Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Anonymous on October 08, 2003, 09:38:00 PM
-
Wanna see HOW PROUD WWASP REAL IS ABOUT THERE ABUSE AND HOW STUPID THEY ARE FOR PUTTING IT ON THERE CONTRACTS?
THE CONTRACTS ARE VOID AND WILL BE A SIGNIFICANT HELP TO THE CLASS ACTION LAW SUIT
http://www.intrepidnetreporters.com/Tee ... #Restraint (http://www.intrepidnetreporters.com/TeenHelp/contract.htm#Restraint)
-
the Sponsors authorize the Program to use handcuffs, mechanical restraints, electrical disabler, made or pepper spray in order to restrain the student. Sponsors agree to hold harmless and release the Program from any liability or damages resulting from restraint procedures
That was not in Dundee's contract.
I would love to know what kind of parent would agree to that.
-
"This would include parents that are unwilling to follow the guidelines of the Program or are, at the sole discretion of the Program, unreasonable or difficult to work with."
:rofl: :wave:
-
This would include parents that are unwilling to follow the guidelines of the Program or are, at the sole discretion of the Program, unreasonable or difficult to work with."
What the hell does that mean?
-
It's in the enrollment agreement under:
Involuntary Enrollment Termination.
The Program reserves the right to terminate the enrollment of any student at any time if there is a default in the performance of any of the terms of this Agreement by the student or Sponsor, or if in the sole discretion of the Program the student is not a suitable resident of the Program or for any other reason the Program determines that the student should not continue to reside at the Program. This would include parents that are unwilling to follow the guidelines of the Program or are, at the sole discretion of the Program, unreasonable or difficult to work with.
-
On 2003-10-08 18:45:00, Carey wrote:
"the Sponsors authorize the Program to use handcuffs, mechanical restraints, electrical disabler, made or pepper spray in order to restrain the student. Sponsors agree to hold harmless and release the Program from any liability or damages resulting from restraint procedures
That was not in Dundee's contract.
I would love to know what kind of parent would agree to that. "
It's probably not in any of the contracts anymore, didn't someone say this is a contract from 1987?
-
I guess I did not get the relevence of:
"The Program reserves the right to terminate the enrollment of any student at any time if there is a default in the performance of any of the terms of this Agreement by the student or Sponsor, or if in the sole discretion of the Program the student is not a suitable resident of the Program or for any other reason the Program determines that the student should not continue to reside at the Program. This would include parents that are unwilling to follow the guidelines of the Program or are, at the sole discretion of the Program, unreasonable or difficult to work with"
to the to the orignial post on this thread that stated:
"the Sponsors authorize the Program to use handcuffs, mechanical restraints, electrical disabler, made or pepper spray in order to restrain the student. Sponsors agree to hold harmless and release the Program from any liability or damages resulting from restraint procedures"
-
On 2003-10-08 18:53:00, Anonymous wrote:
""This would include parents that are unwilling to follow the guidelines of the Program or are, at the sole discretion of the Program, unreasonable or difficult to work with."
:rofl: :rofl:
Oh, I get it, it makes it look like the parents could be pepper sprayed if they were unreasonable or difficult! :rofl:
-
Yes, the topic is just explainging that The world wide association od speciality programs and schools are proud of abusing teens since 1987.
This paradise cove contract was made in 1998,
:silly:
-
How could paradise be being sprayed with pepper spray and gettin electricuted by cattle prods be fun. WWASP is fraud in every aspect and every way, look at how this gang was set up, every method they use or say is to cover up the truth
-
Carey ,
That means parnets who do not follow the Parent manual guidelines.Parents who question the authority of the Family Reps. Parents who ask to speak with their child prior to level 3.Parents who wish to show up at the facility unannounced and speak with their kid.
It means,strives to control all of the things you and any sane person would consider the norm response to seeking confirmation their child is ok.
It is a tool the Program uses to control the parents into adhering to their Parent manual RULES or else they get their kid back before he is "fully baked."
The seminar staff were constantly referring to the Parant Manual as reference what and what not to do.
HEAVEN HELP US!
-
What's curious to me is the use of the word "sponser".
One would assume that in the first statement it implies "parent":
the Sponsors authorize the Program to use...
But then later they use "parents":
This would include parents that are unwilling to follow the guidelines of the Program or are, at the sole discretion of the Program, unreasonable or difficult to work with."
Who are the sponsers that are giving the program permission to abuse? The parents or the referring party, or the mamas/daddys at the program?
If it is indeed the parent, then why not have the other read:
This would include "sponsers" that are unwilling to follow the guidelines....
Why the inconsistency in terms???
-
The contract is void anyways since you cannot give permission to violate the law. It is illegal to abuse your children and you can't sign a contract to allow another to do it.
It is illegal to administer psycotropic drugs without a license to prescribe them. You can't sign something to counter that.
In addition you cannot sign away the rights of the child to sue for the abuse so when wwasp or parents try to tell the kids they signed away their rights, they are either ignorant or lying.
In addition since it is illegal to transport a child across state lines for this supposed treatment without the permsission of both states, the contracts permiting the kidnapping of one's teen by "Escorts" are probably void as well and that would mean the escorts are guilty of kidnapping.
-
you said it best FaceKhan
-
That means parnets who do not follow the Parent manual guidelines.Parents who question the authority of the Family Reps. Parents who ask to speak with their child prior to level 3.Parents who wish to show up at the facility unannounced and speak with their kid.
I understand what it says. I don't understand why a parent would agree to it, much less adhere to it. You parents were in control of the situation all along, you just made a choice to follow it.
-
That was me.
The parents who were having second thoughts and yet agreed to what was written in the Parent Manual must have said to themselves when having those second thoughts, "let me see, I really don't like the idea of the program using pepper spray on my child if the program thinks it is necessary, but then again I really don't like the idea of bringing my child home and having to deal with him/her...so I'll choose the pepper spray senario."
Come on, it was the parents choice in this situation in Samoa or where ever it was that that contract was written for. It was the parents choice to send the child there and it was the parents choice to allow the "pepper spray" if so chosen by the "untrained" staff.
It sounds to me like WWASP was being used as the "hitman" by the parents. Now the parents are regretful for what they have done, the choices they made, and want to blame it on the "hitman" who carried out their orders. Don't we as a nation prosecute both, the hitman and the one who has paid them? I think we even prosecute harder the person who paid for the hit?
[ This Message was edited by: Carey on 2003-10-09 05:30 ]
[ This Message was edited by: Carey on 2003-10-09 05:31 ]
-
Carey:
stop for a moment and think that the parent may have been thinking "gee, my son/daughter has had some problems, but not the kinds of problems that would instigate the use of "restraint" or peper spray--not my child-- That is in the contract for the REALLY BAD kids, not my son/daughter. Now, what the contract should say is: if your son/daughter speaks at any time other than 15 minutes group and then and only during his/her turn during 1 hour in the evening, he/she will be thrown to the floor, staff knee pressed against his/her head, possibly axsphysiated from the weight placed on their body from "restraint", his/her head will or could be bashed into the wall, wrestled to the ground for smiling, randomly punished for and UNKNOWN offense or one they didn't exist, all at the discretion of the staff, and you hereby give us permission to do so and will indemnify that behavior (yes, face khan, illegally). now, thats REALLY what it should say. BUT WE EXPOSE THE TRUTH AND THE ABUSE WILL STOP. ::armed::
-
[ This Message was edited by: KarenZ on 2003-10-18 17:51 ]
-
stop for a moment and think that the parent may have been thinking "gee, my son/daughter has had some problems, but not the kinds of problems that would instigate the use of "restraint" or peper spray--not my child-- That is in the contract for the REALLY BAD kids, not my son/daughter.
I DID stop and think,that is why my boys are not still in a program. The risk to me was not worth the taking. I did NOT want uneducated, untrained, unqualified staff working with my kids...because of the risk of abuse. And just think, the contract that my ex had signed was not even near that extreme, it was still pretty bad, but not to that extent.
If you are not willing to protect your own child, then why do you expect others too? I am not condoning any kind of abuse...just trying to make a point.
-
That was me.
-
ok carey, i see your point. you didn't put your child/ren in a wasp school, you would never fall for that crap about saving their lives, change for the better, improving family relationship, teaching accountability, values, blah blah blah, etc. you'd never fall for that. Guess What? Plenty parents did. You disagree with them, thats your option, but i for one don't think the parents considered a specialty school anything akin to a HITMAN for god's sake, and don't deserve to go to JAIL for falling for a big con game. my son was in one of the specialty so-called SCHOOLs for three weeks, when i discovered the information . . . the information that i believed could POSSIBLY be true, i went and got him. He is forgiven for the acts that brought the circumstances which i made my decision on. we have worked it out, with the help of therapists and my mom, sisters and everyone who has helped me. He knows that i love him more than anything/anyone in the world, i've told him so and guess what? he forgives me. guess what else? the individuals WHO PERPETRATED THE ABUSE will go to jail and WASP will be shut down, each and every one of them, if it takes me 2 months or 20 years it WILL BE DONE. Sorry, but i have time, money and effort to see it done. i admittedly made a mistake. but i dont deserve to go to jail and wasp was not my HITMAN, :roll:
-
No anon you did not want to kill your child, but you did want to teach him a lesson. And what ever was in the contract you signed, you agreed to, inherent risks and all. Does that validate the contract, NO. Does that make it right NO.
I just happen to think that you are extremely mad at those who carried out your actions when had you not hired and paid them in the first place to do so, they never would have. Obviously they are not anymore intelligent than you are. They wrote the contracts, DUMB, and you signed them, DUMB. Also, if they had been smart, just as if you had been smart, they would have put measures in place to prevent any types of false alligations, just as if you would have been smart, you would have made SURE your child was in good hands.
That was my point.
-
What is the difference in the WWASPS contracts vs. contracts with every other RTC, behavior mod, specialty school out there?
The one posted here is probably not an updated/current contract, but in viewing other program contracts that are on-line, they are very similar.
I realize that wwasps is the target right now, but what about all the others? Are they all giving their staff free reign to abuse children?
-
regarding the handcuffs, mace, electrical disabler- vow to hold harmless for all actions of employees on or off duty clauses in the earlier Teen Help/Paradise Cove/TB contracts...
David VanBlarigan's parents (on Primetime) stated that they read that part but never thought it would really be used...when asked by Cynthia McFadden...
Paul Richard's parents when asked on (48 hours) stated that they were happy to see that clause so the (poor Samoan giants) would be protected from harm (by their captives)!
there are all kinds of people and parents in this world...some made a mistake but some may have seen exactly what they wanted in the contract...that is even scarier than the Teen Helpers including it in their contract.
-
http://www.cedu.com/images/app_enroll.pdf (http://www.cedu.com/images/app_enroll.pdf) - check pages 17/18 for similarities.
-
[ This Message was edited by: KarenZ on 2003-10-18 17:53 ]
-
Anon,
Carey has the ability to be very condencending
in her judging of us "dumb" parents who trusted the untrustworthy. Most of what she says could be considered accurate. If not judgemental.
I'd like to point out that Carey gave her sons to her exhusband when the twins behavior was distressing , difficult for her to handle.
Apparently the ex was not a much better choice than our speciality school choice. The boys ended up at wwasp anyway.
Carey,they are fortunate you are smart mom.
Give the rest of us a break will ya.
Until you have walked in our shoes you have no right to judge.
-
On 2003-10-09 10:17:00, Anonymous wrote:
"ok carey, i see your point. you didn't put your child/ren in a wasp school, you would never fall for that crap about saving their lives, change for the better, improving family relationship, teaching accountability, values, blah blah blah, etc. you'd never fall for that. Guess What? Plenty parents did. You disagree with them, thats your option, but i for one don't think the parents considered a specialty school anything akin to a HITMAN for god's sake, and don't deserve to go to JAIL for falling for a big con game. my son was in one of the specialty so-called SCHOOLs for three weeks, when i discovered the information . . . the information that i believed could POSSIBLY be true, i went and got him. He is forgiven for the acts that brought the circumstances which i made my decision on. we have worked it out, with the help of therapists and my mom, sisters and everyone who has helped me. He knows that i love him more than anything/anyone in the world, i've told him so and guess what? he forgives me. guess what else? the individuals WHO PERPETRATED THE ABUSE will go to jail and WASP will be shut down, each and every one of them, if it takes me 2 months or 20 years it WILL BE DONE. Sorry, but i have time, money and effort to see it done. i admittedly made a mistake. but i dont deserve to go to jail and wasp was not my HITMAN, :roll: "
Personally, I do not think that you are dumb. It is not easy to be a parent and when we do mess up, which we all do in some way or another, all we can do is everything we can to fix it as much as possible. Sounds like you are doing that.
-
I'd like to point out that Carey gave her sons to her exhusband when the twins behavior was distressing , difficult for her to handle.
Once again, not the case. First, I never gave my kids to my ex. Nor did I ever agree to not talking to them, not seeing them, not spending time with them. YOU DID!!!
Yes, I was having some difficulties with one of the twins. Even so, I can promise you this, the things that he was doing certainly did not warrent cutting him off from the love of his family. That is exactly what you did to your child.
When the boys went to Brazil, they went because their dad and I thought that maybe, being boys and all, they would benefit from spending some time with him. Second, I was not having problems AT ALL with one of the boys. One of the boys just wanted to go to Brazil for a year to spend some time with his dad.
Don't even try to equate what I did with what you did. Not even in the same ballpark. But you know what, had my ex handed me the contract from Dundee to sign...I would have said "kiss my ass."
-
[ This Message was edited by: KarenZ on 2003-10-18 17:54 ]
-
Karen, are parents required to go to the Seminars and how much do they cost?
-
- I wasn't alarmed. I had gone as long as that several times in the past with out a phone call (when he was at summer camp) and so didn't think this was a problem
Karen you can try an rationlalize it any way you want, but no matter what your excuse may be, it just does not fly. Example look at what you wrote above. Then tell yourself that the same considerations should be given to the two senarios.
-
Anyone got copies of training materials for ed consultants? Having not seen them, I'd be willing to take a blind bet that they include something similar to a line in SAFE, Orlando's training sheet on public speaking.
They explicityly state (or stated. They may have changed it by now) that when audience members ask questions not covered in the scripted presentation, the parent or client speaker is to refer them to an intake coordinator or supervisor. It goes on to explain that if you tell them too much, they might get scared off and asks "If you knew what you were getting into, would you have agreed to it?"
Of course you wouldn't! Behavior modification doesn't work if the subject understands the process. There is nothing so likely to produce peace as to be well prepared to meet the enemy.
--George Washington
-
[ This Message was edited by: KarenZ on 2003-10-18 17:56 ]
-
Karen you said: "Oh, it flys allright - otherwise WWASP wouldn't have grown to mamoth proportions and have multipul thousands of kids in their care."
No it doesn't fly. You were not sending your child to camp to have a good time...you sent your child to a program to straighten him out.
Just because there are other suckers out there just like you...certainly does not validate what you did. Maybe it makes you feel better to know there are others...but I still say you are the minority and that most parents have better sense.
-
[ This Message was edited by: KarenZ on 2003-10-18 17:57 ]
-
Other Anon, who asked about Discovery -I forget to answer this part - No, the parents do not Have to attend. However to take part in the parent child weekends you must have been threw at least Discovery; So actually, Discovery is mandatory.
Who here is brainwashed? "I suppose if you don't stand for something, you will fall for anything."
Sure is funny how you seem to see yourself at the mercy of "the program."
-
What program? You mean a WWASP prison with 5 "programs" already shut down cause of abuse!
::bigsmilebounce::
-
What program? You mean a WWASP prison with 5 "programs" already shut down cause of abuse!
My point was...Karen was always in control..she was not brainwashed...she was not at the mercy of "the program." She was always in control of the situation and yet she acts as though she herself had been brainwashed.
Her problem is she does not need proof of anything. She can be told anything about something and automatically she jumps right on the bandwagon...with really nothing to go on but what she has been told. Next thing you know she is an expert on the topic.
Her son ended up in a program. She did about the same amount of investigating the program at Dundee, in a foreign country, that she did investigating the summer camp she sent him to. She said so herself.
-
[ This Message was edited by: KarenZ on 2003-10-18 17:59 ]
-
Karen - you said you never attended :wink: the adult personal growth seminars in a thread some time ago. Many think that the seminars brainwash parents into thinking they need to keep their kid in the program, which they don't...but say if they did, then you were not brainwashed as you never attended one, right?
-
Your right about this ; But what you so stubbornly don't see, is this was not the intent or understanding of the parents who try the Program.
Karen, you can only speak for yourself. You can not tell me or anyone else what the other parents understanding is or was.
No one would agree to the kind of cutting off thats actually takes place if they understood it from the start.
I think it is funny that you say this. You know why? The reason is, and so you will know, I too am very much against these programs, however, probably 90% or more of the parents that I have spoken with in regard to the limited communication and the length of time that lapsed before they were able to talk to their child, chose to leave their child in the program for much longer than what the "enrollment agreement" stated was the norm. Why did such a high number of these now disgruntle parents go along with it when it became a reality? So as you say "no one would agree to the kind of cutting off thats actually takes place" then why did it take them so long, like months, to say "hey something is not right here."
I agree in a moment of desparation a parent might make a poor decision about the placement of their child in a program, but after the dust settles why do they then not start to see the signs? Why has it taken a lot of these disgruntle parents so long to see what was happening?
We even know of one parent, someone you and I both know, who made trips to Dundee, and yet left her child there for a year, and is now speaking out against them. WHY? Why did it take a year? Why did it take Amberly 6 months, after resigning (a total of 10 -12 if you add her time at Dundee) to speak out against Dundee? Why with what all has been discovered did it take these two people so long to speak out? Were they afraid for themselves? That is the only thing I can figure. Here you have two adults, actually three given Randall, who could have saved a lot of children a lot of pain and suffering much sooner.
I am so tired of adults who now play the blame game and today act as though they are so righteous. Once again, I think it is a save your butt senario, just like the PURE save your butt senario. I question whether any of these individuals motive is that of protecting children.
-
:idea: :idea: :idea:
-
[ This Message was edited by: KarenZ on 2003-10-18 18:01 ]
-
If you really want to know, and aren?t just looking for yet another person to unjustly besmirch
I have not unjustly "besmirched" anyone, not even you.
Maybe you can tell me where anything I have said has been unjust since you seem to think my stating facts and asking question is unjust in your opinion.
Maybe they, meaning Amberly and Marth can explain the answers to my questions, because I know you don't know anything about anything... I know that you only know what someone else tells you.
-
Carrey shut yo mouth, you sound like a 50 year old lady going through metapause with nothing positive to say. You are doing nothing to help against WWASPS abuse. :lol:
-
Pleeeezzzeee: Carey has nothing to do with anyting. The best we can all do is IGNORE her. She talks to herself anyway as anons. Then she puts little emotocons to pull up her threads that no one cares about. She is such a ASS. Karen, dont even waste your time typing to her. Let her converse with herself. IMO she is mentally not stable, and her rampant writing proves it.Nut Case in a Nut Shell. :silly: She is not helping anyone, but she enjoys making pple feel like shit and is so degrading. Projecting her own failures on to us. Fu-kg Nut.
-
I must have hit a nerve.
-
On 2003-10-11 20:35:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Pleeeezzzeee: Carey has nothing to do with anyting. The best we can all do is IGNORE her. She talks to herself anyway as anons. Then she puts little emotocons to pull up her threads that no one cares about. She is such a ASS. Karen, dont even waste your time typing to her. Let her converse with herself. IMO she is mentally not stable, and her rampant writing proves it.Nut Case in a Nut Shell. :silly: She is not helping anyone, but she enjoys making pple feel like shit and is so degrading. Projecting her own failures on to us. Fu-kg Nut."
So what if Carey's opinions irritate (or even bore you)? That doesn't give you the right to control the opinions of others by telling them who they should or should not listen to with such vicious (and vile) overtones. Second, do you want to explain why it's okay for you to call someone mentally unstable when your own failure
to rationally debate an issue raises questions about your own mental stability?
:eek:
And NO, I am NOT CAREY in case your paranoia is still on overdrive.
-
keep in mind people. this board is about wwasps abuse on teens, not a counciling message board.
-
Hahahahahahaha....oh that was so funny
-
carry ima flip u the bird' :tup:
You insecure house mom with grammar skills that wouldnt even be able to support bill clinton.
Leave or help save lives from wwasp.
-
On 2003-10-12 21:09:00, Anonymous wrote:
"carry ima flip u the bird' :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: