Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Kiwi on January 19, 2004, 12:28:00 PM
-
http://http://attorneygeneral.utah.gov/PrRel/prjune142002.htm
Does anyone know what became of this case? The director was charged and then it went very quiet. Last I heard, some of the accusers had been transferred to Tranquility Bay. Maybe the prosecutor is finding it a little tricky to pursue this without his star witnesses.
-
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... t=30#11865 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=2046&forum=9&start=30#11865)
Scroll to the bottom of this page.
-
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... t=30#11865 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=2046&forum=9&start=30#11865)
Scroll to the bottom of this page.
Well, at the bottom of that page I see a link to an item saying that Winder had been arrested, which I already knew, and another one to the Majestic Ranch web site which says he is still director, which doesn't tell me if the prosecution is still pending or has been dropped. WWASP aren't known for keeping their web sites up to date anyway. Am I missing something?
I cannot find anything more recent on the web. I just wondered if someone had seen a newspaper article that I hadn't.
-
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,510033604,00.html (http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,510033604,00.html)
Even someone accused of AGGRAVATED SEXUAL ABUSE is FREE TO WORK WITH CHILDREN in boarding schools.
Wayne E. Winder was arrested and charged last year with one first-degree felony count of aggravated sexual abuse and three class A misdemeanors of child abuse while director of Majestic Ranch Academy.
In March, Winder entered a plea in abeyance to the single felony count, aggravated sexual abuse, after the alleged victim recanted her story. If Winder STAYS OUT OF TROUBLE FOR THE NEXT NINE MONTHS, HIS CHARGES WILL BE DROPPED, said his attorney, Earl Xaiz. MEANWHILE, Winder has RETURNED TO THE SCHOOL AS DIRECTOR.
-
http://www.majesticranch.org/location.html (http://www.majesticranch.org/location.html)
We are the first ranch on the right hand side of the road with several log sided buildings with green roofs and a big red barn. Our entrance says "Peart Ranch" on the top and "Majestic Ranch" on the side.
???????????????
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=3994&forum=9 (http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?topic=3994&forum=9)
Marie Peart was married to Blair Peart, Bob Litchfield's brother in law.
-
sounds like they are no longer married. :rofl:
-
Thank you Deborah.
http://http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,510033604,00.html
'"They are claiming to be a boarding school, and Utah has no regulations for boarding schools," Stettler said'
'And the Division of Consumer Protection doesn't regulate the group because the corporation assists treatment and behavior modification facilities, not secondary schools.'
So they're schools when they want to be and not schools when they don't want to be!
[ This Message was edited by: Kiwi on 2004-01-21 03:15 ]
-
He was "accused" - isn't it a common accusation when a kid doesn't want to be in a boarding school or residential treatment to say whatever it takes to get out? It was found to be only an accusation, right?
-
He was "accused" - isn't it a common accusation when a kid doesn't want to be in a boarding school or residential treatment to say whatever it takes to get out? It was found to be only an accusation, right?
As I said earlier, the way I heard it at least three of the accusers were sent to Tranquility Bay. Perhaps the others (I think there were six in all) withdrew their accusations to avoid being sent to TB. Narvin Lichfield tried the same tactic at Dundee Ranch: anyone who didn't sign a paper to say they were there voluntarily was threatened with TB.
There was obviously sufficient evidence for the prosecutor to charge Winder. IMO where there is reason to believe a child has been sexually assaulted they should not be left in the the custody of people who have an interest in covering up the fact.
-
***'"They are claiming to be a boarding school, and Utah has no regulations for boarding schools," Stettler said'***
Standard MO for the industry. Boarding schools to the state, therapeutic facility to the public.
"Claiming" to be. Whose job is it to confirm their stated purpose? They should be required to spell out the nature of their program when filing with the state.
Stettler knows the scoop on these places. He is failing to do his job by not requiring them to come into compliance. Perhaps Licensing could be persuaded if someone filed a complaint, and dogged them about following up. That was my experience with a different facility which had avoid regs for 7 years. Previous parents hadn't bothered to check.
And it's ironic that both Stettler and Winder previously worked for Youth Corrections.
-
:???: I was looking to send my son here for Help I am not going to send him now. He would come out wrost then when he goes in.
A Grateful Mother
-
Only if you believe what you read here. Talk to kids that have been there and see if they've come home worse than they went in. It will also give you time to learn how to live a better life, as a parent and as a person. The allegations regarding the Director were found to be false, but apparently just the allegation was enough to keep you from getting help if you are in a serious situation with your child.
-
The allegations were not to be found false.
Contact Utah's Attorney general for accurate details.
-
On 2004-02-14 08:19:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Only if you believe what you read here. Talk to kids that have been there and see if they've come home worse than they went in. It will also give you time to learn how to live a better life, as a parent and as a person. The allegations regarding the Director were found to be false, but apparently just the allegation was enough to keep you from getting help if you are in a serious situation with your child. "
Talk to kids who have been there, sure, but *not* the ones the program refers you to and *not* the ones who have been out less than five years.
Most of the programs isolate the children from the outside world. Most use restraints at least in *some* circumstances.
Isolation, physical control, credible threat of physical force or harm----those are the prerequisites for inducing Stockholm Syndrome, and it only takes two to three days to induce.
How you treat Stockholm Syndrome is you undo the things that cause it---particularly the isolation.
Unfortunately, the TBS's have these kids for months, they tell the parents to treat anything negative the kid says as manipulation, the kid gets used to this, and so even after the kid is *physically* free, he or she is still isolated for a long time behind a barrier of mutual mistrust. The parents don't trust that anything negative the kid says about the program is anything *but* manipulation. The kid doesn't trust that the parents will believe anything he or she says, and typically the kid's mistrust lasts *much* longer than the parents'.
Sometimes kids who are pulled out early will talk openly about the experience right away. Graduates seldom will. It takes about five to fifteen years before the graduates, or most kids that have just been there for awhile (graduated or not), will talk about the experience in depth and give detailed accounts of what a day was like in the program, what the experience was like in the different "levels," what it was like when someone was restrained, the frank details of the educational environment provided, detailed descriptions of the food, detailed descriptions of the therapy process, etc.
Fresh program graduates generally give accounts that are as bare of details as an oak branch in January is bare of leaves. If you talk to someone and they aren't prepared to talk in detail about all of those things, they just try to brush you off with buzzwords or generalizations (e.g.---the food's a bit bland), take it as a huge red flag.
-
Sometimes kids who are pulled out early will talk openly about the experience right away. Graduates seldom will. It takes about five to fifteen years before the graduates, or most kids that have just been there for awhile (graduated or not), will talk about the experience in depth and give detailed accounts of what a day was like in the program, what the experience was like in the different "levels," what it was like when someone was restrained, the frank details of the educational environment provided, detailed descriptions of the food, detailed descriptions of the therapy process, etc.
Fresh program graduates generally give accounts that are as bare of details as an oak branch in January is bare of leaves. If you talk to someone and they aren't prepared to talk in detail about all of those things, they just try to brush you off with buzzwords or generalizations (e.g.---the food's a bit bland), take it as a huge red flag.
"
This is very good advice on who to listen to. We have a unique situation in that we have physical custody of our grandaughter who spent 10 months at Casa by the Sea. She has been free for 5 months now. Her mother had her for the first 3 months home from WWASPS, and simply refused to listen to any negative things this kid said about her experience. She walked away. And so the child "clammed up", as is typical.
Now, with us (who believe what she says because it jibes with so many other accounts in every detail), every day is peppered with anecdotes, spoken as simple facts of life, often without rancor. She is surprisingly positive about the Mexican staff, the "mommas" who were her only lifeline while in Casa. She drops things, like yesterday when she mentioned the fish soup that she hated so much. She pointed out some really strange thing served another patron at a Mexican restaurant we were at, and said it looked like the fish stew they had at least once a week. It was an unappetizing chopped-up melange of rice and brown stuff, which leads me to believe that Casa bought the brown belly meat of local Ensenada fish (otherwise unsaleable, and obviously very cheap) for their protein component. No wonder she didn't like "fish stew".
She also pointed out the menu illustration, featuring a stucco-walled rancho with huge wooden gates, was just like Casa's. She said the wooden gates had several alarms, even though they could not be opened except from the inside and that it was hard for staff to do. She speaks often of alarms going off, and when I put together when they rang most often (in the middle of the night just before scheduled seminars), I suggested that the alarms were a not-so-subtle way of sleep depriving kids to "soften them up" for the upcoming 3-day marathon of seminars. Brainwashing 101...it's written out in every elementary mind-altering how-to book. These people are so unabashed about using such techniques, that I can only imagine that they are experienced in dealing with parents who really don't give a damn and overlook glaring "red flags" in order to get rid of their kids.
-
In other words, eating Mexican food in Mexico is not acceptable? Reminds me of the so-called lunches at the public schools: burgers, pizza, junk food every day, every single stinking day. I dont care if I never even SMELL another piece of pizza or burger. Zits are the result of such garbage diets - unless that's just being a teenager. DUNNO!
-
I think she was just mentioning it as an example of the detail that is typically lacking from the accounts of recent program graduates but is common among people who've been out five or more years.
Not all the detail is horror stories---some of it's just the daily grind.
The alarms right before the marathon seminars to start the sleep dep. is much more serious than the food issue. It's not conclusive by itself, but as part of the larger pattern---my god, how *stupid* (or just coldly indifferent) would you have to be to put your kid there?
I'm glad the WWASP apologists show up here to push their party line. They're not very good at it, and generally come across to any relatively sane parent as dangerously disconnected from reality---about halfway between Mommy Dearest and Norman Bates' mom.
-
yeah, i really want to take a chance w/my child's life and consider him/her safe with an alleged child abuser. NOT!!!!!
-
That's all the media has to do is write about allegations and the whole world hides in fear. A responsible person would check it out for accuracy before running scared. It was NEVER proven true, only a bunch of kids wanting to come home and made up the story. OMG! Would a troubled teen really do that!?? :rofl:
-
On 2004-02-15 17:10:00, Anonymous wrote:
"That's all the media has to do is write about allegations and the whole world hides in fear. A responsible person would check it out for accuracy before running scared. It was NEVER proven true, only a bunch of kids wanting to come home and made up the story. OMG! Would a troubled teen really do that!?? :rofl: "
Well...what does it take to "prove" it's true????? These statements I print on Fornits are not the statements of a kid trying to lie his way into being "released". As I have said over and over again, they are the anecdotal tidbits we hear as we go about our daily life, trying to get this kid back into high school, after-school volleyball, dating, Spanish II....
What kind of person hears the stories I relate, and says, "Well, can you prove that they're true?" Do you, as an investigative parent, want to go with this mentality, to hand over your kid to a suspect group of incompetent sadists? What do you need to learn if the hundreds of stories (as opposed to the "hundreds" of supportive stories FROM KIDS that we never seem to see published) are true?????
What kind of parent would read about this stuff and say, "Oh My God! Would a troubled teen really do that??? :ROLL ON THE FLOOR LAUGHING!!!!!!!!!!!
May you spend your twilight years in a rest home chosen by your "troubled teen", eating macaroni and cheese off a paper plate, listening to Oldies but Goodies from the 60's, being visited a couple of times a year, having your hair done by a kind young lady, and wondering why you thought it appropriate to "roll on the floor laughing" when your child told you he was being abused in WWASPS.
-
On 2004-02-15 17:10:00, Anonymous wrote:
"That's all the media has to do is write about allegations and the whole world hides in fear. A responsible person would check it out for accuracy before running scared. It was NEVER proven true, only a bunch of kids wanting to come home and made up the story. OMG! Would a troubled teen really do that!?? :rofl: "
No, a responsible person would consider the potentials for abuse and the lack of government regulation of the industry and *avoid* placing their child outside of the country, as a start.
Secondly, a responsible parent, if they *had* to consider residential treatment would consider treatment as close to home as possible, preferably in state, and visit *often* and *unannounced*.
-
there could also be parents that may hide their heads in the sand and never want to listen to what happened to their children after all how could you deal with the guilt if something horrible did happen to their children?..
read some of the straight survivor stories and parents who still will not believe or hear what happened to them...or maybe you think they are lying too?
can't imagine sending 8-12 years old out of the protection of their parents- if it were me you'd have to pry them away.
-
That's all the media has to do is write about allegations and the whole world hides in fear. A responsible person would check it out for accuracy before running scared. It was NEVER proven true, only a bunch of kids wanting to come home and made up the story. OMG! Would a troubled teen really do that!??
people who refuse to believe a child when they say that they are being sexually molested are just as guilty as the molester in my book. certainly, any responsible parent would not leave the child inthe hands of the alleged perputrator.
-
I guess we all should take our children out of the catholic schools they attend? I know that's a much bigger target, and from the allegations of sexual abuse it would make me think about this long and hard, but living in fear of a few wayward priests doesn't justify keeping children out of school without first checking to see if the allegations are true or not.
It is the parents responsibility to find out and listen to their gut about getting help from a school that will help their child and family work together instead of against each other. This board is meant to separate not reunite.
-
**This board is meant to separate not reunite.**
Spoken like a true perpetrator of abuse, or in this case, supporter of abuse.
Quiet common for the perpetrator to accuse others of doing precisely what s/he is quilty of. Ever heard that? Almost all cheaters will accuse their spouses of cheating. Politicians do this as well, but in that case, it's a conscious technique to sway pubic opinion.
You support the division of families and the warehousing of teens, scapegoating them for "family" problems; yet accuse this "board" of separating? Go figure.
This board's primary purpose, as I understand it, is to provide a venue for those who have had negative experiences with the industry, and those wise enough to do their homework before shipping their kid off. You should be happy you're even allowed. You program supporters must hold on to the fantastical hope that you will silence or convert those who have a different experience, understanding and perception of the difference between abuse and therapy; and the industry in general. Just isn't going to happen.
You sound like fundamentalist zealots who repeat the same dogma over and over, ad nauseum... and as if no one has ever heard it before. You would have us all warehouse our teens and consider it "reuniting" the family? MANIPULATOR. WISH I COULD ISSUE YOU A CONSEQUENCE!!!
And yes, I understand you mean the family will "eventually" be reunited-- when the teen is thoroughly conditioned? And whatever that takes is just hunky dorey.
How do you justify the techniques used by W and other programs? (W doesn't have the market cornered on abusive BM techniques- they're all more alike than different). Where would you draw the line? What do you consider abuse? I would genuinely like to know where you draw the line. In other words, what techniques would you allow as a means of having a "perfect" teen returned to you?
More times than not, advocates are calling for informed consent and full disclosure. There are way too many parents who don't have a clue, and believe that the only techniques used are those vaguely spelled out in their handy parent manual. If programs did this one thing, they'd still have business- from those who condone abuse; but would have far less angry parents who feel deceived when they learn the truth. And we'd have many less mouth pieces for the industry here flapping. ::bigmouth::
-
Deborah - you continue to assume you know so much about WWASP programs. You don't. You know what you read, period. Just because your son's program was abusive, so you've said, you've jumped on the wwasp bandwagon and spout your assumptions over and over and over again. For that matter, there are many on this board that enjoy jumping on the bandwagon who have NO experience whatsoever with wwasp and are assuming they know the truth. A "newbie" to this board would be hard pressed to find it. I don't care who they believe, what I do care about is that they get accurate information. Only about 2% of what has been posted by you so called child rights activists or educational consultants that can't refer to wwasps is true. When someone posts the truth, they are accused of drinking kool aid, or they want to justify their child being abused, or they are idiots. What's in this for you. Saving children?! That's funny.
-
On 2004-02-16 20:39:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Deborah - you continue to assume you know so much about WWASP programs. You don't....Only about 2% of what has been posted by you so called child rights activists or educational consultants that can't refer to wwasps is true. "
Who *does* know about WWASPS programs? Does this Anon (who seem to be very prolific in all threads recently) know? Three sequential posts on one thread all sound as if they are from the same single "Anon". My educated guess, from dealing with a lot of this sort of panicked rote response, is that this is a mother whose child has been at a WWASPS facility, maybe for 5-6 months now, who is probably having some major concern flitting through her fogged mind. She believes the wonderful gushy letters from her child, and has had maybe 3 or 4 phone conversations so far. Her kid says he loves her, and finally recognizes that he was on the wrong track and he is working hard to graduate The Program (quickly as possible) and return to his loving family who sent him here for his own good. The seminars have been euphoric for her, what with a large room full of people backslapping her, cheering her, confirming that she did do the right thing.
This Anon does not know WWASPS either. She may never know. But her kid will. He will never forget.
-
On 2004-02-16 21:05:00, spots wrote:
Who *does* know about WWASPS programs? Does this Anon (who seem to be very prolific in all threads recently) know? Three sequential posts on one thread all sound as if they are from the same single "Anon". My educated guess, from dealing with a lot of this sort of panicked rote response, is that this is a mother whose child has been at a WWASPS facility, maybe for 5-6 months now, who is probably having some major concern flitting through her fogged mind. She believes the wonderful gushy letters from her child, and has had maybe 3 or 4 phone conversations so far. Her kid says he loves her, and finally recognizes that he was on the wrong track and he is working hard to graduate The Program (quickly as possible) and return to his loving family who sent him here for his own good. The seminars have been euphoric for her, what with a large room full of people backslapping her, cheering her, confirming that she did do the right thing.
This Anon does not know WWASPS either. She may never know. But her kid will. He will never forget. "
There you go showing your ASSumptions again.
ASSumption 1 - I am not a new parent to this. Unless you think almost 5 years is new.
ASSumption 2 - I've never been patted on the back for "doing the right thing for my child." I don't need that kind of validation.
ASSumption 3 - Gushy letters from my child! You gotta be kidding, right?
ASSumption 4 - My child will never forget, but it's not for the abuse you think he endured.
ASSumption 5 - I don't know WWASPS.
Since this is your "educated guess," then maybe a little re-education is in your immediate future.
-
I guess we all should take our children out of the catholic schools they attend? I know that's a much bigger target, and from the allegations of sexual abuse it would make me think about this long and hard
Yes, they are a bigger target and therefore the number of allegations much smaller in proportion but I take your point, I would be just as concerned about any catholic school that censored letters and didn't allow contact with parents until the kids had earned the "privilege". I would also take any such allegation by my child extremely seriously and would expect the school to do the same.
One thing you won't find catholic schools doing is sending both parents and children to seminars where they are taught "there is no right and wrong": it kinda goes against catholic doctrine.
By the way. I am not a catholic so I am not just sticking up for my religion.
-
**What's in this for you. Saving children?!**
Informed consent. I believe parents should know how their child will be "treated" while in the hands of strangers. I also believe that programs are more alike than different. It appears that W is simply more open about their particular "methods" for gaining compliance, where the high dollar facilities are more covert.
They all:
Point to the teen as the problem. They might point to the parent if the teen were capable of paying for their incarceration.
Censor mail and forbid mail from other family members and family friends.
Provide no access to a phone or the outside world and monitor communication.
Use limited calories, restraint, excessive punishment to gain compliance.
Have a system in place to relieve the parent of guilt and strenghten their decision.
This list could go on and on, but if we took item for item, you'd see they are more similar than different. Those attributes are very necessary to "change" someone against their will. W is just the KMart version, that appeals to a different socio-economic group of people.
The only differences will be in the methods and techniques, which are what is in question... and no one wants to talk honestly about.
One can condition a child to avoid touching the knobs on the TV by consistently (key) shocking them with a cattle prod. The question... is that humane. And that is the question being posed to you program supporters. What I have heard you say over and over, is that the methods employed are necessary to accomplish change. I, and others, disagree. There are more humane ways of dealing with difficulty.
-
WWASP does not point to the teen as the problem. The whole family got themselves into the "problem." What do you think the personal growth seminars for the parents are for?
I never heard, "there is no right or wrong" - twist the words. There IS right and wrong. What is said is, "it's not about right or wrong, it's about what works and doesn't work."
Teaching self control is the purpose of providing consequences, worksheets or losing points, for not following the rules. Grounding, taking away the stereo, tv, car, phone, etc., at home didn't work. Spanking a child doesn't work. Was it right or wrong to do this? No. It was about what works or doesn't.
Mail is NOT censored. Only family members that the parents feel are okay to write to their child are permitted. If the family member is working against the program, then they don't write. How wonderful would it be for the teen to get a letter from Aunt Sallie saying how rotten the parents are? Food deprivation? If the kid refuses to eat, then they lose weight. They eat very well if they want to. If a kid is overweight, then yes they do lose weight cuz the cookies and candy are not allowed.
With WWASP under the microscope, do you really think they would abuse kids? I guess child rights outweigh parental decisions. What an abuse of the system. My state is child right and it's really a juvenile system nightmare.
-
Mail is NOT censored. Only family members that the parents feel are okay to write to their child are permitted. If the family member is working against the program, then they don't write. How wonderful would it be for the teen to get a letter from Aunt Sallie saying how rotten the parents are? Food deprivation? If the kid refuses to eat, then they lose weight. They eat very well if they want to. If a kid is overweight, then yes they do lose weight cuz the cookies and candy are not allowed.
With WWASP under the microscope, do you really think they would abuse kids? I guess child rights outweigh parental decisions.
Hey anon, I've read otherwise from various sources..I don't buy that program bullshit. I've heard it before...they're LIARS thru & thru. Either you're severely deluded or you're lying through your teeth...Which is it?
-
I never heard, "there is no right or wrong" - twist the words. There IS right and wrong. What is said is, "it's not about right or wrong, it's about what works and doesn't work."
My apologies, I missed that nuance. So what they say is that there is right and wrong but it doesn't matter.
These are the, much vaunted, values that they teach your kids!
-
what planet do you live on :roll:
-
On 2004-02-17 07:40:00, Anonymous wrote:
"WWASP does not point to the teen as the problem. The whole family got themselves into the "problem." What do you think the personal growth seminars for the parents are for?
The whole family got themselves into the "problem". that is laughable in that you stupid wasp people assume if your child needs help, there must be something wrong with YOU. In your case, though, its probably a good assumption.
I never heard, "there is no right or wrong" - twist the words. There IS right and wrong. What is said is, "it's not about right or wrong, it's about what works and doesn't work."
ah, is that what they say to convince you the ends justify the means? Putting your child into an even "allegedly" dangerous, abusive, vulnerable position, is OKAY, AS LONG AS IT WORKS! i'm sure you are comfy at home so it works well for you!
Teaching self control is the purpose of providing consequences, worksheets or losing points, for not following the rules. Grounding, taking away the stereo, tv, car, phone, etc., at home didn't work. Spanking a child doesn't work. Was it right or wrong to do this? No. It was about what works or doesn't.
the consequences, from what i heard, are named afer the perpetrator of these consequences. Uh huh, i heard being punched is a consequence. now, you dont think spanking a child works, but punching a teenager is fine. well, since he had the bruises to back it . . . one is left to their own conclusion. Lesson, if someone isn't doing what YOU want, punch them, IT WORKS! If that doesn't punch them somewhere else, somewhere where it will really hurt. That works!
Mail is NOT censored. Only family members that the parents feel are okay to write to their child are permitted. If the family member is working against the program, then they don't write.
working against the program? what your perception of that? or does the almighty PROGRAM run your life and make those decisions for you, seeing as something is WRONG with you, as they say, you must be incapable of making a decision such as this.
How wonderful would it be for the teen to get a letter from Aunt Sallie saying how rotten the parents are? Food deprivation?
hahahah, if aunt sally were writing the checks, that'd be fine! very funny.
If the kid refuses to eat, then they lose weight. They eat very well if they want to. If a kid is overweight, then yes they do lose weight cuz the cookies and candy are not allowed.
this is so rediculous it does not need a reply.
With WWASP under the microscope, do you really think they would abuse kids? I guess child rights outweigh parental decisions. What an abuse of the system. My state is child right and it's really a juvenile system nightmare. "
yes, because they so obviously believe they are RIGHT. and THEIR PERCEPTION of what is right WORKS!
-
fod, i would agree, this person is a liar or delusional. perhaps a sound bite could emphasize that point! :grin:
-
On 2004-02-17 08:53:00, Kiwi wrote:
"I never heard, "there is no right or wrong" - twist the words. There IS right and wrong. What is said is, "it's not about right or wrong, it's about what works and doesn't work."
My apologies, I missed that nuance. So what they say is that there is right and wrong but it doesn't matter.
These are the, much vaunted, values that they teach your kids!
"
When they say it's not about right and wrong, it doesn't mean it doesn't matter. It means to go beyond right and wrong to figure out what's working or not. It means we need to find a way to make "it" work. It can be anything that you choose to look at.
-
deborah,
here is where i draw the line. Assaults on human rights. Thats where they fail to draw the line. as i have hear, for them, those assaults are WHAT WORKS!
-
When they say it's not about right and wrong, it doesn't mean it doesn't matter. It means to go beyond right and wrong
This just gets better and better. So now you say you go beyond right and wrong. You WWASPies realy are playing God.
Hello! In the real world there is no beyond right and wrong.
-
On 2004-02-18 01:01:00, Kiwi wrote:
"When they say it's not about right and wrong, it doesn't mean it doesn't matter. It means to go beyond right and wrong
This just gets better and better. So now you say you go beyond right and wrong. You WWASPies realy are playing God.
Hello! In the real world there is no beyond right and wrong."
The programs' philosophy is not new. It's just the same old "the ends justify the means" dressed up in program-speak to keep stupid people from recognizing it.
-
Anon,
I beg to differ.My experience with the seminars was exactly the opposite from what you stated.
YES the program/seminars did blame the kids."it was their choice of behaviors that got them in a "speciality" school." We parents were not at fault."
I met some very goofy people in the seminaes. I se to think the poor kids for having such dysfuntional parents. Myself included. I was comforted by the fact some were goofier than me.
When family memebers questioned the isolation aspect of the program we were instructed to dicontinue interacting with them untoil "Graduation." How is that for achieving a "Whole and Healthy Family." The mail is censored. Don't kid yourself.
May I suggest you step far left and take a clear view of what is being shared and really think about what is happening withibn the facilities.
I wish I had gone with my instinct.It wasnt until I showed up in Jamaica did I realize what a huge mistake we had made.
I know the kids can distress us to no end, but the means Does NOT justify the end.
Be aware or you will be heart broken as I have been since discovering the truth.
Lastly, very inappropriate,ugly things DO happen within the walls of facilities were there is no outside intervention.
Beaware, very aware.Your child's mental health is at stake.
You wont hear this on the BBS . When I questioned I was lied to. Over and over again.
-
On 2004-02-18 01:01:00, Kiwi wrote:
"When they say it's not about right and wrong, it doesn't mean it doesn't matter. It means to go beyond right and wrong
This just gets better and better. So now you say you go beyond right and wrong. You WWASPies realy are playing God.
Hello! In the real world there is no beyond right and wrong."
To go beyond right and wrong means to not be stuck in the crap and to figure out ways to make things work for you. It doesn't mean right is working and wrong is not working. Is that working for you??
-
You program folks look a hell of a lot like the TM-ers and the Moonies and the Scientologists.
True Believers, every damn one of you.
Actions speak louder than words, and you folks' actions in shipping your kids off to be held incommunicado for months or years at a time are so effing *bizarre* that there's just nothing you can say that's going to outweigh that.
Even if there was, this True Believer scary shite wouldn't exactly be designed to inspire confidence in the rest of us who live in the real world and raise our kids, pay our taxes and bills, feed the dog, mow the lawn, and know parents with "problem teens" who manage to get through the teen years *without* shipping their kid to a private prison in Jamaica or Utah.
From the bottom of any large organization looking up through the ranks, human greed and stupidity look a lot like a conspiracy.
--S. Gilbert
-
:tup: :em:
-
To go beyond right and wrong means to not be stuck in the crap and to figure out ways to make things work for you. It doesn't mean right is working and wrong is not working. Is that working for you??
No, but I am sure it all makes perfect sense when you are in an LGAT and have checked your brain in at the door.
-
Listen Up. We may have found a point of agreement. I think they are actually being honest when they say it's not about being right or wrong, but "what works".
Right- being in accordance with what is just, good, or proper; being in good physical or mental health or order
Wrong- an injurious, unfair, or unjust act : action or conduct inflicting harm without due provocation or just cause; a violation or invasion of the legal rights of another; something wrong, immoral, or unethical; especially : principles, practices, or conduct contrary to justice, goodness, equity, or law.
In order to incarcerate a teen, make them the scapegoat for family problems and isolate them from the world; one must ignore what is Right and Wrong- good, just, ethical, moral; and remain focused on "what works". Unfortunately "what works", works for the parents and program. Parents can abdicate responsibility, and the program makes big bucks. And that seems to "work" for many. And... they absolutely do consider what they are doing to be "right".
[ This Message was edited by: Deborah on 2004-02-19 04:50 ]
-
indeed, good point.