Author Topic: Redcliffer  (Read 52742 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Redcliffer
« Reply #60 on: August 16, 2005, 03:10:00 PM »
Quote
Family court in NH is so biased against men that we couldn't get an order from them to remove him.

Just an idea: is there perhaps another family member who could apply for custody, if only on a temporary basis?  It might focus the court's mind on the fact that this is a child welfare issue, not a matrimonial dispute.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Notafriendofredcliff

  • Posts: 23
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Redcliffer
« Reply #61 on: August 20, 2005, 12:30:00 PM »
I had to take a step back for a couple of days.  This is just becoming overwhelming.  I had some surgery & stuff, and I feel really beaten down right now.  Now I feel guilty for my "time out" while a child is suffering.  

Deborah, you are such a sweetheart.  Thanks for all the links!  There is so much information out there, and so much propaganda also.  I got an email from the child's mother with a link to a "study" that shows just how very effective Redcliff's program is. She is trying to defend what she has done to the child, and present it as a "good thing".  The study she sent me was by Dr. Aldana (BYU).  I looked at Redcliff's website, and they use this as part of their "Research" information.  They also use research from Dr. Russell (U. of Idaho), and then they combine the two for an overall picture of recovery.  It sure looks good.  VERY favorable results.

Unfortunately, the mother only reads what she wants to read (and she's a bit "literacy challenged" to begin with) and she failed to consider the source of all this glowing research.

I found Dr. Aldana's Curriculum Vitae, and he is on the BOARD OF DIRECTORS AT REDCLIFF.

The second study was performed by Dr. Keith Russell and the Outdoor Behavioral Healthcare Research Cooperative.  I found that between 1998 and 2003, much of Dr. Russell's research has been funded by grants (6 grants totaling $228,000) from the OBHIC (Outdoor Behavioral Healthcare Industry Council).  

The connection?  Redcliff is a very involved member of the OBHIC.  Steve Petersen (Redcliff owner & founder) is on the OBHIC's committees for Standards & Quality, and is the Chair of Staffing. Scott Petersen (another owner & founder of Redcliff) is on OBHIC's MARKETING & MEDIA RELATIONS COMMITTEE.  Jim Salisbury (same thing, you get the idea here) is on the OBHIC Staffing Committee.  Now, I'm not saying the research is invalid or even questionable.  I'm just saying I (if I were a parent looking for wilderness therapy for a child) would want, AND EXPECT, Redcliff to note this information along with the research results. The website calls these "two independent studies". Well, the two studies were DONE independently of each other. I hope intelligent parents will look a bit deeper than that, before accepting any research.

I would like to see research on the outcome for a child who is placed there when his psychological evaluation determined his placement there was not necessary, and could even be counter-productive.  Even Dr. Russell said in one of his papers that Wilderness Therapy is seen as a treatment option for SERIOUSLY TROUBLED adolescents not being reached by traditional forms of treatment.  In our case, the child had visited a family counselor with his mother twice in the past 6 months.  No effort was made to give this child a chance, before he was picked up and taken to Utah.  Does Redcliff have any responsibility for accepting a child who doesn't need to be there?  Is there ANY child they won't accept?  Maybe one whose parents can't afford $425 a day?

What we are doing now is going to take so long, it won't be helpful in getting him out of there.  We are trying very hard to ACCEPT that we can't help him.  That's not easy.  What Redcliff is doing to the child, they are also doing to us.  Isolating the parent from the child, and putting us all in a situation where we have no rights.  They are trying to beat us down emotionally and make us give up.  For us, we DO have recourse....but it will take a long time, and does the child no good.  At a minimum, we hope to be able to prevent this from happening to anyone else.  Every day we are checking the weather reports for Utah, trying to empathize with what he is going through.  It somehow makes us feel a bit closer to him.  I know that sounds bizarre, but it's all we have to make us feel like we are in touch with his day-to-day life.  We are that desperate.  My husband still writes him letters.  But now the therapist (with whom my husband gets a 15-minute telephone call once per week) says this is not helpful, and she wants the child to only receive one letter from his father, and one from his mother, per week.  No mail from other relatives.  Our hands are tied.  We can't disregard what she says....She is our lifeline to him...our only contact....and we can't lose that.

My husband spoke to Redcliff's attorney on the phone.  More roadblocks and brick walls.  He indicated the fact my husband has joint legal custody of the child is virtually meaningless.  The court order from NH (saying my husband has access to all records) will not be recognized.  The consent form signed by the mother allows him only very limited access, to a few documents of Redcliff's choosing. What is wrong with these people?  Redcliff's Director of Admissions refuses to communicate with my husband AT ALL. Nobody will explain why we've been told 3 different (and increasingly complicated) versions of what would be required to withdraw the child.....when Redcliff's own enrollment contract states their policy is to allow any parent to withdraw the child.  They don't even care about the custodial status of that parent.  They will simply allow him to be withdrawn.  Why do they have a different policy for us?  They refuse to explain.  The last requirement that was stated (needing a court order from UTAH) was the one the Director refused to put in writing.  Why?  Do they plan to deny saying it?  Yes, we've thought about recording conversations, but it's not legal here.  I'm sure they know this, so they don't worry about what they say on the phone.

The mother has refused to give us custody (even though we received her offer in writing last month, and she said glowing things about our ability to provide good parenting for him).  We have considered having a third party take custody, but there is only one good option there, and I don't think they'd be willing to change their lifestyle to do it.  And the mother would refuse to do that anyway. She's afraid if someone else has the child, she'll have to give up her child support payments.

We have someone in our corner now, and will know more next week about what will happen next.  In the meantime, we are working on ways to deal with the frustration of not being able to help him. Sometimes it is just overwhelming, not knowing what he's going through, and worrying that he will resent us for being unable to help him.  Just overwhelming.  Thanks for the support!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Joyce Harris

  • Posts: 516
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Redcliffer
« Reply #62 on: August 20, 2005, 05:50:00 PM »
[ This Message was edited by: Joyce Harris on 2006-05-28 13:00 ]
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Notafriendofredcliff

  • Posts: 23
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Redcliffer
« Reply #63 on: August 20, 2005, 11:14:00 PM »
Joyce, thanks so much!  We have tried approaching a lot of "officials" without success.  Now we have a whole new source!

I can't begin to imagine what you are going through.  There are always things you can do, or try to do, but nothing can undo harm done to a child.  All you can do is try to change things to protect children from this in the future.  

We regret that we didn't go pick up my husband's son right away, at the time they were saying we COULD withdraw him (although I still believe they would NOT have released him to us).  Instead we wasted time believing we (along with her relatives) could make her see this was a huge mistake, and she would do the right thing.  We were fools to worry about the legal implications.  He was there a little over a week when the fax from Redcliff arrived saying we needed a court order. Ten days later that requirement grew to be a court order from Utah. It's all gone downhill from there.

I wish we could just show up there and take him.  But he is out somewhere in their 650 square miles of wilderness, and that's a large area to search. Without their willingness to help us, we'd never find him.  

I have been in touch with a large regional newspaper here, and am hoping this can get some exposure.  I want everyone to know this can happen to their child.  I want this practice STOPPED.  It's ludicrous that a father can have legal custody of his son, and a business tells him he has no rights to his own child.  It's shameful, and it's time people know the truth about these places, and how they operate.  That's my goal.

I wish you all the best with your struggle, and thank you for your help.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Nonconformistlaw

  • Posts: 789
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://survivingstraightinc.com
Redcliffer
« Reply #64 on: August 21, 2005, 01:52:00 PM »
As I read through your posts on this topic, of your struggles with family court and Redcliff, and as I search for an answer to this whole predicament....and I cant help wonder if the problem lies within Redcliff's contract itself....

So, Notafriendofredcliff, I was wondering....has your attorney seen the redcliff contract?

Here's why I ask....I cant help wonder if a judge's hands might be tied because of the contract the mother signed...in other words, I wonder if the contract itself legally gives Redcliff the legal right to deny you contact with your son?...(I have a huge ethical and moral disagreement with a program having that much power over a child's parents). But I dont know for sure, so you would have to ask your attorney about this.

And for what its worth...I'm still rooting for you and hope something good comes out of this mess. Its really obvious that you are a very caring person who only wants to do the right thing for this child...in fact your spirit inspires me... ::rainbow::
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
quot;In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.\" George Orwell

Offline Deborah

  • Posts: 5383
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Redcliffer
« Reply #65 on: August 21, 2005, 02:57:00 PM »
A parent's divorce decree (rights) supercedes a program's policies and contracts. Further, this father did not sign the contract- mom had another ex sign as 'father'. Because this father has joint custody, that fact alone should make the contract null and void. Legal action could probably be taken against the ex who represented himself as the boy's father.

The major problem appears to be that the family court judge ruled that the child would remain in the program, denying temporary custody.

There's something very wrong when a judge rules that a child will stay in a program when 1) a professional evaluation showed it not to be in his best interest and 2) the other biological parent has expressed a desire for custody.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
gt;>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hidden Lake Academy, after operating 12 years unlicensed will now be monitored by the state. Access information on the Federal Class Action lawsuit against HLA here: http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=17700

Offline Notafriendofredcliff

  • Posts: 23
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Redcliffer
« Reply #66 on: August 21, 2005, 03:32:00 PM »
Well......When we first saw a faxed copy of the enrollment contract, it was so blurred and had been faxed back & forth between the signing parties for signatures, we couldn't make out much.  But I finally went on the Redcliff website and "registered" to get a password (like I was actually going to try to enroll a child) and was able to get in to see the actual contract. It's separate from the rest of the application documents, and is called the RCA Financial Contract. Only the most desperate parent would sign that piece of garbage.  There is nothing there to indicate the other parent would have no rights.  In fact, it says clearly that in the event another parent, REGARDLESS of their custodial status, wants to withdraw the child, no problem.  Come & get him.  Unfortunately, my husband didn't SIGN this contract, so he can't hold them to it.  But I think it's pretty darned clear, since it's in their contract, it must be their POLICY.  Any reasonable person would assume so.  We just can't understand why they require so much more for my husband to withdraw him.  It makes no sense, and they refuse to explain.  Our attorney will address this with them this week.  

The enrollment contract, as it was executed, was so fradulent.  The mother signed it, along with her 3rd ex-husband (who has NO legal standing with regard to this child), representing themselves as "the legal Parent(s)/Guardian(s) with full legal/joint physical custody of ."  Keeping in mind that this was accompanied by the other application paperwork Redcliff received, with contradictory information as to custody, they have to assume some responsibility for this. And they will, like it or not.  This kind of thing can't go on.

I don't believe one parent can give permission for a business entity to deny the other parent's rights.  The mother and her 3rd ex-husband paid to have the child abducted and taken to Utah.  We have papers from the court here in NH, saying my husband is entitled to ALL information about the child by virtue of being his legal custodian, and the mother is required to provide him a flight itinerary whenever the child travels out of state.  She disregarded this order, although in the grand scheme of things, this is the least of our concerns.  My husband is not even allowed to know the name of the company who abducted his son.  Redcliff said they'd be happy to give him a list of all the companies they recommend for parents to choose from, but refuse to tell him which one brought the child to them.  That's "private".  This is wrong on so many different levels.  

We'll get more info from the atty on Tuesday, maybe good, maybe not.  But I'm not giving up either way.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Notafriendofredcliff

  • Posts: 23
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Redcliffer
« Reply #67 on: August 21, 2005, 03:35:00 PM »
Right on Deborah!  YES, we're planning to go after the ex-step-father as well.  He did this to another one of his step-sons (don't know if this was before or after he divorced the mother, and don't know if the natural father had a clue).  He has to be stopped.  This one, I'm going to ENJOY.  :flame:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Antigen

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12992
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://wwf.Fornits.com/
Redcliffer
« Reply #68 on: August 21, 2005, 03:41:00 PM »
Maybe I'm just simple minded. But it seems to me that they're plain out bluffing. Seems to me that if Dad shows up at their business office or field office w/ ID, a copy of the divorce decree and an officer of the law, they'd be legally compelled to go get the boy and place him back into his father's physical custody. The only trick they could really pull would be to coerce him into stating that he doesn't want to go w/ him.

If people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.
http://lfb.com/?stocknumber=FF7485&code=10247' target='_new'>Thomas Jefferson

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
"Don\'t let the past remind us of what we are not now."
~ Crosby Stills Nash & Young, Sweet Judy Blue Eyes

Offline Deborah

  • Posts: 5383
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Redcliffer
« Reply #69 on: August 21, 2005, 03:50:00 PM »
What action can be taken against the judge? Never heard of it, but could one request a different one? Who would one file a complaint with?
The fact that the mother's 3rd ex fraudulently signing as legal guardian, and placed the kid inspite of the evaluation, and the excessive restrictions on communication with dad and refusal to provide the child's records, should be red flags for any family judge.
Doesn't sound to me like she is upholding her duties as a judge, and clearly is not acting in the child's best interest.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
gt;>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hidden Lake Academy, after operating 12 years unlicensed will now be monitored by the state. Access information on the Federal Class Action lawsuit against HLA here: http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=17700

Offline Deborah

  • Posts: 5383
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Redcliffer
« Reply #70 on: August 21, 2005, 03:55:00 PM »
Yeh, I think they're stalling too- violating the law and their own policies until someone forces them to comply.
Except for the judge denying temporary custody, I too still think the best strategy would be to do what you said Ginger and just demand they retrieve him from the field. Take him home and deal with the fall out if/when it happens.
Dear lord, there is ample evidence here to prove reasonable concern, to a sane judge, anyway.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
gt;>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hidden Lake Academy, after operating 12 years unlicensed will now be monitored by the state. Access information on the Federal Class Action lawsuit against HLA here: http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=17700

Offline BuzzKill

  • Posts: 1815
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Redcliffer
« Reply #71 on: August 21, 2005, 04:03:00 PM »
I agree with Deb and Ginger here - Go get the kid and sort it out later. The one mistake you might of made is trying to come to an agreement over the phone. Quit calling and Go - take a lawyer if you possibly can - maybe take a reporter with you - definitely take cameras and recorders,And then insist they produce the boy; or drive you and your party out to where he is.
Seems to me the one snag might be the out door nature of it. Its not like he would be on campus somewhere - but I would not let them keep me from buying a flight to SLC or LAS and driving out to red cliff.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Deborah

  • Posts: 5383
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Redcliffer
« Reply #72 on: August 21, 2005, 05:07:00 PM »
Doesn't matter if they're in the back 40, the program is required to know where the boy is at all times. Their schedule has to be planned and recorded in advance.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
gt;>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hidden Lake Academy, after operating 12 years unlicensed will now be monitored by the state. Access information on the Federal Class Action lawsuit against HLA here: http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=17700

Offline Nonconformistlaw

  • Posts: 789
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://survivingstraightinc.com
Redcliffer
« Reply #73 on: August 21, 2005, 05:56:00 PM »
For the record: I completely AGREE PERSONALLY, with ever last word Deborah and Notafriendofredcliff said in the posts immediately following my last post. I was really proposing a hypothetical question/suggestion.

I PERSONALLY AGREE completely with exactly what Notafriendofredcliff said:-------"I don't believe one parent can give permission for a business entity to deny the other parent's rights." -------

But I FEAR this is what programs are attempting to do, legally or no....and I bet they know full well that most parents are either unwilling or unable to fight them....I bet they use the lengthy legal proccess to their advantage, and like someone else said STALLING until it the kid finishes the program or they have milked enough money from parents to keep them happy, who knows?(BTW, I DO NOT AGREE with these possible tactics)

What I do KNOW about the law in general is what concerns me.....very often the LAW produces UNFAIR results...the LAW is very RARELY BLACK and WHITE or CLEARCUT, and most disturbing, COMMON SENSE often goes out the window in order to produce "REASONABLE" results. And then SOMETIMES, the law is FAIR....

Looks to me like parents in family court, see the UNFAIR and arbitrary results too often, that clearly runs counter to common sense. That said I am NOT suggesting that unfairness is inevitible.I think what I am really getting at is that a lawyer in Notafriendofredcliff's and any other parent's case needs to use that gavel to beat some common sense into the judges head.
::rainbow::
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
quot;In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.\" George Orwell

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Redcliffer
« Reply #74 on: August 22, 2005, 06:52:00 AM »
Quote
They also use research from Dr. Russell (U. of Idaho), and then they combine the two for an overall picture of recovery.

Dr Russell works for that esteemed center of clinical excellence the Department of Resource Recreation and Tourism at the University of Idaho.  His PhD in "wilderness therapy" is issued by that very same department.  It's rather like an English Literature Department issuing MDs.  What the hell do these people know about therapy?

BTW, the peer review panel on all the OBHRC research, the people who are supposed to be ensuring academic rigour, comprises the clinical directors of all the companies that sponsored the research in the first place.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »