Fornits
Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform => The Troubled Teen Industry => Topic started by: Kiwi on November 15, 2004, 06:15:00 AM
-
How to Save a Troubled Kid?
http://http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101041122-782109,00.html
Just what a kid with bipolar disorder needs - a WWASP program! :roll:
-
I sent them a reply via their web based emailer.
I doubt I'll get anything from them though, WWASPS probably either bribed or threatened them, knowing their past in dealing with critics...When we contemplate the whole globe as one great dewdrop, striped and dotted with continents and islands, flying through space with all other stars all singing and shining together as one, the whole universe appears as an infinite storm of beauty.
-- John Muir
-
The Carbens used the "gum" rule/consequence as an excuse to bring their son home. Period. They saw a bit of a change and decided the work was done. Did they ever get it wasn't about the gum? Regardless, I wish them success in using what they all learned and all is well.
-
I only hope that that kid will be able to pick up the pieces and move on. He is very lucky to be out of there after only four months.
-
I told them about the wonderful WWASP school we placed our son at, Bethel Boys Academy, Lucedale, MS. That during his 3 1/2 days he was beaten, tortured, starved and deprived of sleep, water (dehydration) and bathroom priviledges. I had to ask how that treatment was supposed to help my son in any way? Also, why is agains the law (a felony) for parents to abuse, torture, starve, etc. their child, but not some complete stranger?
-
I'm sorry, that "excuse" crap is stupid.
I have bipolar disorder. You don't "fix" a bipolar with harsh treatment. You run a grave risk of killing him/her. Bipolars *will* suicide--they don't just attempt, they do it. And you may have no warning at all, at all.
If he wasn't taking his medicine, he probably did need to be committed. Punching his mother in the back is the kind of violent outburst you can get in a bipolar who's off his meds. He's not rotten, he's just crazy and off his meds.
He needed to be committed to a more traditional mental hospital that would get him stabilized on his medication, and then brought home under the condition, from his parents, that he would stay current with his medicine and keep all appointments with his pdoc and therapist. And that if he didn't take his medication he'd go right back into the hospital. (Because he's dangerous to others off his meds, and the danger will tend to manifest as a sudden rage with no warning at all.)
Bipolars are frequently terribly forgetful.
His parents needed to take responsibility for handing him his medicine when it was time for him to take it, watching him take it, and taking him to his pdoc and therapist appointments.
Once taking care of his illness became an ingrained habit, they might eventually be able to let him manage it himself. Until then, when he didn't take his medicine, they shouldn't have treated it like it was his responsibility and his problem if it didn't happen---we're talking about a seriously mentally ill boy, here. They needed to step up and see to it that their disabled son *did* take his meds at the appropriate times.
If WWASPS appeared to have any benefit at all, it was probably *solely* because they were making him take his meds regularly.
I'm functional, but I'm in the upper 90% of functionality for bipolars.
It is not at all uncommon for bipolars to be on permanent, full Social Security Disability. And SS disability is generally hard for people to get---if they say you're disabled, you're *very* disabled---and a lot of bipolars are.
This kid isn't "troubled"---he's broken. He was broken before he was sent to WWASPS, and the only effective thing they did for his behavior (besides traumatize him into learning to put up with bullshit) was probably to ensure he took his meds regularly. And the learning to follow rules could have happened easily without the trauma---once he was stable on medication. It's the stabilizing on medication that he needed.
No amount of "work" in or from any kind of therapist will cure bipolar disorder. There. Is. No. Cure.
Not yet. Maybe someday, but not yet. And when they do cure it, it will be a medical intervention like gene therapy that does it, because bipolar disorder is a degenerative brain disease with a *heavy* genetic component. The medication stops the progress of the brain damage and allows some of it to heal. But it doesn't cure the underlying condition, it just treats it. Stop the treatment, and the damage resumes and progresses.
There may be environmental triggers involved, like there are for diabetes or high blood pressure, but like diabetes and high blood pressure, once you're sick with it, it doesn't go away. And we have no frickin' clue what the environmental triggers are, so there's no chance of avoiding them by modifying your behavior. If you're genetically prone to heart disease, sure, you can eat right and keep your weight down and exercise. If you're genetically prone to bipolar disorder, nobody knows *what* the hell to tell you (or your parents) to avoid to keep from getting it---or in what percentage avoiding some as-yet unidentified environmental trigger would be effective.
No amount of "work" would have fixed this seriously mentally ill boy.
If he takes his meds, a therapist *can* help him learn to manage his disorder better and cope better with life. Maybe. Depending on how well his condition responds to medication. Some bipolars' illness does not respond to any of the drugs we currently have, and for most finding a combo that works is trial and error on the part of the shrink.
Doing "work" indeed!!!
You frickin' ignorant snake-oil-selling QUACK!!!!
You people don't have a cure for bipolar disorder, so quit fucking lying to desperate parents and pretending that you can "fix" the major mental illnesses that have a biological basis. You fucking can't. And the entire psychiatric profession knows damned well you can't.
The National Institutes of Mental Health's verdict is in on your type of "work" as a treatment for the major mental illnesses. Their verdict? ***INEFFECTIVE AND FREQUENTLY HARMFUL***
God, we need the FDA or its equivalent to have the same control over "therapies" or "work" that purport to treat mental illness. WWASPS should have to post big warning labels all over their web pages and marketting stuff clearly stating that their "treatment" is ineffective and harmful for seriously mentally ill children, and if they don't they should be jailed under the very same charges a patent medicine salesman would be if he was trying to sell a bogus "cure" for cancer, because it's the same exact damned thing.
Timoclea
:flame: :flame: :flame: :flame: :flame:
(Oh, and not only am I bipolar, and the parent of a bipolar, and the daughter-in-law of a bipolar, and the cousin and niece of a bipolar, I have a degree in Psychology from a national top-ten public university. Anon? You're an idiot, and what's more, you're a dangerous fucking idiot.)
-
Timoclea
I didn't get that Bethel was a WWASPS school when your son was there.
Second, WWASPS schools DO NOT claim to cure bi-polar, nor ADD or anything else that is "for life,"
For bi-polar they help them learn the necessary skills to deal with the highs and lows. That includes knowing he has to be the one to be responsible for taking his meds. As you know, YOU are the one ultimately responsible for taking your meds, even when you don't think you need them anymore. Mom and dad aren't going to be there to make sure he takes them for the rest of his life.
-
I didn't have a kid at Bethel. That was a different post.
*I* am functional enough to be fanatical about taking my meds and contacting my pdoc if I start to get unstable and need my dose adjusted up or down.
I'm in the top 90%---very high-functioning for someone with this disease.
Many bipolars *can't* be the one responsible for taking their medication. They are *disabled* with it. They need a keeper. Either Mom and Dad, or when Mom and Dad are gone, some other extended family member.
My bipolar cousin's healthy grown daughter looks to be pretty much set to take over taking care of Mama when my aunt and uncle die. My cousin isn't nearly as functional as I am, and when *she* notices she's getting unstable, she's already far enough gone that she has to go check herself into the hospital and they call the responsible next of kin---now my aunt, eventually her grown daughter---to say she's there until they get her stabilized again.
She's on total SS disability, and she needs to be. When she's stable on her meds, she's a nice lady. When she's not, she's not. But it's not her fault. She's sick, she's disabled, she's had a hard life and will likely continue to have a hard life.
No, bipolars *can't* necessarily be the one responsible for taking their medication, because it's rare that they're as good as I am about noticing when the meds need to be adjusted, and noticing as early as I do. So even a bipolar who's taking their medicine completely as directed can go nuts when the sunlight levels or their weight or other changes changes the dose they need---and then they're not necessarily a sane person who can take responsibility for restabilizing themselves---they can be crazy folks who need a keeper until they're restabilized.
I'm *very* high function, more by luck than by design, and there but for the grace of God go I.
And even I have and use sane friends and family members to notice, often before I do, when something changes and my meds are no longer quite right and tell me I need to call my doc. Even I have my husband sometimes remind me when I miss a dose and start talking morbidly or pessimistically, "Have you taken your meds today?"
Timoclea
-
Timoclea
I didn't get that Bethel was a WWASPS school when your son was there.>>>>
My son was abused and tortured at Bethel. It wasn't a WWASP school last summer, 2003. But it is now. I think any reputable treatment school for teens would NOT want to be associated with WWASP.
I just was commenting that I e-mailed that TIME editor also. I also sent them a copy of the lawsuit filed in Federal Court.
-
The parents that pulled their child are like so many other parents that come to a parent/teen seminar. Kid HAS made some changes, and really looks great during the seminar. The kids actually talk about this and know that if they really look good their parents will bring them home. No, the gum thing was not the reason, it was an excuse. Didn't they choose a structured program with rules because their son was not living by any rules whatsoever and even hit his mother? What do they really think 4 months is going to do when the family was in chaos for a lot longer? Band-Aid, quick fix, scare tactic, wake up call?
Reading between the lines of the story, my opinion (if it matters) is they were struggling financially and didn't want to lose their home. I'd buy that before I'd buy the gum consequence. Besides, it wouldn't have taken months to get back to where he was. Admitting it was about money will free them up to get on with their lives.
I commend Ms. Norem for confronting the broken rule and not playing games for the parents sake.
The boy didn't have the time to get the internal structure he will need, so instead the parents are taking it on for him. Whatever works!
Was this kid really bi-polar? None of the "symptoms" describe bi-polar...the paranoia, the mania, the perfectionism, the depression. Sounds more like A.D.D. to me.
-
Reading between the lines, I see parents who determined that their son had gotten a wake up call and once exposed to the 'methods', decided against further 'treatment'.
Recipe for creating a passively-aggressive defiant child- subject them to unrealistic rules that have no rational basis other than to determine who's in 'control' and to austere/ extreme consequences for minor infractions.
Subject a kid (person) to this environment long enough and you get a person who lives by others rules, can't think for themselves, and is constantly vigilant; who only makes positive decisions to avoid consequences.
Internal structure. :lol:
I think the parents showed intelligence for removing him before he was brain dead.
What IS the rationale for the No Gum rule? Aren't there enough rules without concocting irrational ones?
-
Reading between the lines of the story, my opinion (if it matters) is they were struggling financially and didn't want to lose their home. I'd buy that before I'd buy the gum consequence. Besides, it wouldn't have taken months to get back to where he was. Admitting it was about money will free them up to get on with their lives>>>>
Sorry, I don't agree. I believe there are a lot of parents out there just like myself. Who honestly did NOT know that these type of torture homes could even exist in the year 2003. When we rescued our child from Bethel Boys Academy, our son was able to smuggle out three other phone numbers. We immediately called those parents and upon hearing how their child was being treated, rescued their kids. When the state removed an additional 13 victims from that hell hole, only one parent insisted they wanted their child sent back there. They didn't believe their son. The other 12 parents were outraged and the abuse and torture their kids had suffered. That isn't what they were told would happen to their child, nor did any of them feel that's what kind of help they paid for.
There are some ignorant parents out there who truly don't care about what happens to their child as they have simply given up the parenting card. Yet, from talking to so many victim's parents, a large majority honestly don't know the abuse their child is suffering. When they do know they pull their child from that bad situation.
I believe this set of parents did the same thing. At first, they were happy with the results they were seeing, yet the gum incident made them realize it was waaaaay to harsh. Good for the parents to pull their child out of that.
-
On 2004-11-15 21:10:00, Anonymous wrote:
"The parents that pulled their child are like so many other parents that come to a parent/teen seminar. Kid HAS made some changes, and really looks great during the seminar. The kids actually talk about this and know that if they really look good their parents will bring them home. No, the gum thing was not the reason, it was an excuse. Didn't they choose a structured program with rules because their son was not living by any rules whatsoever and even hit his mother? What do they really think 4 months is going to do when the family was in chaos for a lot longer? Band-Aid, quick fix, scare tactic, wake up call?
Reading between the lines of the story, my opinion (if it matters) is they were struggling financially and didn't want to lose their home. I'd buy that before I'd buy the gum consequence. Besides, it wouldn't have taken months to get back to where he was. Admitting it was about money will free them up to get on with their lives.
I commend Ms. Norem for confronting the broken rule and not playing games for the parents sake.
The boy didn't have the time to get the internal structure he will need, so instead the parents are taking it on for him. Whatever works!
Was this kid really bi-polar? None of the "symptoms" describe bi-polar...the paranoia, the mania, the perfectionism, the depression. Sounds more like A.D.D. to me. "
ADD and the manic phase of bipolar disorder look *extremely* similar, especially in children.
There are a few typical differences, for example ADD rages typically last for less than an hour and bipolar rages can last for four or five hours or more. Bipolars typically have disordered body positions (such as hunching over or going into a fetal position or trying to hide under things) when they are in a rage or crying fit or on the edge of one. ADDers typically don't have those disordered body positions. The problem is that the two disorders can co-occur, and the few differences are not definitive---you can have early onset bipolars with shorter rages and ADDers with disordered body positions.
The really important difference is in response to medication.
It can be absolutely disastrous to put a manic child on Ritalin. Ritalin is a stimulant, which would tend to make the mania worse. Manic people, even children, can get violent with little to no warning. (Or, rather, with warning signs even experienced laymen may not recognize at all.)
If you put an ADD child on a mood stabilizer, it simply doesn't work---but is not immediately disastrous.
So usually the way the doctors tell the difference between ADD and mania in children is they give a mood stabilizer and see if it gets better. If it does, the child is bipolar. If it doesn't, *then* they try Ritalin. If the child gets better instead of worse, it's ADD.
One of the other touchstones that can help you tell the difference is if there happens to be a strong family history of one disorder or the other---there won't always be, but if there is, it can give the pdoc a clue as to which disorder she's looking at.
So basically, unless you're a licensed psychiatrist, if the licensed psychiatrist diagnosed the kid as bipolar and had the kid on a mood stabilizer that was working *when he took it*, then you should presume that even though it "sounds like ADD" to you, the psychiatrist probably knows very well what she's talking about.
Timoclea
-
Pretty good article in Time. Like so many reporters, he came to find fault and abuse, and instead the worst thing he found was parents who decided to pull their kid for breaking a rule. Dad gave him the gum, kid decided since dad gave it to him, it would be okay. If dad was an alcoholic and told his son it was okay to have a few sips of Jack with him, I suppose that's acceptable?
The gum thing...it's petty, it's a small rule, but learning to not break rules is to learn self-control. Damn, if a consequence for breaking a rule is torture, bring it on!
-
Timoclea - I have ADD. I was given a stimulant many years ago and I was buzzed! This is what is being prescribed by the so-called degreed experts as the answer? How about learning self-control, anger management, making lists, focus skills (wWhich by the way WWASPS schools ALL teach) First hand experience, it works, though it took time to make it a conscious part of my life. ADD does not disappear, even masked by meds. From the article, it sounds like the young man did learn some good things. The program teaches to take what fits and let the rest go. Choosing to let go of the need for a consequence for a known rule was their choice. It's not my business, only theirs.
-
< How about learning self-control, anger management, making lists, focus skills (wWhich by the way WWASPS schools ALL teach)
WWASPS **teaches** these things?
No, WWASPS creates an environment of terror, uncertainty, humiliation, arbitrary punishment for arbitrary rules, lack of discipline and self-control of authority figures, from untrained sadistic staff to peer inmates given unrestricted power, running the asylum...
You'd better learn the self-control of not responding to taunting or stupid made-up-as-you-go rules, or spend months in solitary or a few days in R&R after a harsh take-down.
You'd better learn anger management, to swallow inside all the hatred for an inferior person's cruel actions, such as lengthening your prison term by months (and mega $$$) for accepting a gift of gum from your parent.
You'd better learn to make lists, to try to put some order into your life of not knowing which day it is, what is going on in the outside world, when you will return to your family. WWASPS owners declare publically that they make all days, all weeks, all months distressingly the same...boring..., allowing clients to "work on themselves" because there is no other reality to connect to. Make a list of how many things you must confess, how many things you have done to ruin your family, how many reasons you fail as a human being, how much wrong you have done to cause your family to banish you. If the list is long enough and hurtful enough, maybe the staffer or facilitator or kid in the next chair at group will be satisfied enough with your list to give you points toward returning home.
Focus? On what? Is there any focus for a WWASPS victim beyond how awful he is? When the focus produces a kid who finally beats himself up so mentally that he believes he is the Root of all Evil, then...then...he can focus on how to extinguish or bury or fake real feelings..."grow" through the Program.
WWASPS feeds on hate, on fear, on stealing money by lying about what is really happening to these "manipulators". There is no positive...just a cancer of hate that only hateful parents can condone, once they truly understand what the Program is doing.
-
Hey, programmie anon...
HOW DOES WWASPS TEACH ANY OF THIS? HUH?
Thats all.Save our planet; it's the only one with chocolate!
--Andi, domestic goddess
-
***Dad gave him the gum, kid decided since dad gave it to him, it would be okay. If dad was an alcoholic and told his son it was okay to have a few sips of Jack with him, I suppose that's acceptable? The gum thing...it's petty, it's a small rule, but learning to not break rules is to learn self-control. Damn, if a consequence for breaking a rule is torture, bring it on!
This is just classic.... and should be included in the parent manual!!!
Yes, kids assume their parents are an authority figure in their life. If dad gave him a piece of gum, why wouldn't he take it, unless the goal is to convince the child that the program has more authority over them than their parents.
You can not 'teach' anything with rules and consequences that are unreasonable. The only thing they learn is that they must defer to irrational rules to avoid punishment.
Months of 'hard work', as it was put, and he can't be rewarded with a stick of gum. What 'reward' did the program give him, other than being able to see his parents briefly. BTW, the rest of the world knows that contact with parents is a right, not a privlege to be earned.
If the program 'teaches- take what works and leave the rest', sounds like he wasn't in violation of a rule. Any thinking human being would recognize that the rule has no value, other than 'control'. You all sound like a bunch of sadistic control freaks.
-
On 2004-11-16 20:56:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Timoclea - I have ADD. I was given a stimulant many years ago and I was buzzed! This is what is being prescribed by the so-called degreed experts as the answer? How about learning self-control, anger management, making lists, focus skills (wWhich by the way WWASPS schools ALL teach) First hand experience, it works, though it took time to make it a conscious part of my life. ADD does not disappear, even masked by meds. From the article, it sounds like the young man did learn some good things. The program teaches to take what fits and let the rest go. Choosing to let go of the need for a consequence for a known rule was their choice. It's not my business, only theirs. "
Okay, so I'll take your word for it that you have ADD---although if you do, a stimulant shouldn't have "buzzed" you, it should have settled you. That sounds like a reason to reevaluate the diagnosis, but presumably that's already been done by qualified professionals.
But you obviously don't know jack shit about bipolar disorder.
Bipolars *really, really need* to be on appropriate medication.
Bipolar disorder is a physiological brain disease where each manic episode does a little bit more brain damage. If left untreated, parts of a bipolar person's brain actually shrink from the ongoing damage.
If treated with the right medicines at the right doses to prevent the manic episodes, the damage stops and at least some of it appears to heal.
The medications prescribed for bipolar disorder do *not* merely mask symptoms. They prevent further brain damage, and allow some of the damage that has already been done to heal.
Every growing human being needs to learn life skills, but most of us learn them just fine without being locked up in a facility to do so.
There is *no* reason to believe that as long as this kid takes his medication and sees his pdoc to adjust the doses when and as needed (things like sunlight levels and weight changes can change the needed dosage)---there's no reason to believe he can't learn life skills either from life and his parents like the rest of us do, or on an outpatient basis from a good therapist.
*I* learned self-control, anger management, how to make lists, how to "focus"---just from living my life and being raised by my parents.
*Most* people learn those things just fine that way.
Once this boy doesn't have essential cells in his brain dying and parts of his brain shrinking because he has a genetic disorder going untreated, *he* can learn those things just fine the normal way, too.
His problems are because he has a brain disease and wasn't taking the right drugs to arrest the damage and allow some of it to heal.
Stop the brain damage, and as long as you make sure it *stays* stopped, he can learn the same way any other *normal* teen learns----or at worst with some outpatient therapy to supplement normal life experience and parental advice.
Look, I don't know the physiology and causes of ADD---but I know the physiology and causes of bipolar disorder (which is what this boy has been diagnosed with, by qualified professionals) very well.
What "fits" for a bipolar is regularly taking the right meds to stop the brain damage. If a patient is displaying the symptoms of mania, that's our clue that right then that patient is undergoing further damage to his brain. And then they medicate the depressive side of it because patients do so much better at coping and actually taking their meds when they're *stable*. (It's not uncommon for the treatment to combine a mood stabilizer to take out the mania, and an antidepressant to raise the general mood to normal.)
For ADD, maybe the meds do only mask symptoms. I'm not an expert on that disorder.
For bipolar disorder, the meds actually treat the underlying problem---but the doctors do not yet have a way to treat the cause of the disorder, which is some set of genes "triggered" (and then the problem is there for life) by some thing or things they haven't yet pinpointed.
When they find the genes that make the vulnerability, they'll probably be able to develop a cure, but that's years if not decades away.
Anyway, the parents were exactly right to remove their kid. As long as they keep him stable on medication he should do as well as he personally can.
Taking the medication to stop the brain damage is what "fits". The whole kit and caboodle of locking the kid up under a regime of mind-bogglingly excessive and unnecessary rules is absolutely part of the "rest" that they needed to let go. And they apparently did.
Timoclea
-
On 2004-11-17 05:02:00, Anonymous wrote:
Months of 'hard work', as it was put, and he can't be rewarded with a stick of gum. What 'reward' did the program give him, other than being able to see his parents briefly. BTW, the rest of the world knows that contact with parents is a right, not a privlege to be earned.
All they had to do was ask if chewing gum during the workshop was okay. I'm not allowed to chew gum during work, and especially not during team meetings. Silly rule? Yes, but I know the consequences of breaking it at work.
During workshops and seminars, gum and food are not allowed and this is made clear in the beginning. Those that don't agree with that rule are asked to state their objection. Did they object, or just decide it was okay for their family to do this?
-
All they had to do was ask if chewing gum during the workshop was okay. I'm not allowed to chew gum during work, and especially not during team meetings. Silly rule? Yes, but I know the consequences of breaking it at work. >>>
Really? Please do tell what the consequences would be at work. Would your boss slam you to the ground and lock you up? Or would you be fired on the spot? Or maybe you would be demoted to the janitors position for a few months?
Get real. Your posts are a desperate attempt to show this was a sane reaction to a dumb piece of gum. The parents realized this also. It wasn't that the Dad whipped out a cigg and offered it to his son. It was a small piece of gum. Nor did the parents tell the son they would smuggle in a few packs so he could chew it later. Pluuulleeeez.
-
Yes, Timoclea, we get it. You've repeated it so many times, and in lengthy detail. I get that bi-polars need medication and it doesn't look like the poster was saying that bi-polar doesn't need medication. ADDers do not need medication, in most cases. Most ADDers can learn to live in harmony with their differences with the right kind of behavior modification. With the meds and behavior modification, so can many bi-polars. Giving a bi-polar meds without behavior modification is only half the battle.
-
On 2004-11-17 08:15:00, Watchaduen wrote:
>
Really? Please do tell what the consequences would be at work. Would your boss slam you to the ground and lock you up? Or would you be fired on the spot? Or maybe you would be demoted to the janitors position for a few months?
Get real. Your posts are a desperate attempt to show this was a sane reaction to a dumb piece of gum. The parents realized this also. It wasn't that the Dad whipped out a cigg and offered it to his son. It was a small piece of gum. Nor did the parents tell the son they would smuggle in a few packs so he could chew it later. Pluuulleeeez.
"
Pluuulleeeez....you're making something much bigger out of this than it is. Did Ms. Norem slam them to the ground and lock them up? No. Did the dad bring cigs and light up during the workshop? No. They had their opportunity to challenge the gum rule in the beginning and didn't. They made their own rules.
For me, if I were to chew gum, I would be reprimanded and told that certain employee privileges would be taken away for 3 months. This is a major corporation. I love my job and career and choose not to break this silly rule and it's really not important to chew gum just to see how much I can get away with.
-
The ADHD Fraud
How Psychiatry Makes "Patients" Out of Normal Children
by Fred Baughman Jr. MD & Craig Hovey, PHD
Edition: Paperback, 288 pages
Available September 2004
Click here to order:
http://commoncouragepress.com/index.cfm ... bookid=290 (http://commoncouragepress.com/index.cfm?action=book&bookid=290)
Cover Price: $17.95
Our Price: $11.67
Inventing a disorder that millions of children can be branded with has been applied to diagnoses like bi-polar and anxiety, among others, where, once again, life's difficulties and traumas are redefined as diseases. Pharmaceutical companies make billions selling dangerous drugs that should never enter a child's body; schools get more compliant children; insurance companies have treatments to push that are much cheaper than addressing a child's real situation; psychiatry has more patients to bill for. From stories to statistics, The ADHD Fraud puts the medication of children to rest.
AUTHOR BIO
Fred Baughman, MD is a retired neurologist. Craig Hovey is a writer whose interest in the book's subject was sparked when told by school personnel his son suffered from ADHD.
For more on Dr Baughman's work please visit
http://www.adhdfraud.com/ (http://www.adhdfraud.com/)
-
***For me, if I were to chew gum, I would be reprimanded and told that certain employee privileges would be taken away for 3 months. This is a major corporation. I love my job and career and choose not to break this silly rule and it's really not important to chew gum just to see how much I can get away with.
At least you realize it's a silly rule. I bet if you were the top producer and challenged it, the maker of the rule might think twice about their control issues. Ever asked what the 'rationale' for the rule is?
What employee privleges would you loose? No coffe? No donuts? Have to park in the south 40 for 3 months?
So is the program a proving ground- training camp in which the participants are prepared to live in a 'corporate world' of irrational rules? To just follow rules without questioning? You know there is a term for that. Some people would prefer to find other employment rather work in a control freak, tyranical system. Remember, people have choices. You choose to live with irrational rules, some don't.
Are you the anon who said, 'it's petty, it's a small rule, but learning to not break rules is to learn self-control. Damn, if a consequence for breaking a rule is torture, bring it on!'
Just curious how the process goes when someone in seminar 'states their objection'?
-
On 2004-11-17 09:11:00, Anonymous wrote:
"***For me, if I were to chew gum, I would be reprimanded and told that certain employee privileges would be taken away for 3 months. This is a major corporation. I love my job and career and choose not to break this silly rule and it's really not important to chew gum just to see how much I can get away with.
In this day of scarce jobs, a lot of folks view their jobs from just the employee's side. In point of actual fact, talk to a personnel executive of your major corporation, and you will find the company's strong efforts to *keep* good employees are as strong as the workers efforts to not get fired. So, if you expect your large corporation to remove privileges for 3 months and possibly endanger your beloved career position for the single-time trangression of chewing gum, you must not be working for a recognized "Good Company" (or one that will be around for a long time). Viewing the workforce as expendable non-persons who can only be coerced by threats or punishment into following the company guidelines does not make for a workforce which will provide enthusiastic productivity and loyalty.
To punish for a gum offense sounds like the staffer was gunning for any reason to flaunt authority and *punish*...a typical modus operundi for families that send their kids away when they find they can't make the constant punishments at home "work". What ever happened to stopping the gum-chewer and reminding him of the No-Gum rule, even when it is offered by his parent whom he (and the world at large) would presume to have greater authority than The Program? If WWASPS *teaches*, then *teach*. Punishment doesn't teach values; it teaches that the punisher is powerful...and that's what WWASPS is all about.
-
Spots - go back to the beginning of the workshop statement - "Is there anyone in the room that doesn't agree with the ground rules?" What does that say about anyone that doesn't agree, but doesn't say so? The facilitator was letting them know they broke a ground rule. Was she supposed to play favorites, or be consistent?
Please don't assume the major corporation has this rule (no gum chewing) for no reason. It's not a control issue. It's because they require the employees to look and act professionally. Gum chewing while being face to face with clients ... well, do you get the visual? For me, the gum chewing is not even important since I don't chew it anyway! However, it is important enough for the company that they made it a part of the rules.
The employees get past this as they understand why it's in place. Am I to assume that because I'm a high producer that I should be given the priviledge to chew gum? High producers get many other perks, but this one won't be changed for me or anyone.
Yes, in life people either enjoy their job and go along with the rules, or they enjoy their job and challenge the rules, or they don't like their job or don't like the rules... I will challenge a rule, offer solutions and either agree or disagree with the outcome.
Bottom line, the parents didn't challenge the rule.
-
***Viewing the workforce as expendable non-persons who can only be coerced by threats or punishment into following the company guidelines does not make for a workforce which will provide enthusiastic productivity and loyalty.
Just occured to me. Perhaps s/he works for the corp offices of WWASP !! :lol:
-
***Yes, in life people either enjoy their job and go along with the rules, or they enjoy their job and challenge the rules, or they don't like their job or don't like the rules... I will challenge a rule, offer solutions and either agree or disagree with the outcome.
Sweetie, the world is not that black and white. I would be insulted if my boss thought I didn't have to the good sense to know when it was or was not appropriate to chew gum in professional situations. I find it excessive that you can't chew gum outside a face to face or staff meeting. It's just ignorant, and yep controlling.
Bottom line, the parents didn't challenge the rule.
And, I noticed you didn't answer.... what would have happened if they had?
-
What would have happened if the parents had challenged the ground rule? Don't know, it didn't happen, so how could anyone know?
When someone challenges a ground rule, there is a group discussion about it, beyond that, it's anyone's guess.
-
"I don't know why someone can't chew gum outside of face to face meetings..." Not everyone is as responsible as others. They made the rule because those that chewed gum sometimes forgot they were even chewing it. Hence, the no toleration policy.
It's not about the gum...how many of you really get that?
-
So now we get to the crux of the issue-
***Not everyone is as responsible as others. They made the rule because those that chewed gum sometimes forgot they were even chewing it. Hence, the no toleration policy.
This ridiculous rule is really about the image of the corp. It also interferes with the employees opportunity to learn thru natural consequences- Go into a meeting with a potential client chewing gum, and you might not land the account.
People really are stupid, and thank god we have corporations for the adults and programs for the kids... to make the rules and keep us all in line. Because image and following the rules certainly is more important than living one's life and learning from experience. Not.
You're all afraid of the process. Well, let me tell you, there is no better teacher, and those lessons are real lessons one gains from trial and error, not from being subjected to irrational, arbitrary rules and consequences that are too harsh.
***It's not about the gum...how many of you really get that?
I don't think anyone who has responded didn't get that it's not about the gum, but idiotic rules that have no basis in reality. It's about consequences that are too severe for the 'crine'. It's about 'torture' for violation of those idiotic rules. You are the one that tried to justify the gum rule by stating your employer had a rule against it and that a violation resulted in a consequence, which I'm still trying to imagine what that might be. Coffee? Donuts? Leads? Insurance premiums not covered?
BTW, who narcs on the employee who forgets and goes into an appointment with gum in his/her mouth? Do you work in pairs so there is always a narc to report back violations?
-
From ny experience the Program was always manipulating and challenging the parents too.
Christmas or holday vistis would be pulled out from excited parents because the kid supposedly did an infraction. Parents were constanly made aware who really was in charge,who was calling the shots. The Program.
I saw it many time during the seminar process.I experienced it myself .
-
I think it's about standing up for yourself and challenging a rule, instead of hiding out and not saying anything at all. :wink:
-
On 2004-11-17 21:38:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I think it's about standing up for yourself and challenging a rule, instead of hiding out and not saying anything at all. :wink: "
You know, if these parents are so quick to make excuses for their child for breaking a little rule, what the hell are they going to do differently with the BIG rules? It really was up to the son to tell dad "no" and be done with it. He knew he was breaking a ground rule, so did the parents. Wonder where else that is showing up in their lives. You all can justify breaking a small rule that you don't agree with, but it doesn't matter. The son is home now and away from the big bad program.
-
"But taking nothing for granted, the Carbens are instituting their own tough-love rules at home. "We'll have a lot more boundaries," says Mary. In the meantime, they have confiscated John's car keys."
Yea right! Boundaries? That's funny.
One thing that I noticed missing was that this reporter apparently was on campus at least a full day if not two. What a better way to cry abuse than with a reporter right there! Not one of the kids, even the lower levels...not one kid in the workshop. What's up with that? What a perfect opportunity!!!!
-
***You know, if these parents are so quick to make excuses for their child for breaking a little rule, what the hell are they going to do differently with the BIG rules?
I'm sure it's difficult for you to comprehend, but people really are capable of discerning the difference between breaking a 'small' arbitrary rule and a 'big' one.
***It really was up to the son to tell dad "no" and be done with it. He knew he was breaking a ground rule, so did the parents.
Wish they were here to speak for themselves, but the thought crossed my mind.... was this one of the program 'tests'... that went wrong. Was the parent told to offer the child gum to see if he'd decline. Then when the parents realized that he would loose all the points he'd accumulated for 5 months, they decided the program/methods were too rigid and irrational. Sounds like intelligence working there.
***You all can justify breaking a small rule that you don't agree with, but it doesn't matter.
You miss the point, for obvious reasons. Contrary to program think, it is a sign of higher intelligence when one ignores stupid rules that have no other purpose than to control and/or oppress unnecessarily. By rejecting the rule, the 'lesson' is then returned to its rightful owner- the control freak tyrant.
***The son is home now and away from the big bad program.
That's a good thing. Now he can return to learning about life by living life- making mistakes, perhaps big mistakes, and learning from them. Which is so much more desirable than him being stuck in a private prison where his only thoughts are to remember the 'list' of unreasonable and arbitary rules in order to avoid 'torture'.
You all are really big on people making 'choices'. This family 'chose' to remove their child. Why can't you move on and honor their choice? Oh yeh, there's a corp image to protect... I forgot. Which dictates the necessity of publicly implying that there is something fundamentally wrong with them and their choice.
My hope is that one day all you program groupies wake up to just how fearful and controlling you are, for the sake of future generations.
-
On 2004-11-17 23:21:00, Anonymous wrote:
"
On 2004-11-17 21:38:00, Anonymous wrote:
"I think it's about standing up for yourself and challenging a rule, instead of hiding out and not saying anything at all. :wink: "
You know, if these parents are so quick to make excuses for their child for breaking a little rule, what the hell are they going to do differently with the BIG rules? It really was up to the son to tell dad "no" and be done with it. He knew he was breaking a ground rule, so did the parents. Wonder where else that is showing up in their lives. You all can justify breaking a small rule that you don't agree with, but it doesn't matter. The son is home now and away from the big bad program. "
That is such a foolish position.
I routinely go five or ten miles over the speed limit, where I think it's safe for conditions. But I've never murdered anyone, and if someone makes me mad I don't walk up and assault them. I don't cheat on my taxes or shoplift. I've never been convicted of anything other than minor traffic infractions---largely because I don't *do* those other things.
Contrary to your assumption, *most* people break stupid, small rules and *don't* break the big ones.
Being able to tell which rules are the small ones and which rules are the important ones is normal and healthy.
It's called having a sense of proportion.
Program idiots not having said sense is why most of us are upset with them, and why most of us believe that *most* normal people in society would be upset with the programs if said normal people were aware that the programs exist, that basically normal kids *are* getting sent to them, and aware of what the programs do to kids.
Having a sense of proportion is vital to being a mature enough, functional enough adult to responsibly, wisely raise children.
Five year olds have no sense of proportion. They see a guy drop a piece of litter by the side of the road and think he should be put in jail. It's a developmental thing, it's normal for their age, BUT--and here's the key---you're supposed to grow out of it.
Mature adults are supposed to know better.
People with a five year old's sense of justice shouldn't be raising kids.
Timoclea
-
"Its not about the gum. How many of you get that?"
Precisely the point -- it's all about the $6,000 or so that the Program gets for playing "gotcha" with the parents checkbook. Do you get that?
-
---it's all about the $6,000 or so that the Program gets for playing "gotcha" with the parents checkbook. Do you get that?"
Just as an aside, not really germaine to the discussion...
SCL costs about $3500 a month x 4+ months the kid was there = $14,000, plus the costs of the parents visiting Montana from wherever, plus the costs of attending the seminars required to be able to see their son at all (travel, lodging, food) plus the costs of collect long-distance phone calls (if allowed at all) plus the inflated costs of any medical, psychological, or extraneous services, plus the costs of $500 for toiletries used during his time there, plus the cost of uniforms and their laundering, plus the cost of the required deposit into the kid's "allowance fund" each month....
IOW, it cost a hell of a lot for some dumbshit to blast the kid for chewing gum. Perhaps THAT was the overriding reason the parents decided to call it quits.
-
Yes, Spots. That's what was said in an earlier post. I do think it was about the money. They just decided that since they had seen some huge changes in their son, he'd had enough time and are justifying their "pulling" him by blaming it on being confronted with a broken rule.
To the anon that breaks the speed limit. That's still not the point. The point is that the parents didn't CHALLENGE the rule, they just decided to break it and were confronted with it. No favortism. It's a ground rule that no food, including gum, is allowed in the room.
-
Good For Them!!
Control freaks need to have their cages rattled every once in a while.
-
On 2004-11-16 08:32:00, Anonymous wrote:
What IS the rationale for the No Gum rule? Aren't there enough rules without concocting irrational ones?"
I remember when I was in both grade school and high school gum was not allowed. If a student was caught chewing gum, we had to "wear" it. Has that changed? I hope so!
-
Aw, HELL yeah!
More from: http://www.nih.gov/news/pr/oct2004/od-15.htm (http://www.nih.gov/news/pr/oct2004/od-15.htm)
NIH Office of the Director (OD)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Friday, October 15, 2004
Kelli Marciel
NIH Consensus Development Program
301-496-4819
Panel Finds that Scare Tactics for Violence Prevention are Harmful
Good news is that positive approaches show promise
Bethesda, Maryland ? Programs that rely on ?scare tactics? to prevent children and adolescents from engaging in violent behavior are not only ineffective, but may actually make the problem worse, according to an independent state-of-the-science panel convened this week by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The panel, charged with assessing the available evidence on preventing violence and other health-risking behaviors in adolescents, announced today its assessment of the current research.
The panel found that group detention centers, boot camps, and other ?get tough? programs often exacerbate problems by grouping young people with delinquent tendencies, where the more sophisticated instruct the more naïve. Similarly, the practice of transferring juveniles to the adult judicial system can be counterproductive, resulting in greater violence among incarcerated youth.
?The good news is that a number of intervention programs have been demonstrated to be effective through randomized controlled trials,? explained Dr. Robert L. Johnson, Chair of the Department of Pediatrics at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, who chaired the state-of-the-science panel. ?We were pleased to find several programs that work, and we hope that communities will adopt them and continue to develop other interventions that incorporate the features common to successful programs.?
The panel highlighted two programs that are clearly effective in reducing arrests and out-of-home placements: Functional Family Therapy, and Multisystemic Therapy. Among the important characteristics that these programs have in common are a focus on developing social competency skills, a long-term approach, and family involvement.
The panel also identified strengths and weaknesses in the field of violence prevention research, and made a number of recommendations to shape future efforts. Among these, the panel advocated a national population-based adolescent violence registry, and greater emphasis on economic research into the cost-effectiveness of intervention to prevent violence.
The panel released its findings in a public session this morning, following two days of expert presentations and panel deliberations. The full text of the panel's draft statement will be available late today at http://consensus.nih.gov (http://consensus.nih.gov). The final version will be available at the same Web address in three to four weeks. Statements from past conferences and additional information about the NIH Consensus Development Program are also available at the Web site, or by calling 1-888-644-2667.
The panel is independent and its report is not a policy statement of the NIH or the Federal Government. The NIH Consensus Development Program, of which this conference is a part, was established in 1977 as a mechanism to judge controversial topics in medicine and public health in an unbiased, impartial manner. NIH has conducted 119 consensus development conferences, and 23 state-of-the-science (formerly "technology assessment") conferences, addressing a wide range of issues.
The conference was sponsored by the Office of Medical Applications of Research and the National Institute of Mental Health, of the NIH. Cosponsors included the Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research, the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institute of Nursing Research, the National Library of Medicine, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, the U.S. Department of Education, and the U.S. Department of Justice.
The 13-member panel included practitioners and researchers in community and family medicine, pediatrics, nursing, psychiatry, behavioral health, economics, juvenile justice, outcomes research, and a public representative. The panel reviewed an extensive collection of scientific literature related to youth violence prevention, including a systematic literature review prepared by the Southern California Evidence-Based Practice Center, under contract with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. A summary of the Evidence Report on Preventing Violence and Related Health-Risking Social Behaviors in Adolescents is available at http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/epcsums/adolvisum.htm (http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/epcsums/adolvisum.htm).
The archived webcast of the conference sessions will be available shortly at http://consensus.nih.gov/ (http://consensus.nih.gov/).
Note to TV Editors: The news conference at 2 p.m. today will be broadcast live via satellite on the following coordinates:
Galaxy 3 Transponder 02 C-Band
Orbital slot: 95 degrees West
Downlink Freq: 3740 Vertical
Audio: 6.2/6.8
Test time: 1:30 p.m. ET
Broadcast: 2:00 - 3:00 p.m. ET
Note to Radio Editors: An audio report of the conference results will be available after 4 p.m. today from the NIH Radio News Service by calling 1-800-MED-DIAL (1-800-633-3425).
The NIH comprises the Office of the Director and 27 Institutes and Centers. The Office of the Director is the central office at NIH, and is responsible for setting policy for NIH and for planning, managing, and coordinating the programs and activities of all the NIH components. The NIH is a component of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Home > News & Events E-mail this page
Subscribe to receive future NIH news releases.
You never see animals going through the absurd and often horrible fooleries of magic and religion. Only man behaves with such gratuitous folly. It is the price he has to pay for being intelligent but not, as yet, intelligent enough.
--Aldous Huxley, author
-
On 2004-11-22 07:27:00, Antigen wrote:
"Aw, HELL yeah!
The panel highlighted two programs that are clearly effective in reducing arrests and out-of-home placements: Functional Family Therapy, and Multisystemic Therapy. Among the important characteristics that these programs have in common are a focus on developing social competency skills, a long-term approach, and family involvement.
WWASPS - includes a long term approach, building social competency skills and HUGE family involvement! Great news!
-
Missed the point, which is:
Programs that rely on ?scare tactics? to prevent children and adolescents from engaging in violent behavior are not only ineffective, but may actually make the problem worse...
Anything else a program might do is inconsequential if such methods are employed. Get it?
The National Mental Health Assoc has similar opinion:
http://www.nmha.org/children/justjuv/bootcamp.cfm (http://www.nmha.org/children/justjuv/bootcamp.cfm)
Experts agree that a confrontational approach is not appropriate. Most correctional and military experts agree that a confrontational model, employing tactics of intimidation and humiliation, is counterproductive for most youth in the juvenile justice system. The use of this kind of model has led to disturbing incidents of abuse. For youth of color (who represent the vast majority of the juveniles sentenced to boot camps)-as well as for youth with emotional, behavioral, or learning problems-degrading tactics may be particularly inappropriate and potentially damaging. The bullying style and aggressive interactions that characterize the boot camp environment fail to model the pro-social behavior and development of empathy that these youth really need to learn.
Youth who are involved with the juvenile justice system require an individualized approach that takes their strengths and needs into account. Programs and policies should be family-centered, including the family in all decision making about a child, as well as culturally and developmentally appropriate. Research has shown that small, community-based programs are more effective and less costly than correctional institutions, for the majority of children who come into contact with the juvenile justice system. Rather than removing children from their families and communities, which only increases their difficulties and sense of marginalization, most youth can be managed in their communities while they receive a full range of rehabilitative services, including mental health and substance abuse treatment.
-
That applies to the juvenile justice system. They have a long way to go.
-
Only in your limited and programmed perspective. It most definitely applies to white middle class kids who are incarcerted in private facilites.
-
On 2004-11-22 08:07:00, Anonymous wrote:
WWASPS - includes a long term approach, building social competency skills and HUGE family involvement! Great news!
Are you kidding? How can you characterize zero to limited, monitored family contact as "HUGE family involvement"??? In the words of the good Dr., you must be straight up outa your mind! No gods, no masters.
--margaret Sanger
-
What do you mean my zero or limited contact? Once a week contact with the therapist and family rep, unlimited letter writing, family support groups, BBS interaction and of course, the personal growth seminars,the teen/parent workshops and family after care.
If you're talking about in person contact and unlimited phone calls at the early part of it, you're right, that is limited. The unlimited letter writing (not censored BTW) is to rebuild communication, first letters, then phone calls, then visits. It works for anyone that isn't a control freak.
What is being called "breaking them down" is not a negative. It's confronting the behavior that got them there in the first place and learning behaviors and choices that they feel good about without using drugs or anger or manipulation.
-
This is a very biased article that fails to look into the history of WWASPS or SCL, instead it just shows the progress of one student and his family. More of a promotional tool for WWASPS than anything else.
The reporter wrote: ?She and Randy were impressed by the ?40 referrals? from ecstatic parents?. Yet the reporter fails to mention that these referrals are FOR PROFIT. Ive met ecstatic parents in Tupperware parties too.
Teens naturally mature, and WWASPS takes credit for that. What they don?t take credit for are the bruises and emotional scares. WWASPS is SICK!
-
One of my many comments to the editor of the article has to do with just what you said about the bipolar diagnosis. You said it well, as you know it too well. Did you write to Time. If not, I hope you will on that point alone! [ This Message was edited by: hurleygurley on 2004-11-22 14:10 ]
-
Anon said:
..."What do you mean my zero or limited contact? Once a week contact with the therapist and family rep..."
---which in our WWASPS case meant an uneducated untrained "guard", who you could *try* to connect by phone each Tuesday afternoon, and who told the parents for more than the first 2 months that '...she is doing well but having a little trouble with the rules', while failing to mention that the child was spending all day/every day in a white beach chair, feet flat on the floor, facing the blank wall of a 3x5 white room, no school, no exercise, no human interaction at all---
"...unlimited letter writing"
---as required by WWASPS every Monday afternoon, but only one-third of all letters home were sent, [only 1 of every 3 weekly assignments made it home] and no one knows how many tries by the child until an "acceptable" letter was drafted---
"...family support groups, BBS interaction and of course, the personal growth seminars..."
---which consist of a lot of whining and guilt trips, desperate attempts at self-validation for the failure of the parent to *parent* his own child. Heavy emphasis on how we just have to let go of our guilt and realize that the kid is totally at fault, and once he realizes that lying and manipulation will gain nothing but consequences [punishment, banishment, and isolation] will he begin to toe the line and "earn" the right to return to our loving family.
"...the teen/parent workshops and family after care."
---which occur well into the Program, are formatted not as a family get-together but rather as a *workshop* where the child instantly understands that The Program has taken on a new face that only looks like Mom and Dad, and only when the child has learned the ultimate manipulation of saying whatever it takes - fake it till you make it. Family aftercare consists of monthly meetings with those few supporters so devout that they continue the bizarre relationship with other failure parents, infrequently bringing their children into the mix...which does not have anything to do with "FAMILY" aftercare.
"...If you're talking about in person contact and unlimited phone calls at the early part of it, you're right, that is limited."
---try WWASPS' incredible parent manipulation and lying that witholds direct contact OF ANY SORT WITH ANY FAMILY, not at the earliest part, but for 10 f****** months, almost one whole year, for a 14yo kid!
".. .The unlimited letter writing (not censored BTW)..."
--- :wstupid: You simply cannot be stupid enough to believe this!!!! Emails, the quintessential censorable medium, for God's sake! Has your child ever talked to you about little things he said in his letters, "...but I told you about being sick/eating crap/OP", and you insist that he never wrote that? Or is he still in WWASPS and you haven't ever really talked to him without a club hanging over his head?
"...What is being called "breaking them down" is not a negative."
---Have you read ANY of the quoted material in this thread about how negatives DON'T help??? These "problem" kids need double-fold the love, attention, and guidance to get them through tough times.
"...is to rebuild communication, first letters, then phone calls, then visits. It works for anyone that isn't a control freak."
---spoken by a World-Class control freak.
-
Does anyone have a complete list of shutdown WWASP programs at hand. Otherwise I'll search around a little. Just wanted to add that to MY letter to the editor..
-
Hurley-- there's a list of shut-down WWASP facilities on the ISAC site, on the WWASP information page.
-
...perhaps you can get some info here? I found this on GOOGLE when I entered tranquility bay in the search engine?
 Â
 Â
Sponsored Links
Tranquility Bay BBS
U.S. Teens Tortured in Jamaica
Parents Don't Care!
http://www.bulletinboards.com/view.cfm?comcode=Titsch (http://www.bulletinboards.com/view.cfm?comcode=Titsch)