as strokes, myocardial infarctions, unexpected deaths, recurrence of peptic ulcers, asthma, etc.
John Reuben and Aspen Education Group caused or were causative factors in M Reuben's suicide because they subjected him to thought reform at Academy at Swift River and SUWS Wilderness programs. Suicide is known to be one of the outcomes of thought reform.
Also inevitably, and relevant in this case, a certain number of people will commit suicide if they are subjected to kidnap and multi month or year imprisonment without the opportunity for due process. Trauma and subjugation is disorienting, and spiritually and mentally damaging. Trauma and violation of this degree is also known to cause suicide.
This is obvious to decent people. Unfortunately for his sons, neither John D Reuben nor Aspen Education Group process even the tiniest drop of decency within them.
-
Mike Reuben died of an overdose after COMPLETING TWO Aspen programs. They obviously were of no help whatsoever. That's all anybody is saying.
Thank you! Finally a person with reason. If you read here long enough you will see that many posters actually believe that the programs caused this boys death. How could anyone possibly say this without evidence? It could have been an ex girlfriend that he just broke up with, a fight with his father, his mothers death or an accidental over dose. But there are so few program related deaths that many here on fornits feel that on paper programs are safe and this isn’t something they are willing to believe. So they try so desperately to pin every possible death on a program which results in lost credibility.
I dont think they lose credibility as you put it. But they do believe very strongly that programs are not good for people.
-
John Reuben and Aspen Education Group caused or were causative factors in M Reuben's suicide because they subjected him to thought reform at Academy at Swift River and SUWS Wilderness programs. Suicide is known to be one of the outcomes of thought reform.
Translation: Thought reform made him do it.
-
Translation: The Who forced him to do it. :roflmao:
-
John Reuben and Aspen Education Group caused or were causative factors in M Reuben's suicide because they subjected him to thought reform at Academy at Swift River and SUWS Wilderness programs. Suicide is known to be one of the outcomes of thought reform.
There is an insanity defense and now there is the "thought reform defense."
-
John Reuben and Aspen Education Group caused or were causative factors in M Reuben's suicide because they subjected him to thought reform at Academy at Swift River and SUWS Wilderness programs. Suicide is known to be one of the outcomes of thought reform.
There is an insanity defense and now there is the "thought reform defense."
No "defense," just a trend worth some examination.
-
Mike Reuben died of an overdose after COMPLETING TWO Aspen programs. They obviously were of no help whatsoever. That's all anybody is saying.
Thank you! Finally a person with reason. If you read here long enough you will see that many posters actually believe that the programs caused this boys death. How could anyone possibly say this without evidence? It could have been an ex girlfriend that he just broke up with, a fight with his father, his mothers death or an accidental over dose. But there are so few program related deaths that many here on fornits feel that on paper programs are safe and this isn’t something they are willing to believe. So they try so desperately to pin every possible death on a program which results in lost credibility.
Another way to look at it is lets say a person has a heart transplant and 2 years later that person commits suicide. Should we then conclude that the transplant was a failure since the patient is dead after 2 years?
-
Mike Reuben died of an overdose after COMPLETING TWO Aspen programs. They obviously were of no help whatsoever. That's all anybody is saying.
Thank you! Finally a person with reason. If you read here long enough you will see that many posters actually believe that the programs caused this boys death. How could anyone possibly say this without evidence? It could have been an ex girlfriend that he just broke up with, a fight with his father, his mothers death or an accidental over dose. But there are so few program related deaths that many here on fornits feel that on paper programs are safe and this isn’t something they are willing to believe. So they try so desperately to pin every possible death on a program which results in lost credibility.
Another way to look at it is lets say a person has a heart transplant and 2 years later that person commits suicide. Should we then conclude that the transplant was a failure since the patient is dead after 2 years?
Bad analogy; a heart transplant has no potential (it is a mere physical adjustment, so to speak) to cause a person to off themselves, whereas the psychological effects of being in a program could have everything to do with causing a person to off themselves. That was a terribly weak analogy.
-
The psychological effects could work either way. Some could push a person more towards suicide and others further away. Just like the heart patient we dont know what effects occurred unless we took 1,000 people who had heart transplants and 1,000 who didnt and see if there is a difference in populations.
since we know kids commit suicide regardless of whether they go to a program or not the only way to know for sure if the program caused it was if they left a note. Another approach would be a controlled study of a 1,000 kids who were denied the help of a program compared to 1,000 kids who attended a program and look for trends to see if one group has a higher rate than the other. But even then we wouldnt know the cause of the individual suicides because they occur in each group (unless, again, the person left a note).
-
The analogy doesn't hold water. I don't know how many kids kill themselves as a result of being in programs, but it certainly doesn't surprise me that it would happen...that it would happen as a direct result of being brainwashed, removed from society, abused, etc. etc.
Sorry, but it just makes sense....
-
The psychological effects could work either way. Some could push a person more towards suicide and others further away.
Maybe, maybe not. Are you willing to take that chance?
Mercury used to be the cure of choice for syphilis. Doctors know better now.
since we know kids commit suicide regardless of whether they go to a program or not the only way to know for sure if the program caused it was if they left a note. Another approach would be a controlled study of a 1,000 kids who were denied the help of a program compared to 1,000 kids who attended a program and look for trends to see if one group has a higher rate than the other. But even then we wouldnt know the cause of the individual suicides because they occur in each group (unless, again, the person left a note).
A study that addresses that issue in part made the news recently. See thread titled Traumatic childhood takes 20 years off life expectancy (http://http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=28915). In fact, you posted pretty much the same argument there as well, having clearly not read the article too carefully.
The message is clear: trauma experienced during one's childhood, which includes trauma experienced in programs, shortens one's lifespan.
This study, published (http://http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2009/oct/06/traumatic-childhood-takes-20-years-life-expectancy/) recently in the Lawrence World Journal, does not even address obvious physical damage, including deaths, brought about by restraints or wilderness fiascoes. Just psychological trauma. Specifically: one's one assessment of such.
-
I did read the article but I didn’t see any connection to programs. Lets say a child had a traumatic experience in his or her life and also had parents who had been divorced. This child would be at risk for a shorter life span according to the article. Now lets say this same child was placed into a program. How can we measure how much their risk is reduced or if they happened to be abused, how much their risk would increase?
Lets say that this same child committed suicide 2 years after graduation from a program. Was this do to the program? Was it due to home life trauma or none of the above? Without the program would this child have committed suicide at an earlier age? Did the program help or hurt this child?
What we do know is that kids commit suicide with or without programs. What I don’t understand is why when a child commits suicide a couple of years after a program people here attribute that to the program when there are certainly many other factors likely causes to consider. Plus the fact that without a note none of us really know the cause of each spcific event.
-
I did read the article but I didn't see any connection to programs.
The article did not specifically address programs per se. It addressed psychological trauma experienced during childhood. Many folk feel traumatized by their time in program, which took place, in most cases, during their childhood years (specifically up to age 18, according to the study). Why shouldn't this be applicable?
The article even gives readers the opportunity to assess their own ACE scores by virtue of a mini-test (http://http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2009/oct/06/whats-my-ace-score/) (the full ACE Study questionnaire (http://http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/ACE/questionnaires.htm) was more than 200 questions). Interestingly enough, though no surprise to most of us, a substantial number of these questions can be answered in the affirmative ... specifically due to one's experience in program.
-
What I don't understand is why when a child commits suicide a couple of years after a program people here attribute that to the program when there are certainly many other factors likely causes to consider. Plus the fact that without a note none of us really know the cause of each spcific event.
I would peg the critical time period for suicide as being within the first several years post-program, since that is when, amongst other factors:
- one has more opportunity to reflect on what just happened to one's autonomy and self-identity in the preceding years,
- supervision is less and/or absent,
- impulsive behavior and ability to foresee consequences hasn't usu. matured yet, and
- the realization that program "tools" don't work in the real world sets in.
As to attribution of cause: I think you are stuck on proving or disproving specific cases. I don't think one can technically do that definitively without a shade of uncertainty, like you say, unless one is in that person's shoes or there is a note. Correlation of the event with program attendance, on the other hand, is a whole different ballgame.
-
I did read the article but I didn’t see any connection to programs. Lets say a child had a traumatic experience in his or her life and also had parents who had been divorced. This child would be at risk for a shorter life span according to the article. Now lets say this same child was placed into a program. How can we measure how much their risk is reduced or if they happened to be abused, how much their risk would increase?
Lets say that this same child committed suicide 2 years after graduation from a program. Was this do to the program? Was it due to home life trauma or none of the above? Without the program would this child have committed suicide at an earlier age? Did the program help or hurt this child?
What we do know is that kids commit suicide with or without programs. What I don’t understand is why when a child commits suicide a couple of years after a program people here attribute that to the program when there are certainly many other factors likely causes to consider. Plus the fact that without a note none of us really know the cause of each spcific event.
A wise man once said "A suicide is always the programs fault."
-
Once again, the discussion had nothing to do with "suicide." What was stated is that Mike Reuben died of an overdose of heroin because, although ASR claims to offer addiction counseling, the program didn't help him with his addiction. We now know that Aspen specifically denies offering any treatment of any kind, even though they advertise that they treat almost anything.
Why, after completing two Aspen programs that claim to treat drug abuse, was this kid still mainling dope? The answer is because he received no actual treatment, as admitted by Aspen in a court of law.
It's obvious that no treatment would have been just as successful at least and maybe even more successful. If he got bonafide drug treatment he would likely still be with us today.
-
The article did not specifically address programs per se. It addressed psychological trauma experienced during childhood. Many folk feel traumatized by their time in program, which took place, in most cases, during their childhood years (specifically up to age 18, according to the study). Why shouldn't this be applicable?
If a child was traumatized in a program than this would apply, I agree.
As to attribution of cause: I think you are stuck on proving or disproving specific cases. I don't think one can technically do that definitively without a shade of uncertainty, like you say, unless one is in that person's shoes or there is a note. Correlation of the event with program attendance, on the other hand, is a whole different ballgame.
What do you mean by correlation with program attendance? The Shapiro study indicated that within her population 4 kids attempted suicide prior to attending the program and those 4 kids had no attempts post program. Would this be considered a correlation? Do you consider that program attendance could reverse the effects of previous traumas that children suffered prior to attending the program?
I dont think the article covered this but it would be interesting to see if there were any reduction effect by program attendance. There seems to be much focus on the negative effects here (which I understand based on the posters past) but we should also consider that the programs may help to reverse the negative effects of previous traumas.
-
As to attribution of cause: I think you are stuck on proving or disproving specific cases. I don't think one can technically do that definitively without a shade of uncertainty, like you say, unless one is in that person's shoes or there is a note. Correlation of the event with program attendance, on the other hand, is a whole different ballgame.
What do you mean by correlation with program attendance? The Shapiro study indicated that within her population 4 kids attempted suicide prior to attending the program and those 4 kids had no attempts post program. Would this be considered a correlation? Do you consider that program attendance could reverse the effects of previous traumas that children suffered prior to attending the program?
I dont think the article covered this but it would be interesting to see if there were any reduction effect by program attendance. There seems to be much focus on the negative effects here (which I understand based on the posters past) but we should also consider that the programs may help to reverse the negative effects of previous traumas.
No, I would not consider it a correlation.
There were 30 families in the Shapiro "study." Only 17 kids from these 30 families bothered to even return their questionnaires. Even if you think that "parents would know" whether their kids attempted suicide or not,
- the incidence of suicide is far less than 1 in 30 kids nationwide, rendering the Shapiro "study" statistically irrelevant on this point, and
- very little time had elapsed since the kids were in program (I believe the mean was a little over a year), meaning none of them had passed that critical time period when suicides are most often attempted.
-
So I guess we cannot attribute any suicides back to the programs unless the person left a note indicating cause and the kids who once attempted suicide (prior to entering a program) but since attending a program ceased this activity you feel more time is needed to make this a firm correlation.
So if I am reading you right you are saying there will always be those believers who feel the program caused the cessation of suicide attempts and those who feel the program increased this activity. but to date there are no conclusive studies to support either side.
-
the incidence of suicide is far less than 1 in 30 kids nationwide, rendering the Shapiro "study" statistically irrelevant on this point
I wasn’t speaking statistically. I do agree the population was far too small to try to compare to any cross section of the general population, that was not my intent. There were 4 kids (I believe 4) who were actively attempting suicide prior to the program and since completion of the program there have been zero attempts by these four students. I understand this isnt conclusive across the board. But it does show that the activity was arrested for these 4. But I understand you would like to see no attempted suicide for longer periods than 12 months.
-
the incidence of suicide is far less than 1 in 30 kids nationwide, rendering the Shapiro "study" statistically irrelevant on this point, and
Irrelevant like most reports posted on this shitty website.
-
This thread wins for the most-amount-of-bullshit-to-happen-over-a-short-period-of-time award. Way to go, guys! Keep it up!
-
Who wants to join the KKK with me?
-
How much does it cost to join the KKK?