Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > Brat Camp
Has anyone been through Redcliff Ascent?
AtomicAnt:
--- Quote ---The fact that some people are content with being angry at their parents, authority, and the world in general, is something of great concern.
--- End quote ---
Yes indeed. The great concern is that they are often justified in being angry at their parents and the authority figures in their lives. That is probably the root cause of their behavior difficulties in the first place. No one disputes that, not even the programs. So why blame and punish the teen? Kids can be helped without the tough part of tough love. Positive support works much quicker, much cheaper, and much better.
I say that not from a book, but from personal experience as both a son and a father.
AtomicAnt:
--- Quote ---On 2005-10-07 13:44:00, envydraggin wrote:
"In reference to your statement regarding the fact that students that "Get with the program, receive less abuse," CAn you not understand how that may be. If you sit there, and resist all efforts to change yourself, and ultimatly your life, of course you will be ridiculed in a situation that encourages change.
The fact that some people are content with being angry at their parents, authority, and the world in general, is something of great concern. Do you really think that the same people who behave this way will in the end say that they were always treated fairly???? Come on now, you appear to be more knowledgable than to truly believe this.
It is unfortunate when a person abuses a child whether it is physically, or emotionally. The fact is that there may be places that there sole purpose is to be truly sadistic. Another fact is that while 50 teens may have died in these impact programs due to neglect, or even possible abuse, many more die than that every single year in the US military (non combat relatred injuries). So now are you going to start a forum saying that because when a soldier gets "smoked" and the NCO asks others to leave when he does this, that he just doesnt want any witnesses? Perhaps you should look at the possibility that the, conversation, or actions happening are intended for the person it is directed to and not the entire group.
You have got to be kidding me to think that the basis of the problems for most of these kids is enhanced by their exposure to these programs. As I stated earlier, most of these teens are bound to be in a penal institution, and be violent their entire lives. Most of these people need something like this to make them realize that there actions will not go unpenalized throughout their entire lives.
Dont forget the fact that while I may not have a PhD, nor am I any type of aspiring psychologist, I have been there, and I am talking from personal experience. Which I might add goes much further than some theory you might have, or somthing you might have read in a book.
:wstupid: :lol:
"
--- End quote ---
As a manager at a large corporation I was trained in taking employees aside and reprimanding them in private. This is done so as to not embarass or humiliate the employee in front of his or her peers.
While I can very well accept this same arguement for clients in a program, there is another side.
If any abuse occurs in the corporate setting, the employee can file a complaint with human resources, my boss, or even the police. They can print, publish, sue, and inform all their co-workers about what may have happened. They can also leave the office and even quit the job.
The clients of these programs have no such safeguards. They are not permitted any of these protective actions. In many cases, they cannot tell their own parents, or if they can, the program can simply perform well practiced damage control by convincing the parents that the client is lying. Because the client is likely to have a checkered past, their credibility might be reduced. This reduced credibility provides another reason that more protection is needed, not less, because it makes the client even more vulnerable to abuse.
One must also consider the age and history of the client. They might not have an understanding of what constitutes abuse and may have been past victims of abuse.
If these programs are really designed to protect the clients' rights and well being, they would have safeguards in place to avoid potential abuse and protect themselves from lawsuits. Anything less is simply unprofessional.
It is clear to me and others who post here, that these programs prefer to operate in the shadows because they are fully aware that their techniques would be condemned by the public at large, and probably law enforcement, if they operated in a more tranparent manner.
AtomicAnt:
--- Quote ---On 2005-11-21 11:40:00, Anonymous wrote:
"Ok, just skimmed throuhg the posts and had to post again, as I forgot to get to this in my rant.
As for the abuse at redcliff, it WAS there. while there was no real physical abuse that I saw (of course, when you are there, you are in a group of about 7-15 with 3 counslers, so who knows about the other groups) there was still abuse. If someone didn't do exaclty as they were told, they could be punished with lack of food, loss of "needed" gear, like tarps to cover with in rain, jackets or the "privilage" of getting warmer clothes from your "stash". I say privilage, because you had a certain ammount of clothes, you didn't want to carry them all, so you could swap out from your bag every 2 weeks. You had to guess what was coming, cuase you could be in shorts hikeing in the snow or in a sweater in the valley, very hot. There'd be times when you just weren't allowed to get warmer clothes. Other punishments where the "cart", though I only heard about that, the "red suite" (an bright red, and very thick and hot jump suite you'd be forced to wear...no matter what temp. it was. Emotional and psychilogical abuse from yelling and degrading, to not allowing letters and just being down right cruel, even eploiting a childs past to degrade them, to physically restraining in a painfull, though "not harfull" manner.
And yes, if you "got with the program" it did not happen to you. So if you just went along with everything, you probobly didn't see the abuse. The reason, and I'm guessing here, is to give good testimonials. Bad child goes to camp, comes back with a positive experince and outlook. Or, bad child goes to camp, can't "hack it", is abused and mistreated, comes out, no one belives because this child was just "beyond help".
Sad isn't it. I could just imagine what CPS hell I'd be in if I took a child out into the desert, fed him rice twice a day, didn't allow him access to a bathroom, or even allow him to bathe, pushed him to the point of physical exhasution every day, then topped it all off by telling him how terrible he is, and how with the power of attorny I now have, I can do what every I want and he couldn't even tell anyone of the abuse. No wonder places like this get shut down, investigated and sued often"
--- End quote ---
You say "...no real physical abuse..." Then you describe inadequate clothing, witholding of food, and painful physical restraint. I hope you understand that these are forms of physical abuse. You even point out that these acts are illegal when committed by someone outside the context of a program. That means they are likely illegal inside a program as well.
Anonymous:
Does this say anything about the efficacy rates of these places?? I understand they interview families within weeks to a few months afther they've been out and are still drinking the Kool Aid.
Anonymous:
--- Quote ---On 2005-07-20 03:47:00, Anonymous
Can I just check those dates? You were at RedCliff Ascent for 75 days and left in January 2005? So you went there at the end of 2004. The first Brat Camp at RedCliff Ascent was filmed in late 2003. Have you got your dates wrong or are they filming ANOTHER Brat Camp there?"
--- End quote ---
GAWWWWWWWWWWWD. Is there really a fuckign DIFFERENCE??????????????????
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version