Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Anonymous on January 15, 2004, 12:36:00 AM
-
I graduated SCL over a year ago. I feel bad for anyone still in it. It is inhumane. Please, make sure that it is you LAST RESORT. let kids be kids. Recognize the differece between kids being kids, and kids having huge problems. And remember -A friend in weed is a friend indeed =)
-
You posted you were at Jamieson Academy...which was it? Smokin too much weed? :silly:
-
On 2004-01-14 22:31:00, Anonymous wrote:
"You posted you were at Jamieson Academy...which was it? Smokin too much weed? :silly: "
Who *cares*?
I don't want my kid smoking pot, but I'd sure as hell rather a kid on pot than a kid raped, suffering from Stockholm Syndrome and then PTSD, education impaired for life from years of indifferent, insignificant instruction.
I'd never *allow* my kid to smoke pot, but if I caught her at it I'd sure as hell do whatever I could to stop it *at home*---and if those attempts to stop it were less than 100% effective, then whatever lack of effectiveness would sure as hell be less harmful than Child Abuse R Us Boarding "Schools."
Nobody's ever suffered permanent, major mental health damage from a joint or two. Or even several years of chronic pot smoking.
Hoards of kids have suffered lifelong, serious mental health damage from institutionalized child abuse in these nightmare places.
I've never used marijuana, and I think using it is stupid, but being a good parent means that when your kid screws up, even badly, you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Sending your teen to one of these nightmare places because he/she won't stop screwing up is just as bad (and the same cop out to frustration) as shaking your baby because he or she won't stop crying.
-
Statement "would not allow your child to smoke pot".
Here is some food for thought......We as parents only have as much control of our child as they will give us...... We can give consequences however that will not stop what the teen wants if that is what they want.
First of all I think we need to look at what is normal for teens. It is my believe that it is normal for teens to try pot and to also drink. There is also a responsibility that comes with that which is where I want to drive home the expecations if that is their choice. This does not mean I approve of it however I am being realistic that I can not control it. What i do not look at as being normal for teens is to consistantly throw family/loved ones away for ones own wants and selfishness.
-
Parents who drink, your kids will almost certainly drink too. Deal with it, you set the example.
Same thing for parents who smoke pot.
If you don't want your kids to drink pull them aside when they are like 12-14 and hand them a beer or a glass of cheap wine. Most likely they will spit it out. That will probably keep them from drinking till they are about 16-18. Its only when you make it a big deal that they are gonna want to do it just to excercise their free will.
-
I have not found that to be true. I do not drink nor do I smoke pot however that didn't stop my child from doing it. So when you take your child aside at age 12 for a little sip of alcohol to teach them the lesson to not do it also says you should take them aside to smoke the forbidden or do the other forbidden things they might do. I do not believe that will teach them either. Some children are just more of a challenge than others. 2 kids raised the same in one home will not turn out the same all the time. 1 can be totally out of control and the other can be the opposite.
-
On 2004-01-15 09:48:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I have not found that to be true. I do not drink nor do I smoke pot however that didn't stop my child from doing it. So when you take your child aside at age 12 for a little sip of alcohol to teach them the lesson to not do it also says you should take them aside to smoke the forbidden or do the other forbidden things they might do. I do not believe that will teach them either. Some children are just more of a challenge than others. 2 kids raised the same in one home will not turn out the same all the time. 1 can be totally out of control and the other can be the opposite. "
I understand you didn't mean it this way, you just hit one of my pet peeves so I'm going to go off on a tangent---please don't think I'm complaining about you, because I'm not, okay? :smile:
The phrase is "out of control."
I really, really hate it when I hear a teen who may well be a screwup pain in the butt described as "out of control."
Because the issue, of course, is out of *whose* control?
The parents'? Society's? The Church's?
Teenagers whole job as human beings is to start separating from authority and being under their *own* control instead of the control of their parents or society or their church.
Very naturally, along the way in this process, most of them go overboard at least occasionally.
I'm more concerned with the ones that never rebel, because those are "Good Chermans" in the making---people who will happily walk the latest "subhuman" scapegoats to the gas chambers because some authority figure *told* them to.
Teens' developmental *job* is oppositional behavior. It's not a *disorder*---it's a positive and necessary developmental stage.
Teens learn through trial and error, and thought, and example, which things they need to oppose their parents and society about, and which things their parents and society are more or less right about.
How you keep kids from doing really stupid things is you give them very good reasons for not doing the stupid things that make sense in terms of their personal self-interest as they see it.
And if a law if really stupid, and *you* just follow it because the consequences of getting caught aren't worth it---tell the kid the truth.
Teens respect being told the unvarnished practical truth more than anything else. However, it's sometimes very necessary to distinguish between "truth" inferred from religious faith and secular truth coming from empirical evidence.
Anyway, when I hear someone describing a teen as "totally out of control" my first question is always, "Is this person upset because the teen is out of the teen's *own* internal control, or because the teen is no longer as responsive to control by external authority?"
A teen out of his own internal control has a serious problem.
A teen becoming less and less amenable to *external* controls is growing up normally. If he or she is going hog wild *under* his or her own control--is making the *decisions* to go hog wild---then inconsistent parenting, overcontrolling parenting, parenting without consistent, rational and reasonable limits and consequences is the cause.
Moving the child to a normal family home environment with consistent, reasonable, rational guardians is the solution.
My concern with these places is that they accept teens who are entirely under their own internal control but are in rebellion against external controls. The latter is an inevitable symptom of growing up, and a budding grownup reacting normally to a bad home environment. The "solution" is an institution hired by the parents to stop the growing up and separating-from-external-control process in its tracks---which is very like binding a little girl's feet to keep them from growing, or pulling a child out of school to keep him from getting an education and growing too independent.
The counter argument would be that we adults are under society's control and government's control---but it's not really *true*. A healthy, mature adult human is under his/her own internal control and obey's society or government *only* when his or her better judgement says the rule is a good idea anyway. A healthy, mature adult human's response to a rule that is *not* a good idea is to independently evaluate that rule and *either* obey out of a personal belief in the importance of rule of law *or* to disobey and either attempt not to get caught, or to stand and face the consequences boldly to make a point or legally challenge the rule.
A healthy adult human is *only* under his/her own internal control.
A teen who is *only* under his/her own internal control but *is* under his/her own internal control is just a normal, healthy teen turning into an adult.
Some parents need and deserve to be opposed or defied by their teens and everyone else.
Ginger's parents are an excellent case in point.
That's my quarrel with ODD as a diagnosis. Diagnostic criteria *never* involve an evaluation of the parents to determine if opposing or defying those particular parents is a reasonable, rational act. That question should *always* be asked, and very carefully evaluated, before a diagnosis of ODD or related disorder is made.
-
On 2004-01-15 13:24:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-01-15 09:48:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I have not found that to be true. I do not drink nor do I smoke pot however that didn't stop my child from doing it. So when you take your child aside at age 12 for a little sip of alcohol to teach them the lesson to not do it also says you should take them aside to smoke the forbidden or do the other forbidden things they might do. I do not believe that will teach them either. Some children are just more of a challenge than others. 2 kids raised the same in one home will not turn out the same all the time. 1 can be totally out of control and the other can be the opposite. "
I understand you didn't mean it this way, you just hit one of my pet peeves so I'm going to go off on a tangent---please don't think I'm complaining about you, because I'm not, okay? :smile:
The phrase is "out of control."
I really, really hate it when I hear a teen who may well be a screwup pain in the butt described as "out of control."
Because the issue, of course, is out of *whose* control?
The parents'? Society's? The Church's?
Teenagers whole job as human beings is to start separating from authority and being under their *own* control instead of the control of their parents or society or their church.
Very naturally, along the way in this process, most of them go overboard at least occasionally.
I'm more concerned with the ones that never rebel, because those are "Good Chermans" in the making---people who will happily walk the latest "subhuman" scapegoats to the gas chambers because some authority figure *told* them to.
Teens' developmental *job* is oppositional behavior. It's not a *disorder*---it's a positive and necessary developmental stage.
Teens learn through trial and error, and thought, and example, which things they need to oppose their parents and society about, and which things their parents and society are more or less right about.
How you keep kids from doing really stupid things is you give them very good reasons for not doing the stupid things that make sense in terms of their personal self-interest as they see it.
And if a law if really stupid, and *you* just follow it because the consequences of getting caught aren't worth it---tell the kid the truth.
Teens respect being told the unvarnished practical truth more than anything else. However, it's sometimes very necessary to distinguish between "truth" inferred from religious faith and secular truth coming from empirical evidence.
Anyway, when I hear someone describing a teen as "totally out of control" my first question is always, "Is this person upset because the teen is out of the teen's *own* internal control, or because the teen is no longer as responsive to control by external authority?"
A teen out of his own internal control has a serious problem.
A teen becoming less and less amenable to *external* controls is growing up normally. If he or she is going hog wild *under* his or her own control--is making the *decisions* to go hog wild---then inconsistent parenting, overcontrolling parenting, parenting without consistent, rational and reasonable limits and consequences is the cause.
Moving the child to a normal family home environment with consistent, reasonable, rational guardians is the solution.
My concern with these places is that they accept teens who are entirely under their own internal control but are in rebellion against external controls. The latter is an inevitable symptom of growing up, and a budding grownup reacting normally to a bad home environment. The "solution" is an institution hired by the parents to stop the growing up and separating-from-external-control process in its tracks---which is very like binding a little girl's feet to keep them from growing, or pulling a child out of school to keep him from getting an education and growing too independent.
The counter argument would be that we adults are under society's control and government's control---but it's not really *true*. A healthy, mature adult human is under his/her own internal control and obey's society or government *only* when his or her better judgement says the rule is a good idea anyway. A healthy, mature adult human's response to a rule that is *not* a good idea is to independently evaluate that rule and *either* obey out of a personal belief in the importance of rule of law *or* to disobey and either attempt not to get caught, or to stand and face the consequences boldly to make a point or legally challenge the rule.
A healthy adult human is *only* under his/her own internal control.
A teen who is *only* under his/her own internal control but *is* under his/her own internal control is just a normal, healthy teen turning into an adult.
Some parents need and deserve to be opposed or defied by their teens and everyone else.
Ginger's parents are an excellent case in point.
That's my quarrel with ODD as a diagnosis. Diagnostic criteria *never* involve an evaluation of the parents to determine if opposing or defying those particular parents is a reasonable, rational act. That question should *always* be asked, and very carefully evaluated, before a diagnosis of ODD or related disorder is made.
"
Bravo, Anon, you hit the nail absolutely on the head. Thanks!
:wave:
-
I agree as well regarding ODD-- but to be fair, the diagnosis requires the child to be resistant to authority that isn't the parents-- ie, he has to be defiant of *all* authority figures or most, not just parents.
I bet many kids are given the diagnosis just based on what the parents describe, however-- but this is not how it's supposed to be done.
One thing that would put these guys out of business very rapidly would be to require psych eval of both parents and child by an *independent* expert and failure at several outpt treatments [barring an emergency, like real suicidal activities or injecting] before long-term residential care could even be considered.
-
On 2004-01-15 15:14:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
I agree as well regarding ODD-- but to be fair, the diagnosis requires the child to be resistant to authority that isn't the parents-- ie, he has to be defiant of *all* authority figures or most, not just parents.
I bet many kids are given the diagnosis just based on what the parents describe, however-- but this is not how it's supposed to be done.
One thing that would put these guys out of business very rapidly would be to require psych eval of both parents and child by an *independent* expert and failure at several outpt treatments [barring an emergency, like real suicidal activities or injecting] before long-term residential care could even be considered."
Here are the diagnostic criteria:
Four or more of the following in six months.
* 1. Often loses temper
* 2. often argues with adults
* 3. often actively defies or refuses to comply with adults' requests or rules
* 4. often deliberately annoys people
* 5. often blames others for his or her mistakes or misbehavior
* 6. is often touchy or easily annoyed by others
* 7. is often angry and resentful
* 8. is often spiteful and vindictive
How many parents with a pain in the butt teen can't easily interpret their own conflicts with their teen as the *teen* "often" losing his temper?
"Often" arguing with "adults" doesn't stipulate that the adults include adults other than the teen's parents or guardians.
A family conflict would definitely result in the teens' being around the parents and seeming "often" angry and resentful.
The teen being upset with the parents would be enough to be "often" touchy or easily annoyed by "others."
Four completely subjective criteria, sufficient for diagnosis, that could easily be exchanged by long term family conflict triggered by unreasonably controlling or other bad behavior by the parents.
But the question is *never* asked. The diagnostic criteria don't require that it be.
The diagnostic criteria don't require that all these reactions to "adults" or "others" specifically include general responses to adults and others who are not the child's parents---or church leaders---which can be a big factor if Mom and Dad have specific religious beliefs the teen doesn't share.
The diagnostic criteria for this "disorder" are so overbroad and unreasonable that it amounts to, if the parents are fighting with the kid over the kid's reasonable and developmentally appropriate growing independence, and the *parents* say the kid is oppositional and defiant, then the *kid* is "sick."
The diagnostic criteria for this disorder, which is certainly a real disorder, need to be radically reformed.
-
er...sorry....keyboard dyslexia. I meant "explained," not "exchanged."
-
Check out this discussion about a boy who is facing some serious consequences for doing something that sounds pretty "normal" to me, especially when you consider his circumstances. Any feedback?
biased ://www.strugglingteens.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000690
-
Sorry, here's that link:
http://www.strugglingteens.com/cgi-bin/ ... 2;t=000690 (http://www.strugglingteens.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000690)
-
It is common to regard ratings and descriptions as information given by a competent authority who is a professional ally of the psychologist. Any report, however, is one individual's perception of another, subject to as much distortion as any perception of a fluctuating ambiguous stimulus. Indeed, such reports often serve as information
about the personality or motivational state of the rater.
Cronbach, L.J.
Essentials of Psychological Testing
Third Edition, 1970
P. 491
An "experts" (PhD Psychotherapist) comment on that quote:
Excellent quote and thinking about overcoming our conditioned tendency to defer to experts... here is a favorite Dalai Lama quote:
One of my fundamental beliefs is that all sentient beings have gentleness as their
fundamental nature. If we look at the pattern of our existence from an early age until our
death, we see the way in which we are so fundamentally nurtured by affection, each other's
affection, and how we feel when we are exposed to each others' affection. In addition,
when we ourselves have affectionate feelings we see how it naturally affects us from
within. Not only that, but also being affectionate and being more wholesome in our
behavior and thought seems to be much more suited to the physical structure of our body in
terms of its effect on our health and physical well- being, and so on. It must also be
noted that the contrary seems to be destructive to health. --Dalai Lama, 1999
************************
We can't legislate affection or love. And we can't go give it to parents so they know what it looks and feels like, so they can pass it on. You either got it or you didn't, and it's hard to give what you didn't get. One can recover if they so desire, but that is a journey and requires some grieving of unmet childhood needs.
The whole argument for psych "disorders" is scientifically unfounded. I appreciate the point you are trying to make anon, but you're using a faulty argument.
If one is defiant, which we know to be "normal" (I would say "common", not normal), where does one draw the line. When does the "normal" behavior become a "disorder". I think that whole argument is bogus. I believe it's the same reaction to disrespect, just manifesting in varying degrees. And I don't think that it suddenly becomes a psych "disorder" when the defiance extends to authorities outside the family. Bunk! And what of the child that has the opposite reaction, totally defering to authourity for fear of reprisal? Does that child have a "disorder"? The "Scared Shitless Disorder"?
Defiance is "normal" (common) under duress. There are cultures that have no "teen rebellion". It is a phenomema of modern society.
I can't even say that I'd support an evaluation of the parents, unless that particular "expert" shared my beliefs. Otherwise, it would be a crap shoot as what the "expert" would determine. If s/he was of the belief that you expressed, s/he could well determine that RT was in the teens best interest. I think it is completely possible that many determine the parents are "unfit" and resistant to change, therefore make a decision in favor of removing the child from the parents.
One thing for certain, an evaluation is never objective, no such thing. Every decision is based on the experts perceptions and beliefs, which more times than not can produce an undesirable outcome. I'd prefer that anyone conducting an eval on me to have all the information I have, and share my beliefs. I do not want to be "evaluated" by someone who has only college psych-book knowledge.
-
On 2004-01-15 16:42:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Check out this discussion about a boy who is facing some serious consequences for doing something that sounds pretty "normal" to me, especially when you consider his circumstances. Any feedback?
biased ://www.strugglingteens.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000690"
Well, petty theft of money is serious. It's not normal. It's also not grounds for residential treatment.
They make safes. If your kid is untrustworthy around money, you don't leave any around unlocked.
Our safe has combination and key locking---and it ain't your gym locker lock--the combination is much more complicated than that.
I really couldn't know without talking to the kid and parents in depth.
This kind of thing, if my kid did it, would be grounds for grounding with some serious additional chores for a month---part of getting back out of trouble would be doing additional work to pay restitution for the theft.
I would only call the police and prosecute if the kid was unwilling to obey the rules of being grounded and doing the work to pay restitution for the theft.
It's not "pretty normal"---but it's also the kind of garden-variety serious teen screwup that can be deterred by ordinary parental tools of punishment.
-
Oh hell, how many parents can claim goodie-2-shoe status and say they never stole money from their parents when they were teenagers or never once snuck a peek at their older brother's (or even dad's) Playboy? This kid's mom is depressed b/c she can't control her son's attitude and behavior, in spite of spending a minor fortune on raising him in a therapeutic community. Back to the wilderness? What a great idea. No X-rated websites out there to worry about.
:roll:
-
Isn't materbating considered an egregious offense in some of these places? How can parents be so anti-normal?
-
Found another quote while researching laetrile and alternative cures for cancer. A topic for another forum. It is directed toward medicine, but should be applied to psychiatry as well.
http://www.seedoffaith.com/ (http://www.seedoffaith.com/)
Unless we put medical freedom into the Constitution, the time will come when medicine will organize into an undercover dictatorship ... To restrict the art of healing to one class of men and deny equal privileges to others will constitute the Bastille of medical science. All such laws are un-American and despotic and have no place in a republic ... The constitution of this republic should make special privilege for medical freedom as well as religious freedom."
Benjamin Rush, M.D., signer of The Declaration of Independence, physician to George Washington. from THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF BENJAMIN RUSH
-
Removing kids to foster homes is not the solution either. The same abuses can and do occur.
A documentary aired about a welfare mom trying to make ends meet. The social worker who was put on the case finally determined that she was unfit and removed her children to foster homes. One of the complaints was that she left the older kids in charge while she worked.
The really infuriating thing about this situation, they paid the foster parents DOUBLE what they paid her. Where's the rationale???
Comptroller widens investigation into state foster care program
12:50 PM CST on Thursday, January 15, 2004
KVUE News
A financial review of the foster and residential care industry has turned into a massive statewide investigation.
New allegations of mismanagement and child abuse forced investigators to expand their probe.
Stacks of reports and surveys are piling up at the state comptroller's office.
The results were supposed to be issued this week but will not be ready until late next month.
State Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn says the investigation is looking at a lot more than how our tax dollars are being used.
"Certainly I'm concerned about the tax dollars, and that's why this is a special financial report, but most importantly I am concerned that our most vulnerable children are being put into an environment, that is not safe for them, that does not nurture and enhance these children. They are our most precious resource, our most vulnerable resource, and let me tell you these forgotten children have got one tough grandma looking out for them right now," says Strayhorn.
Investigators want to hear from people with experiences in the state foster and residential care systems.
For more information on the foster care survey, click here.
oOo
If you would like to see the story online you can view it with Realplayer at this link;
http://www.kvue.com/cgi-bin/bi/video/G2 ... le=5649128 (http://www.kvue.com/cgi-bin/bi/video/G2redirect.pl?title=5649128)
-
Yes I believe the boy looking at porn is normal....however I do not believe stealing from ones family is and taking a credit card is. One should not have to hide their purse in their own home, one should not have to worry about locking up their money. Teens need to learn RESPECT of others things vs. thinking only of them selves.
However, it is also important to make the punishment fit the crime. Personally I would one make him repay what he took and would also cut the computer availability. You can set passwords that the kids do not know.....You can make it so adult sites can not be shown. Parents need to start the parenting vs. looking for sympathy on a forum.
-
Given all that one can infer by the fact that these parents put their kid in a TBS to begin with and their response to this minor infraction, I'm guessing this kid is probably in a similar situation, intellectually and developmentally, as I was at around age 15.
I think telling Ben that he can't have contact with us would probably come as a relief to him at this point.
First, this statement is probably on track. When I was on my phases, I had no desire whatever to "earn" talk or to go home. I missed my dad the way he used to be when he was acting as my father and not as an agent of the Program. But I didn't expect to be seing that old man ever again. My mom had always been an agent of the Program just about as far back as I could remember. I didn't hate them. I wasn't mad at them. I simply had no preference wrt where I did my time till I could get out or who I was supposed to call Mom and Dad in the mean time.
Second, I had a very serious problem distinguising between different levels of risk and different levels of infractions. I had lived a very insular life as a kid. Everything was all very black and white. My mom made no distinction between petty and major issues. Just like these parents, anything other than 100% compliance with a smile 100% of the time was 100% proof of drug abuse and a need for treatment.
So I didn't slide gradually from good kid to 'troubled' teen. I tried my very best to walk the straight and narrow. When I just couldn't take it anymore, I started right down the list of "druggie" behavior that I'd learned from Open Meetings every Friday night for years. I had already smoked pot w/ my brother and taken the car out at night. I had not gotten caught, but I knew I would eventually. And I knew there was only one consequence; I'd be put in group at The Seed and come out the other end weird like my older brothers and sister and some of their friends.
So I packed a back pack, took my $137 out of the credit union and hitchhiked around the country for like a month, looking for someplace to land and stay hidden for the remaining 2 years+ till I turned of age. I really made no distinction whatever between smoking a joint to see what all the fuss was about and thumbing my way around the interstate highway system all alone. We should be careful to get out of an experience only the wisdom that is in it - and stop there; lest we be like the cat that sits down on a hot stove-lid. She will never sit down on a hot stove-lid again---and that is well; but also she will never sit down on a cold one anymore.
Mark Twain
-
On 2004-01-16 07:06:00, Antigen wrote:
"Given all that one can infer by the fact that these parents put their kid in a TBS to begin with and their response to this minor infraction, I'm guessing this kid is probably in a similar situation, intellectually and developmentally, as I was at around age 15.
I think telling Ben that he can't have contact with us would probably come as a relief to him at this point.
First, this statement is probably on track. When I was on my phases, I had no desire whatever to "earn" talk or to go home. I missed my dad the way he used to be when he was acting as my father and not as an agent of the Program. But I didn't expect to be seing that old man ever again. My mom had always been an agent of the Program just about as far back as I could remember. I didn't hate them. I wasn't mad at them. I simply had no preference wrt where I did my time till I could get out or who I was supposed to call Mom and Dad in the mean time.
Second, I had a very serious problem distinguising between different levels of risk and different levels of infractions. I had lived a very insular life as a kid. Everything was all very black and white. My mom made no distinction between petty and major issues. Just like these parents, anything other than 100% compliance with a smile 100% of the time was 100% proof of drug abuse and a need for treatment.
So I didn't slide gradually from good kid to 'troubled' teen. I tried my very best to walk the straight and narrow. When I just couldn't take it anymore, I started right down the list of "druggie" behavior that I'd learned from Open Meetings every Friday night for years. I had already smoked pot w/ my brother and taken the car out at night. I had not gotten caught, but I knew I would eventually. And I knew there was only one consequence; I'd be put in group at The Seed and come out the other end weird like my older brothers and sister and some of their friends.
So I packed a back pack, took my $137 out of the credit union and hitchhiked around the country for like a month, looking for someplace to land and stay hidden for the remaining 2 years+ till I turned of age. I really made no distinction whatever between smoking a joint to see what all the fuss was about and thumbing my way around the interstate highway system all alone. We should be careful to get out of an experience only the wisdom that is in it - and stop there; lest we be like the cat that sits down on a hot stove-lid. She will never sit down on a hot stove-lid again---and that is well; but also she will never sit down on a cold one anymore.
Mark Twain
"
I'm sorry, Ginger, but given what your parents were like, hitchhiking as a runaway was *safer*.
Your parents were *already* the kind of psycho fate people warn hitchhikers against.
Getting murdered would have been worse, of course. But provided you didn't get AIDS, even being forced into prostitution would be no more damaging to your psyche and for no longer term than the abuse at The Seed.
And getting murdered and forced into prostitution weren't *certainties* like getting stuck in The Seed was. I do not believe that you could have avoided The Seed no matter how "good" you were, any more than a battered wife can avoid doing *something* that "sets him off." Because the thing that triggers the Program behavior, like the thing that triggers the battering behavior, is internal to the abuser, and actions of the abused are merely what the abuser points to as external excuses for his/her abusive behavior.
Thumbing your way around the country was *safer* than your personal home environment, as sad as that fact is.
No wonder you didn't consider it "unsafe"---you lived constantly with "unsafe" because your mother was a fucking loony who a sane person wouldn't trust to raise a hamster, much less a child.
I'm glad your dad's brainwashed foray into dangerous lunacy was only temporary, ultimately, and that he recovered, but at the time he was dangerously mentally unbalanced, as well.
Your sane childhood psyche made a *rational* evaluation at the time about relative risk.
Smoking pot was stupid, but a couple of casual joints was mostly only dangerous *because* it was illegal.
Running away was not a stupid misbehavior, it was a smart self-preservational action of a budding adult who realized, at least subconsciously, that she was *not safe*---running proportionally increased your safety by making serious harm merely a grave risk, rather than a certainty.
It sucks out loud that the grown ups in the surrounding government agencies at the time provided no safer options for you to get out of such a dangerous situation.
Running away would have been dangerous and stupid for most kids in most home situations. In yours, it was a sane and rational response to an insane and abusive situation.
Have you seen "Sleeping with the Enemy"? When the wife is lining up all the cans so carefully, and the towels so carefully, she's being just as abused as when he's actually beating the crap out of her---because she's living in a condition of constant terrorization.
Your home environment was lining up the cans and towels.
-
On 2004-01-15 18:04:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Oh hell, how many parents can claim goodie-2-shoe status and say they never stole money from their parents when they were teenagers or never once snuck a peek at their older brother's (or even dad's) Playboy? This kid's mom is depressed b/c she can't control her son's attitude and behavior, in spite of spending a minor fortune on raising him in a therapeutic community. Back to the wilderness? What a great idea. No X-rated websites out there to worry about.
:roll: "
I didn't steal money from my parents or anyone else. Did look at other kids' porn mags, though.
I don't think that makes me a goody two shoes. Most people I know, I would think (but I'll ask), didn't steal money from their parents or anyone else.
On the other hand, I also didn't have parents who actively interfered with my opportunity to use my own labor to earn money around the neighborhood, or, later, in a job.
If this kid's been forced into substantial unpaid labor at the TBS, I take it back---it might legally be stealing, but morally, they've stolen far more from him than he has from them.
-
On 2004-01-15 21:38:00, Deborah wrote:
"
Removing kids to foster homes is not the solution either. The same abuses can and do occur.
A documentary aired about a welfare mom trying to make ends meet. The social worker who was put on the case finally determined that she was unfit and removed her children to foster homes. One of the complaints was that she left the older kids in charge while she worked.
The really infuriating thing about this situation, they paid the foster parents DOUBLE what they paid her. Where's the rationale???
Comptroller widens investigation into state foster care program
12:50 PM CST on Thursday, January 15, 2004
KVUE News
A financial review of the foster and residential care industry has turned into a massive statewide investigation.
New allegations of mismanagement and child abuse forced investigators to expand their probe.
Stacks of reports and surveys are piling up at the state comptroller's office.
The results were supposed to be issued this week but will not be ready until late next month.
State Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn says the investigation is looking at a lot more than how our tax dollars are being used.
"Certainly I'm concerned about the tax dollars, and that's why this is a special financial report, but most importantly I am concerned that our most vulnerable children are being put into an environment, that is not safe for them, that does not nurture and enhance these children. They are our most precious resource, our most vulnerable resource, and let me tell you these forgotten children have got one tough grandma looking out for them right now," says Strayhorn.
Investigators want to hear from people with experiences in the state foster and residential care systems.
For more information on the foster care survey, click here.
oOo
If you would like to see the story online you can view it with Realplayer at this link;
http://www.kvue.com/cgi-bin/bi/video/G2 ... le=5649128 (http://www.kvue.com/cgi-bin/bi/video/G2redirect.pl?title=5649128)
"
Being placed in foster care is substantially *less* likely to result in abuse than staying with abusive parents or being placed in a TBS.
Nothing's perfect, and I would certainly recommend the system place the child with a fit relative willing to care for the child if one is available.
-
***Isn't materbating considered an egregious offense in some of these places? How can parents be so anti-normal?***
This brings up some questions:
What's the arguement against masterbation? Religious?
Does the contract or parent manual inform parents that their teen will not be allowed to masterbate? Or is this sprung on the parent after they have signed the dotted line and find out their teen is being/has been punished for it?
Are they told how their teen will be punished if caught violating this rule?
How is the teen caught?
Are there hidden cameras, sheet/underwear/"spot" checks every morning, do they rely on other teens to rat out their peers?
Who's "truth" about masterbation is forced on the teen? And what rationale is given for forbidding it?
-
Yeah, what is the argument? Even the most sexually oppressed parents could not stop their kids from exploring their sexuality in the privacy of their own bedroom, for god's sake (unless the parent installed a video surveillance camera which is really SICK).
Second, these kids are coming out of these programs with impaired reality testing skills. How do they even know what's real and what's not? It must be overwhelming ergo the need for after-care programs to monitor their state-of-mind.
Anyway, good questions, Deb. Hope some of these program parents will respond with some honest answers.
-
***Second, these kids are coming out of these programs with impaired reality testing skills. How do they even know what's real and what's not?***
Is that surprising? According to seminar information, the participants are conditioned to believe, "Everything you think is real, isn't... and everything you think isn't real, is." They don't even hide it.
-
On 2004-01-17 13:56:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Yeah, what is the argument? Even the most sexually oppressed parents could not stop their kids from exploring their sexuality in the privacy of their own bedroom, for god's sake (unless the parent installed a video surveillance camera which is really SICK).
Second, these kids are coming out of these programs with impaired reality testing skills. How do they even know what's real and what's not? It must be overwhelming ergo the need for after-care programs to monitor their state-of-mind.
Anyway, good questions, Deb. Hope some of these program parents will respond with some honest answers.
"
If you want info from a program person, I'll share that you are absolutely the one with the impaired reality. WHO says that the kids are told what to think in a wwasps program? That's so 180 degrees from the truth! The whole point of personal growth is to find their own answers to what will work for them.
As for after-care - that is a very distorted assumption of why there is after-care. It's to start applying what they learned, mentor, guide, whatever you want to call it.
Someone really wants to discredit the programs intentions...sorry, won't fly with someone who knows.
-
Re: LGAT Training Seminars
Impaired reality testing skills is a term straight out of the LifeSpring study done by Drs. Haaken and Adams several years ago.
Wouldn't it be wise to read the study for yourselves, Parents, before issuing blanket denials or accusing anyone of "bad intentions".
Second, this is a forum where people do not have to tolerate closed-minding thinking. Speaking your mind is a good thing, but please, do not expect or demand others to go along with your point-of-view verbatim.
-
Who's close minded? Closed minds is exactly what I'm reading here forr the mostpart. I'm open to the truth, however, your truth is based on heresay.
Lifespring? Many things are based on a predecessor, but is not the same thing. There were good things in lifespring which MANY other personal growth seminars use. Personal growth in wwasp is NOT mind control, but mind expansion. Too much for you? Then stay in your judgmental little worlds. If you haven't experienced a wwasp seminar, then continue to compare it to what you have experienced. That's the "easy" way to remain "right." Right Deborah? You don't have a clue what it's all about, only what you experienced in whatever it was you attended for 18% of the time. It wasn't for you. Nobody said you were wrong for this. However, you are saying other's are wrong for crediting theirs with a more satisfying life.
If a parent is disgruntled, then, in my view, my view only, is they expected it to look perfect, expected the staff to fix their kid, expected everyone but their kid to take accountability for the choices and actions. It's always someone else's fault.
So...not everyone is happy and "satisfied." It's all in who you ask.
-
On 2004-01-17 12:53:00, Deborah wrote:
"***Isn't materbating considered an egregious offense in some of these places? How can parents be so anti-normal?***
This brings up some questions:
What's the arguement against masterbation? Religious?
Does the contract or parent manual inform parents that their teen will not be allowed to masterbate? Or is this sprung on the parent after they have signed the dotted line and find out their teen is being/has been punished for it?
Are they told how their teen will be punished if caught violating this rule?
How is the teen caught?
Are there hidden cameras, sheet/underwear/"spot" checks every morning, do they rely on other teens to rat out their peers?
Who's "truth" about masterbation is forced on the teen? And what rationale is given for forbidding it? "
Deborah - please visualize all the kids masturbating any time they feel like it. Are you there yet? Good...any more questions?
-
One thing I learned from my teen was that the word "normal" is misused and that teens stop listening when it is weilded. So, I took up the words constructive and destructive, which were more accurate. Was this kid's action constructive or destructive to himself? Was it normal?
Look at the origins of NORMAL. Mr. Webster defines it:
2 a : according with, constituting, or not deviating from a norm*, rule, or principle
3 : occurring naturally
4 a : of, relating to, or characterized by average intelligence or development
b : free from mental disorder : SANE **
*NORM: an authoritative standard; a principle of right action binding upon the members of a group and serving to guide, control, or regulate proper and acceptable behavior
**SANE: 1 : proceeding from a sound mind : RATIONAL ***
2 : mentally sound; especially : able to anticipate and appraise the effect of one's actions
***RATIONAL: 1 a : having reason or understanding b : relating to, based on, or agreeable to reason : REASONABLE ****
****REASON: 2 a (1) : the power of comprehending, inferring, or thinking especially in orderly rational ways : INTELLIGENCE *****(2) : proper exercise of the mind
*****INTELLEGENCE: 1 a (1) : the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations
The kid?s behavior does go against the commonly held societal norm. Is he insane? No. Was he acting rationally/reasonably? I don?t know that he consciously rationalized his actions, but I think the answer is, Yes.
This culture is so uptight around nudity, sex, and sexuality in general. It?s common for people to have a hard time even saying the word, and when pushed to refer to the act of sex, they prefer to say ?made love? or ?went to bed with?. Anything but ?had sex?.
The taboo is so insidious that by the time kids reach their teen years they are dying of curiosity- just when hormones are raging. Don't even know how they were conceived. Where do they go to satisfy that rational curiosity? Nude bodies are easily found on the internet. It is very possible that there would be little interest if the teen was exposed to the nude body throughout childhood. Takes the mystery/ curiosity factor out of the equation.
Societal norms attempt to control and regulate sexual behavior, and based on what body of information? Religion attempts to define what is moral behavior and psychiatry attempts to define sane behavior? the majority hide their curiosity/ behavior because they don?t want to be labeled crazy or go against their religious conditioning. Psych professionals (probably in cahoots with religion)put forth the notion as truth, that masturbation was a ?disorder?. Of course, they eventually had to retract the lie, but not until it had wormed it?s way into the majority of minds; some still believe it.
As a product of a sexually suppressed culture, I think his behavior was normal and common. It is reasonable and rational to satisfy one?s curiosity. He didn?t violate anyone to do so. The women obviously offered their nude bodies for anyone to view. The argument could be put forth that porn queens exist largely to balance the scales of extreme suppression of ?naturally occurring? (normal) desire and curiosity. I?m personally more concerned with the sexually suppressed individual who violates an unwilling person to satisfy a natural need that has been skewed out of perspective.
Given the rigid, controlled environment he has and is currently living in, I think he exhibited intelligence- how to satisfy a rational curiosity-given the unreasonable limitations placed on him by parents, society, and BM facility.
I?m still trying to accept the fact that the American people- considered the most freedom loving people on the planet (LOL)- allowed an uptight, suppressed, government official to cover a nude statue in a PUBLIC institution. His behavior was insane (according to Webster) and a blatant slap in the face to the separation of church and state.
As to the petty theft issue. Any parent who knows their kid is prone to taking money, and continues to make it available, is considered insane by the program mantra, ?doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result= insanity??
I?ve followed this parent?s drama and consider her the stereotypical program parent, THE poster parent for the THI. The type of parent all programs thrive on.
-
Hey anon,
Do you believe that "Everything you think is real, isn't... and everything you think isn't real, is."
It is absolutely possible to consider one's self to be happy and satisfied, even when under the influence of someone else or someone else's thinking; who may or may not have your best interest at heart. On some level it doesn't matter if you are or just imagine it... pretty much the same. If you're happy, I'm happy for you !!
You obviously participated in the "Serious Debate" thread. You didn't step up and admit that the seminars were based on est/LS. In fact, the opportunity to discuss it was ignored, except for one parent who denied knowing anything about it.
Why the secrecy or avoidance?
Since you continue to defend it; Have you ever taken an est/LS course? Can you describe how it is similar and how it is different? Do you believe that browbeating and confrontation and defering to the leader is necessary for change? Can you fathom there is a might be a more humane way?
What you continue to ignore is that my argument has to do with parents being informed of the content and methods used before being asked for a committment. If I'm going to participate in a personal growth seminar I want to know which philosophy it is based on AND have the time to research it AND the option to decline if I so choose. Anything short of that is deception and coercion, especially if contact with my child is dependent on participation.
-
***Deborah - please visualize all the kids masturbating any time they feel like it. Are you there yet? Good...any more questions? ***
Your direction was reasonable so I took it. I imagined a circle jerk (isn't that what teens call it?) and had a chuckle.
Then the reality of where they are sat in, and I visualized "normal" teens hiding under covers to explore their "normal" urges. That was a sad image.
What did you visualize? How might that be a problem for the program? So they do forbid this?
I've heard that it distracts them from "working their program". Can you confirm that? I'm more inclined to believe that it is forbidden to enhance the control techniques. What is the consequence? And how is it determined that one has participated in the forbidden activity?
You might consult with Felix and Carmela- the new resident, open-minded, alternative health professionals. They do not support sexual repression. Check out their Emerald Dragon drink.
http://www.lacocinita.com/story.php3?serial_no=127 (http://www.lacocinita.com/story.php3?serial_no=127)
Emerald Dragon
Our most popular ìsmart drink,î the Emerald Dragon is uniquely delectable, very energizing and we think it ís a great aphrodisiac! The active ingredients matcha (Japanese ceremonial green tea powder), wild oats and damiana are synergistically energizing and tonifying on deep as well as more superficial levels.
Serves 1
2 cups ice
1 cup fat-free vanilla rice milk
1 teaspoon premium organic matcha
1 dropper wild oats tincture
1 dropper damiana tincture
1 tablespoon raw honey
1 pinch nutmeg
1 pinch cayenne
1) Fill blender with ice, rice milk, matcha, damiana, wild oats, cayenne, nutmeg and honey, and blend until smooth.
2) Pour into a tall 16-ounce glass and garnish with a paper umbrella.
************
I would like to hear their, or any of these other "personal growth" experts, opinion on the matter. I lived in an alternative mecca for 20 years. If it's out there I've come in contact with it. And I know for certain that "alternative" people do not support sexual suppression. How DID these folks come to be associated with a teen warehouse facility? The best hope is that they will bring some rational, mind expansion to this issue.
If masturbation was allowed, there may be less anger and frustration- unless the goal is to keep the kids in an angry, frustrated, unsatisfied, uneducated, state of being.
-
I could have a good laugh on the visualization myself. Thing is, isn't masturbation a private thing? Under the sheets, in the bathroom, etc.? To my knowledge this isn't an infraction. Maybe it is if a kid is going to the bathroom every hour unless they are truly full of "piss" it would be getting in the way of class work or other activities.
No one watches them go to the bathroom or take a shower. Don't know about other programs, but wwasps doesn't do the point reduction for this unless (possibly), like I said, it is seriously getting in the way of other activities.
-
Deborah you asked about hte seminars. i agree that some of the contents are similar to est/lifespring seminars. I disagree they are the same from what I've read about them.
There was no brow beating. There were questions to get us to think about what isn't working in our lives. Our answers were not orchestrated by the facilitator. No one told us what we were supposed to think or feel or believe. Maybe that's the big difference.
Questions to gain clarity are good. Some of the things I never thought about before. Life outside the box has it's rewards.
-
PS - I don't agree with knowing the contents prior to a seminar. If we don't like it, we can leave, though in all the seminars I've participated in and staffed, only two left, and one came back after a break, by her own choice, not coerced.
If you are familiar with alternative medicine, then it would seem you would appreciate alternatives to therapy, drugs for depression, ADD and other things that can be changed by changing life's stress levels or becoming conscious of behaviors.
I don't think there's anything I will say that will convince you that it works, if the person chooses to do the inner work.
-
On 2004-01-18 10:36:00, Anonymous wrote:
"PS - I don't agree with knowing the contents prior to a seminar. If we don't like it, we can leave, though in all the seminars I've participated in and staffed, only two left, and one came back after a break, by her own choice, not coerced.
If you are familiar with alternative medicine, then it would seem you would appreciate alternatives to therapy, drugs for depression, ADD and other things that can be changed by changing life's stress levels or becoming conscious of behaviors.
I don't think there's anything I will say that will convince you that it works, if the person chooses to do the inner work."
Cult smoke and mirrors.
-
Back at you : FEAR smoke and mirrors :grin:
-
***To my knowledge this [masturbation] isn't an infraction.***
To your knowledge? So, you don?t know?
***No one watches them go to the bathroom or take a shower. Don't know about other programs, but wwasps doesn't do the point reduction for this unless (possibly), like I said, it is seriously getting in the way of other activities.***
But, now you know. Sounds more like assumptions.
*** i agree that some of the contents are similar to est/lifespring seminars. I disagree they are the same from what I've read about them.***
So, you too draw conclusions and form opinions based on information you read? Ironic !
***There was no brow beating.***
Your perception, which is contrary to others.
***No one told us what we were supposed to think or feel or believe. Maybe that's the big difference.***
So, I?ll ask again. Do you believe that "Everything you think is real, isn't... and everything you think isn't real, is."
*** I don't agree with knowing the contents prior to a seminar. If we don't like it, we can leave, though in all the seminars I've participated in and staffed, only two left, and one came back after a break, by her own choice, not coerced.***
Again, this is contrary to others experiences. I said, know the ?philosophy?, although the basic content should be disclosed as well. It is easy to understand how parents feel deceived and coerced when they find themselves in a seminar without prior knowledge of what, or whose theory they are going to be subjected to, and contact with their child is dependent on their participation. Might have fewer ?disgruntled? parents if this was disclosed before they made a financial commitment to the program. And none of you ever answered the question that was posed regarding the animosity/disdain/judgment held toward these parents, especially the ones who ?rescue their little darlings?.
***If you are familiar with alternative medicine, then it would seem you would appreciate alternatives to therapy, drugs for depression, ADD and other things that can be changed by changing life's stress levels or becoming conscious of behaviors.***
Not the argument. The argument is incarceration, labeling one family member (the teen) as the source of the family?s problem. Rigid rules and questionable BM techniques. Using contact with parents as punishment (or motivation), etc, etc, etc. The alternatives I?m familiar with do not include such austere rigidity, disrespect, and abuse as a means to an end.
***I don't think there's anything I will say that will convince you that it works, if the person chooses to do the inner work.***
I am convinced that you feel happy and satisfied, that you genuinely believe it works. Based on your comments, it is my belief that you still have some more work to do in the direction of understanding what constitutes genuine respect for others, particularly teens, and unsuspecting parents. It is quiet possible that everything you currently believe to be truth, isn?t?. and everything you believe isn?t truth, is?. Time will tell. For the moment, enjoy your happiness and satisfaction. If nothing else, it?s a reprieve, before the next level of awareness hits like a bolt of lightening.
-
To masterbate, or not to masterbate. Hmmm, too bad these parents didn't just do the M thing instead of the F thing b/c there would be a lot less kids being raised in some institutionalized style program instead of at home, where they belong.
SHAMEFUL PARENTS!!!!
-
ATTN: This is not SPAM. :cool:
-
the week i ook my son out of the program, on my weekly call to the rep, i asked what my son had dont "this week" that prevented him from speaking to me. the family rep herself (heidi mcginnis) told me my son was consequenced for masturbating. I thought that weird, to say the least. thats weird, and masturbation is normal i had to put my self in the other persons shoes for a minute and wonder how i'd feel and concluded that must not be any privacy for someone to "catch" you masturbating, and how awful to be consequenced for addressing your natural biological urges. And if a person was there for a year, heavan's sake, how long can a normal, healthy person, teen or adult, cope
I never asked my son about this (god! how embarassing would that be, for you mom to ask the circumstances of you getting caught masterburating!) but i wondered about this for some time.
-
On 2004-01-18 10:24:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I could have a good laugh on the visualization myself. Thing is, isn't masturbation a private thing? Under the sheets, in the bathroom, etc.? To my knowledge this isn't an infraction. Maybe it is if a kid is going to the bathroom every hour unless they are truly full of "piss" it would be getting in the way of class work or other activities.
No one watches them go to the bathroom or take a shower. Don't know about other programs, but wwasps doesn't do the point reduction for this unless (possibly), like I said, it is seriously getting in the way of other activities.
"
no one watches them go to the bathroom or take a shower? isn't the drill to wait outside of stall while someone goes to the bathroom?
Which wasp program do you speak of?
or do you mean, no one watches upper levels take a shower or go to the bathroom.
you mean they LET kids go to the bathroom every hour? which wasp program?
-
On 2004-01-17 12:53:00, Deborah wrote:
"***Isn't materbating considered an egregious offense in some of these places? How can parents be so anti-normal?***
This brings up some questions:
What's the arguement against masterbation? Religious?
Does the contract or parent manual inform parents that their teen will not be allowed to masterbate? Or is this sprung on the parent after they have signed the dotted line and find out their teen is being/has been punished for it?
Are they told how their teen will be punished if caught violating this rule?
How is the teen caught?
Are there hidden cameras, sheet/underwear/"spot" checks every morning, do they rely on other teens to rat out their peers?
Who's "truth" about masterbation is forced on the teen? And what rationale is given for forbidding it? "
Deborah, i'm going to check the manual on that one. spot checks every morning! thats funny.
I'd ask my son that, b/c he was consequenced for that, but you know, he'd be absolutely mortified, so i will spare him. Tell us waspers, what say you about that?
-
The previous post was me.
I think deborah asks a valid question in her previous post.
-
last I heard masterbation was considered a cat 4 (major violation) and if you used more that 4 squares of toilet paper it was considered theft..not to mention chewing your nail was considered self mutilation...been a few years but maybe the infractions are still the same?
under these standards we could incarcerate most of the world in WWASP-- wonder if the owners who profit from these facilites have ever masterbated, used more than four squares or chewed their nails...or??? how would they fare?
message to mom - don't allow this...if you feel it is unreasonable - it is! demand to talk to your child don't take no for an answer-and follow your gut - if it seems like the wrong fit to you or him...act - don't let your embarassment override your gut to protect your child- you're all the lifeline he's got!!!
-
Didn't you know that this sort of behavior can lead a teenager back to drugs? If he jacks off (or she,) then he's getting what we call "instant gratification." Good feelings that he hasn't earned. Also, he could be avoiding bad feelings about himself by doing that. For shame! A date with Ms. Rosy Palms!
BTW, I'm joking.. :lol:
-
masturbating, HOW IMMORAL!!!! :lol:
-
***I'd ask my son that, b/c he was consequenced for that, but you know, he'd be absolutely mortified, so i will spare him. Tell us waspers, what say you about that?***
Precisely one of my arguments. Were you told about consequences for masterbating BEFORE you signed him up for the program? How many other "rules/consequences" are not spelled out to parents?
Probably not a good idea for you to ask if you aren't comfortable, but they violated his privacy.
If it were my son- and I had to ask both of them very hard questions- I'd just let him know that you were denied contact because he was consequenced for masterbating, then ask how they came to know he had and how the situation was handled in general on that end. I personally would also want to know what they had told him about it so I could give him accurate information. My sons endured many abusive things in their respective programs which they did not identify as abuse because it was so prevalent and in many cases they had been told that it wasn't and that their parents approved.
While uncomfortable, it could be an opportunity to clarify what actually happened and contradict any negative information they may have fed him, if you are comfortable doing it.
-
Hey, people that masterbate in public go to jail, people who do so in the privacy of their own room are not guilty of any crime. Tell these programs to obey the law.
-
Source: CEDU Discussion
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... =11&Sort=D (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=3517&forum=11&Sort=D)
Posted: 2004-02-23 12:12:00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With all due respect John, Todd D, looks cute and can fake love - like most mormon gods. However, he has a very dark side. Todd was into power.
Todd's wife told many of us that Todd controlled her like a god and even abused her. He was a tyrant at the school and a tyrant at home. He pubically lambasted kids and shamed them publically for mastrubation, he screamed, he yelled, to control and induce fear and intimidation.
He has no college education yet calls himself a counselor. He is unquelified to run workshops, he has no concept of ethics, child rights, empathy or compassion. In my professional opinnion he is mentally ill
The same can be said for Bill B. This fellow is Passive-Aggressive beyond clinical. And, he uses mental torture and mind games to drive kids to crack up. He is responsible for more hospitalizations, inclusing his own, than any staff I have ever met. This Guy like Todd and La Teresa and many others is fake and sadistic.
As for Lateresa, I have never seen a more entrenched narcissistic false self. La exudes such obvious inauthenticity, fake crying, fake feelings, fake love, and icky, smelly, scummy, rotting false concern. Her presentation,itchy with bugs in it, false. Her values, greedy, two-faced, avoident and sociopathic. And, she is just what CEDU wants.
They have one good Director. Lori at NWA. She's creative, kind, real, ultra-intelligent, ethical with education, great critical thinking skills and NO BS. - I bet they fire her. She is exactly what they don't want.
This is critical, a criminal organization needs criminals - ethical people are threatening. They always get rid of the good ones, -- Cowboy Bob, Mark R, Roy P, Jenny, Doug Kim Brown ad infinitum. This is because a cult does not get outside information. And all there is inside is criminals. That is the why of the Racketeering, Child Abuse and False Billing lawsuits.
----------------------------------------------
Addendum: Todd is Todd DeGraff and a question was asked if he is possiblity related to Gayle DeGraff, who is apparently the admissions rep for Top Flight Academy, a program in Utah.
-
On 2004-02-23 08:42:00, Deborah wrote:
"***I'd ask my son that, b/c he was consequenced for that, but you know, he'd be absolutely mortified, so i will spare him. Tell us waspers, what say you about that?***
Precisely one of my arguments. Were you told about consequences for masterbating BEFORE you signed him up for the program? How many other "rules/consequences" are not spelled out to parents?
Probably not a good idea for you to ask if you aren't comfortable, but they violated his privacy.
If it were my son- and I had to ask both of them very hard questions- I'd just let him know that you were denied contact because he was consequenced for masterbating, then ask how they came to know he had and how the situation was handled in general on that end. I personally would also want to know what they had told him about it so I could give him accurate information. My sons endured many abusive things in their respective programs which they did not identify as abuse because it was so prevalent and in many cases they had been told that it wasn't and that their parents approved.
While uncomfortable, it could be an opportunity to clarify what actually happened and contradict any negative information they may have fed him, if you are comfortable doing it."
precisely, i couldn't i had to go get him. it seemed unreasonable not to.
-
On 2004-02-23 19:01:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-02-23 08:42:00, Deborah wrote:
"***I'd ask my son that, b/c he was consequenced for that, but you know, he'd be absolutely mortified, so i will spare him. Tell us waspers, what say you about that?***
Precisely one of my arguments. Were you told about consequences for masterbating BEFORE you signed him up for the program? How many other "rules/consequences" are not spelled out to parents?
Probably not a good idea for you to ask if you aren't comfortable, but they violated his privacy.
If it were my son- and I had to ask both of them very hard questions- I'd just let him know that you were denied contact because he was consequenced for masterbating, then ask how they came to know he had and how the situation was handled in general on that end. I personally would also want to know what they had told him about it so I could give him accurate information. My sons endured many abusive things in their respective programs which they did not identify as abuse because it was so prevalent and in many cases they had been told that it wasn't and that their parents approved.
While uncomfortable, it could be an opportunity to clarify what actually happened and contradict any negative information they may have fed him, if you are comfortable doing it."
precisely, i couldn't i had to go get him. it seemed unreasonable not to.
"
i understand what you are saying, very good points. i am finding out more.
sometimes my posts are counterprodutive b/c the hate comes thro but you realy touch upon an aspect that is at the heart of matter. i respect that.
and, absolutes cant WORK when it comes to MANY various circumstances, but i think we all draw the line somewhere and where we draw that line is -important-.
my perception of what program is about is not the only one -- i regret that my hatred -indifference, disdain, would interfere and/or be counter productive- i can see hatred can, its more subject when its not your own hatred. the posts here lately have been on track in understanding and addressing many issues for reasoning that are on the whole what i consider to be very articulate, intelligent, reasonable, god loving, put your pants on one leg at time every day and like most others, however you want to put it --"in their right mind", people in their combined experiences and knowledge of the industry-- gathering all the facts and looking at information from different angles and applying their awareness and rationale in a meaningful manner whatever their experience, knowledge, education, dictates. ::cheers:: :tup:
-
I should have logged in b/f hitting the say it! button :lol:
precisely
and
i understand what you are saying
are my posts.
aplogies again!
[ This Message was edited by: warriorprincess on 2004-02-23 20:00 ]