Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Anonymous on September 29, 2003, 09:27:00 AM
-
It seems very obvious that Stuggling Teens forums bans any negative mention of Woodburys largest contributer/advertiser. What is funny is the Inside Edition thread didnt even mention the name WWASPS yet Jena locked it. Think about this, if WWASPS is so great whats the big deal? What are they afraid of, the TRUTH. Woodbury is no better then his buddy Ken Kay. Hope he is named in the BIG lawsuit against the W!
-
when we were looking i bought that woodbury book and cross creek had the biggest ad. he promotes them, wonder if he gets a referral fee too.
-
I think his book is BS and all paid adverstising that he is profiting from. Yes, the big W seems to be his largest advertiser.
-
Digging. It seems Woodburys wife, Denise is a lawyer that may have helped WWASPS at one time. Read it somewhere. Anyone have any information on this?
-
On 2003-09-29 17:25:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Digging. It seems Woodburys wife, Denise is a lawyer that may have helped WWASPS at one time. Read it somewhere. Anyone have any information on this?"
Trying posting this question on Woodbury's website if you really want to know. Second, plenty of lawyers have put their kids in WWASPS programs, including the guy who defended David Van Blarigan's parents a few years ago, and that lady who was mentioned in a recent news article (the one on Spring Creek Lodge?) whose last name I believe started with a Z.
-
and some lawyers pulled their kids out when they finally caught on to the abusive brainwashing scam.
-
Her name is Michele Ziperovich... that was the most recent NYT article
-
And about 1/4 of my seminar friends are lawyers and aren't sue happy like Michele Zippo who is now a PURE captive of her own making - what comes around goes around again and again. Don't cha have anything constructive on this forum besides thread after thread of personal attacks and victim-based statements??
-
***Don't cha have anything constructive on this forum besides thread after thread of personal attacks and victim-based statements??
This is a very constructive forum, depends on your perspective. It's also open to the public and uncensored, unlike the place you and your ilk hang out. Sure would like to catch a peek at what's being posted at your private, censored board right now.
Chattering pigs... isn't that how you refer to detractors? You folks aren't nearly as enlightened as you need to believe you are, and you are the sorce of most of the "attacks" and "victim-based statements" you refer to at this board.
Masters of reverse psych.
-
Woodbury is all about the money. He really could not care less about the kids in the concentration camps that he advertises.
I use the prime example that he once personally reviewed a program by describing that "the feeling of safety here is almost tangible." About a year later the Owner and operator was charged with 40 counts of child sexual abuse and fraud. I guess his definition of safety is a bit different than ours.
_________________
The war we fight is not against powers or principalities. It is against chaos and despair. Greater than the death of flesh is the death of hope, the death of dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender.
[ This Message was edited by: FaceKhan on 2003-09-30 00:12 ]
-
It was Woodbury's Stuggling Teens who enlightened me to the Truth about TB.
Go figure, they are aware of the mistreatment ,alledged sexual predators.
Woodbury still continues to promote the evil empire on the back of their monthly news letetrs . Hmmmmm
Could it be the MONEY! Advertising dollars?
Defendant Woodbury has a nice ring to it!!!
-
There's an obvious conflict of interest. Woodbury and other Ed Cons should be required by law to make programs prove they are properly licensed in the state they operate, before refering.
Until Ed Cons are required to do this, they will continue to refer to programs that could endanger the well being of teens, and plead ignorance- such was my experience.
I'm sure they would say it's not their responsibility to check programs licenses. I would disagree. They are being paid to provide information to parents who are trusting them to make a decision about their child.
Which brings up another issue. Consulting on educational/academic options is one thing. When an Ed Con assesses the teen's emotional "problems" and determines which BM facilty they think would be best... that is bordering on practicing without a license unless the Ed Con is a licensed social worker or therapist.
-
[ This Message was edited by: imo on 2004-01-06 08:33 ]