Fornits

Fornits Home for Wayward Web Fora
An open discussion about the troubled parent industry

I'm not sure when the Camerons ran the place, but the Barretts took control in the early 80's.  When Roloff died, the Camerons took his place, so the Barretts moved up to dorm parents.
Repressed memories are a common occurrence.  I have a keen memory and I always think I remember everything.  Imagine my surprise when someone would mention something and I had absolutely no recollection of it happening.  It freaked me out!  Still, I do remember a lot of what happened.  Some people were abused, some weren't.  Your attitude, ability to follow rules, popularity, etc. would determine the experience you had in there.  If someone was disliked either by staff or the other girls, they were toast.

This has been a most amusing thread to read, as I avoid watching Glee.

Queenmom,

Check with your school board to see if your state offers a Challenge program.  This is a free, voluntary program that lasts five months.  It's basically a military boot camp where kids also get their GED.  They can leave the program if they want, but many stay on once they open up to the training.  They interview the candidates and have them wait a bit to make sure they stay clean in order to prove they really want to be there.
I suggest taking this avenue before sending him to a private program against his will.  Teens like to feel like they are in control if their own life and to restrict that might make him resentful.

My common sense tells me to stay out of this argument, but I'm feeling reckless and impulsive.  At my age that means butting into an online argument, which is sad and I'll ponder on that later.
I've said this before and I'll rehash it now.  One can only speak about his/her own experience.  I'll agree with Whooter, Danny and Suck It and say that not all programs are bad, not all programs are abusive, and many kids are helped through programs.  As I saw on an earlier thread, many people suggested reasonable questions to ask treatment centers and encouraged all parents to do their due diligence.  I applaud that.
However, when someone does post an abusive incident and is flippantly dismissed by the Fornits mafia, or even applauded by the opposing Fornits mafia in order to prove their agenda on an ongoing argument, it makes for a bitter experience on this forum.  Although I see Suck It's POV on giving two sides to each story, I still balk a bit because there are people who claim abuse with a legitimate claim.  I agree that there may be a lot of one-sided stories, but if you dismiss all claims as being so, you are inadvertently dismissing the legitimate ones.  
My opinion, for what it is worth) is that people should be aware that abuse can exist and that treatment may or may not be successful.  That way, parents can hone in on subtle differences in their child's behavior in order to prevent these situations.  I think, ultimately, everyone on this forum wants for all teenagers to succeed and become better people.  I also believe that one bad experience does not discredit the many good ones.

Hey Suck It,

Your post was well thought out and nicely presented.  I do, however, want to address one line from it.  When someone tells a story of abuse, and you say, "well what did you do to lead to that?", you are insinuating that abuse under some circumstances is fine.  A chaplain in the Navy once asked me if I was ever abused.  I told him that the times I'd been hit (by my father, not a program) were because I'd provoked him.  Just a clarification, I'm not referring to paddles, I'm referring to kicks, nosebleeds, or other extreme forms of punishment.  I told him how I was an unruly child and I'd get out of hand so my dad would do this.  He said this, which I've never forgotten: " That's usually the case, but he was an adult and you were a child."  
I am not going to argue for or against any program.  I'm over that, and I hate participating in the petty arguments that take place over it on this forum.  I just wanted you to reconsider that statement.  Abuse is not justified.  Disciplinary actions are acceptable if they don't become abusive.  Yes, there is a fine line between these and sometimes it is crossed, but the difference is in how the disciplinary action fits the crime.  If someone is restrained because they are potentially harmful to those around him/her or potentially harmful to  himself/herself, then it's not abuse, it's just restraining.  If someone is restrained as a way of punishment because they broke a rule, it's abuse.  Fine line, but a world of difference.

Tim,
I've thought for a long time on how to address you.  I asked you a question on the yahoo group, but by then you were angry at all those in the group and you refused to reply.  I won't ask the question again, I'll just leave you with my perspective.  My perspective on you, Tim, not the homes.
Why you decided it was your job to step up and defend the program is unclear to me.  Yet, you felt the urge to do so.  Your method was to find posts made here and call the authors of the posts liars.  You offered semantic evidence of why the posts could not be true, not stopping to consider that things may be different now than when the author of the post was there.  You speak to us as if you are the know-all and see-all of the Roloff homes.  In doing so, you became that which we have been conditioned to abhor.  
It's like this, Tim:  We gain NOTHING in telling our stories here.   We hope some parent may see it and maybe change their minds about sending someone, but seriously...when does someone really come in here for that?  We tell our stories because something motivated us to run a search about the homes, and we stumbled here.  We read the stories and we felt some sort of validation.  So we shared our experience too.  Yes, we all define abuse differently, I will give you that much.  I am one of the first to admit my stay there was not as bad as others.  Still, I can recount three episodes that I would (and a court would probably agree) define as abuse to me.  However, I'm not a scarred person because of those instances.  There are people here, though, that went through so much worse than what I went.  I know it happened.  I saw it.  I heard the accounts.  These people were called "rebellious" and chastised because they wouldn't conform to the program, so they were abused.  Not spanked, as I don't consider that abuse.  Spanking, or "licks", as we called them, was a common occurrence.  So common that it wouldn't phase us anymore.  So abusive methods of punishment were developed.  Then there are other horrors: teenage mothers told that the only hope for their babies was to give them up.  What you can't understand, Tim, was that we didn't know other options.  In our young minds, we were being told by our mentors the "right" thing to do.  Even if everything in our hearts was telling us that it wasn't the right thing, we followed.  We followed because to not do so brought on unpleasant consequences.  Our actions were motivated by fear.  It was to the points that our own thoughts would frighten us sometimes.  Like if we thought of a rock song, because someone said something that reminded us of it, we felt we were doing something wrong.  
Then, upon leaving the homes, we were allowed no more contact with each other.  Addresses and phone numbers were taken away from us.  I remember finding some letters in the trash while taking the trash out one Saturday.  They had been sent to some girls in there by a former student.  We weren't allowed to write to anyone besides our pastor and parents, but we were allowed to receive mail, if it met censorship guidelines.  (Yes, all our mail was read before coming in or going out.)  But a former student couldn't write a student still in the program.  I read the letters, with the intention of telling the intended recipients what was said.  There was nothing wrong with what she was saying, so I still don't understand why they didn't allow the recipient to get it.  I was caught reading one and quickly reprimanded.  Why the fear of us talking to each other after the program?  My theory is because once out, we could objectively review our experiences and that was a threat to the "ministry".  So when we found these boards, you can't imagine the relief we felt to see that our reinsertion into society (which was very difficult) was a similar experience to others.  The knowledge that I wasn't alone in my confusion and anger over the homes.  If you go back, you may find my posts...angry, accusing.  Then you can see the fights that inevitably break out in these boards, and I eventually left for a long time because of those.  Then I healed.  I healed through these boards, through the groups.  It became such a small part of my life, but I had to HEAL.  Because of it, I can't get as angry as others that are still going through the healing process.  Yet I understand their reaction to you.  You undermined their experience.  You called them liars.  You had no agenda, other than to bring them down again.  In the name of what, Tim?  Of God?  Of Roloff Enterprises?  They don't need you to be their lawyer.  If the program helps people, and I am not going to say no one has been helped, then the results speak for themselves.  You don't have to feel the need to defend them.  Start your own site promoting the good and allow former students to do the same.  But let those who feel differently express themselves as well.  It's their story, and you are not the one who should tell it.