Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > CEDU / Brown Schools and derivatives / clones
RMA staff I remember from RMA, you post yours from CEDU
Anne Bonney:
--- Quote from: "Whooter" ---
After you post the links/citations, Anne, I will post the link to where you admitted yourself here on fornits that programs are helpful in most cases and that you had embellished many of the events that you claim occurred inside the program.
--- End quote ---
Ok...here ya go. All the quotes below can be found in this thread... viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30485&hilit=JRC You may disagree that you were defending them, but you asked for citations and agreed to provide the citations where I "admitted" that I exaggerated and that programs helped kids. So, g'head.....cite away.
--- Quote from: "Whooter" ---
--- Quote from: "Che Gookin" ---Who gives a shit a what alternatives methods are used? What I want to know is what is going to be done to stop hooking kids up to mobile electric fences and shocking them till they smell like fried bacon.
This shouldn't be about "exploring options".
It should be about stopping something that is wrong, immediately.
Fuck our society in the shitter if we've gotten that far gone that stopping something like JRC requires a committee and a blue ribbon panel followed by a conference wrapped up with 39933 page report.
All of us can go right to hell, and probably will be, if this sort of apple polishing bullshit is endorsed while kids are being zapped silly.
No compromises.. Shut JRC down, and Throw that asshole Matthew Israel into prison with a sign around his neck that says, "Child Abuser".
--- End quote ---
Look Che, you cant just stop Chemotherapy because you cant stand the sight of kids vomiting and their hair falling out. You should read up on the pros and cons of this place. Take a look at the quality of life these kids have. Its near zero....Its no life being restrained 24/7 and drugged out to the point where you are drooling all day. If this gives kids a chance at a better or near normal life then why deny them that? Most of them choose the GED and before any child can be subjected they need to go before a judge along with advocacy groups and independent psych sign off.
Read up on it... thats what I am doing.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: "Whooter" ---
--- Quote from: "Ursus" ---Oh, but it most certainly is! Now, if you really had been reading up on this place instead of playing around with your baseless chemotherapy analogies, Whooter, you would know that a lot of parents of self-harming autistics just don't send them to JRC anymore! Big surprise! Apparently, there are other alternatives!
--- End quote ---
There.. thank you. Since you reacted and called the analogy baseless instead of arguing against it shows me that it was effective and understood. We both know that they are both therapies which cause pain and from a distance appear to be very abusive. If you performed a therapy on a child 100 years ago that caused the child to vomit and the kids hair fell out you would be hung from a tree.
From my reading autistic children are still being sent to the center. If this isn't the case anymore I would like to see the link. If the center has open beds and can help some less severe children then I don’t see why they shouldn’t allow them to be accepted and helped at the center. I could see your concern but you filling in a lot of information that is not there.
But besides that the issue is “shock treatment”. Not all the people being treated at the center receive shock treatment and before anyone can they need to have a hearing before a judge, meet with advocacy groups and see a psychologist to determine if this type of treatment would be beneficial or warranted. I dont see how, with the present screening criteria, an at-risk youth could be exposed to shock treatment.
But that is why we are all here to get answers and find out what they are doing and to whom and how effective it is.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: "Whooter" ---If you sedated the child with the behavior problems and restrained her she would probably live a long life but her quality of life would be near zero. If you did nothing the child would probably injure herself severely. If you tried shock treatment the child may respond and be able to live a long a happier life.
I think it is a good parallel and doesn’t make it easy to conclude that shock treatment is inhumane considering the alternative paths.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: "Whooter" ---I am just trying to gain an understanding as to why people here object to it. Some thoughts:
So its not strictly that it harms the person, but rather that it is done to alter their behavior?
So some here feel harming someone to try to cure cancer is okay? What if the chemotherapy also altered the childs behavior. Would that be okay? If the child became afraid to go outside because she was bald and became self conscious of her appearance. Would this altered behavior be okay?
Lets ask ourselves…..Is it okay to alter a persons behavior via medication instead of shock therapy? What if the medication had to be administered via needle (which is like a bee sting) would that be okay? Would the harm being inflicted outweigh the benefits?
What if the person choose to have the shock therapy and realized there would be a bee sting effect involved? Would you object to the use on that level?
What if not altering the childs behavior meant that he/she would harm themselves seriously or someone else?
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: "Whooter" ---
We know that these kids came from restraints 24/7 and or medicated to the point of drooling. So their quality of life was very low. So we cant just ignore the fact that if the doors close that these children will return to restraints and medication. I am sure their are groups of people who would be against physical restraints and call them abusive and would rather see these kids being able to walk freely and just as easily take the position: "We dont care what happens to these kids as long as they are not restrained, Primum non nocere", and turn a blind eye to shock treatment like you are to Restraints.
I think we can establish that abuse has occurred at this center. But it has not been establish that the treatment is abusive. It is described as a bee sting. We have heard that children have been burned by the treatment, but it has not been established that every kid is burned. Maybe this was an error. People get mistakenly burned by radiation treatment also, but not all people do.
I dont think it is fair to place the burden on Dr. Isreal to find an alternative either... he has a solution and has moved forward with it. The whole scientific community bears the burden to search for an alternative.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: "Whooter" ---I see what you are saying. To see these kids who are banging their heads so hard on the floor that their eyes come loose from their heads and severe retinas and then watch a group become outraged because this same person receives a bee sting shock which will allow him to live freely and visit their favorite restaurant on their own I don’t see the scales tipping in favor of allowing the self abuse as the humane choice.
From the silence (here) I think this reality has sunk in and the ones that just simply aligned themselves behind a few reports of abuse are starting to rethink their position because the argument against this shock treatment seems very weak in light of the benefits. Some say they don’t like it because it burns them and others say that they are shocked 24/7 but if asked if the burns were not typical or that the shocks averaged once per week then many here would still be against it why?
So this tells me that many here really don’t know why they are against the therapy they just enjoy being with a crowd maybe. I am surprised that so many here on fornits advocate physical restraints and medication vs therapy. If we were discussing restraints in a Therapeutic Boarding school then the majority here on fornits would be against it so why are restraints a better alternative at JRC? Go figure.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote ---You got yourself caught up into many lies here Anne and you are now trying to deflect and spin it once again. If you have proof of what you say about me then just post it here. If you dont have proof then just admit that you lied and we can move on.
--- End quote ---
Ball's in your court asshole. I never lied about a thing.
Whooter:
--- Quote from: "Anne Bonney" ---
--- Quote from: "Whooter" ---
After you post the links/citations, Anne, I will post the link to where you admitted yourself here on fornits that programs are helpful in most cases and that you had embellished many of the events that you claim occurred inside the program.
--- End quote ---
Ok...here ya go. All the quotes below can be found in this thread... viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30485&hilit=JRC You may disagree that you were defending them, but you asked for citations and agreed to provide the citations where I "admitted" that I exaggerated and that programs helped kids. So, g'head.....cite away.
--- End quote ---
Okay so I followed you link and the first post I come across which was mine said:
"I haven’t formed an opinion,myself."..... Doesnt sound like a defense to me. You confuse an open minded discussion with defending a position. It is threatening to you when people can think for themselves and view both sides of the issues.
If people openly question whether or not a program is abusive or not doesnt mean they are defending the process. They are shinning a spot light on it an looking at it objectively, thats all.
Now when you find those posts of mine that you claim I support all these terrible places and where I said I was this Reuben guy and that I work for the industry just provide us with the links and we will take a look at them.
...
Whooter:
I think this is a good exercise for you, Anne. As you search for those posts you will be forced to realize that you were wrong and that they don’t exist.
...
Anne Bonney:
--- Quote from: "Whooter" ---
--- Quote from: "Anne Bonney" ---
--- Quote from: "Whooter" ---
After you post the links/citations, Anne, I will post the link to where you admitted yourself here on fornits that programs are helpful in most cases and that you had embellished many of the events that you claim occurred inside the program.
--- End quote ---
Ok...here ya go. All the quotes below can be found in this thread... viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30485&hilit=JRC You may disagree that you were defending them, but you asked for citations and agreed to provide the citations where I "admitted" that I exaggerated and that programs helped kids. So, g'head.....cite away.
--- End quote ---
Okay so I followed you link and the first post I come across which was mine said:
"I haven’t formed an opinion,myself."..... Doesnt sound like a defense to me. You confuse an open minded discussion with defending a position. It is threatening to you when people can think for themselves and view both sides of the issues.
If people openly question whether or not a program is abusive or not doesnt mean they are defending the process. They are shinning a spot light on it an looking at it objectively, thats all.
Now when you find those posts of mine that you claim I support all these terrible places and where I said I was this Reuben guy and that I work for the industry just provide us with the links and we will take a look at them.
...
--- End quote ---
As I said, you may not agree that you were defending them or the procedures, but that's how I see it. You agreed to provide a link to where you believe I "admitted" to exaggerating and that programs were helpful. I'm sure I will disagree with you on that as well, but you agreed to cite posts that you believe I stated those things in.
I'm waiting.
Joel:
Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version