General Interest > Feed Your Head
HELP AT ANY COST - is Available today!
TheWho:
--- Quote --- And did she have to attend seminars and group meetings as well? I can give you an earful about the role of younger brothers and sisters and how it effects family ties in the long run.
--- End quote ---
Well most of the family visits were parents only. About two thirds thru the process they invited the entire family and it was a good time for the siblings to resolve any issues they had with each other. I opted out of this for a few reasons. Some of the meetings had a lot of energy to them, very open and honest discussions on every level. Not having control over what the other kids would be exposed to and there were no issues to be resolved between them anyway, so I opted to isolate them from this and left them behind. In hindsight the family visit was handled very well and was tempered enough for a ?G? rated audience.
--- Quote --- Yeah, well, there are a couple of ways to spin that too. I think the LSWs and licensed psrinks have all the good intentions in the world when they recomend family counseling. However, if the organization to which the family turns for help is one of these cultish ones, that just means everybody joins the cult or leaves the family. Remember what Maia said about the Bacons?
--- End quote ---
I was thinking more of a family therapist who could help with conflict resolution, locally. A trained therapist, mom, dad and child in one room. My daughter was being treated but the rest of us were not. I think, again in hindsight, I would have tried this prior to ASR.
--- Quote --- I'd add one more item to Maia's 10 good questions; does the kid have normal access to communication w/ the outside world? If the answer is no, hang up, it's not a safe place. I don't care how pure the intentions of the people running it.
It's just damned foolish to isolate a kid among strangers and just trust them.
--- End quote ---
I agree, total isolation can be harmful, I think ASR does a good job here and maintains a healthy balance.
--- Quote --- No, it hasn't "softened" in any significant ways.
--- End quote ---
Too bad, one would think, that after 30 years that a process would have self adjusted many times to improve or eliminate those pieces that are harmful or not adding value.
--- Quote --- That's what comes to my mind when the well intended social works and other helping professionals recomend "family involvement". It's a real nightmare. This particular family of cults took my native family from me when I was only a little kid. Aside from patching things up w/ my dad, who met me at least halfway in that effort, I never have gotten my family back. Probably never will, either.
--- End quote ---
That is something I could not imagine. It was hard enough having the distance between us and limited contact for 12-14 months, but I could not sign up for something like that, very different than what we were exposed to. I will check out the book, thanks Ginger.
Deborah:
***Too bad, one would think, that after 30 years that a process would have self adjusted many times to improve or eliminate those pieces that are harmful or not adding value.
Well, Who, I think you're under the assumption that programs are always looking to improve their program methods. Truth is- they make adjustments when the market demands it. There is just so much they can/will change because they wouldn't even appear to 'work' without the isolation/abuse pieces- whether we agree on what constitutes abuse/isolation, this is what it feels like to the kids, and what 'motivates' them to demonstrate compliance. Without those austere control measures, they would have nothing to sell. They would be total failures... unless they adopted a respectful approach to dealing with their charges. Postive regard, conflict resolution, finding their lost zest for life, dispelling hopelessness. Haven't seen a program yet, that was genuninely able to assist in this way. You can't punish away these kinds of issues. It takes genuine caring and finely developed skills to build trutst with teens and help them sort out the confusion and misbeliefs they have been inundated with.
TheWho:
--- Quote ---On 2006-02-18 12:33:00, Deborah wrote:
"***Too bad, one would think, that after 30 years that a process would have self adjusted many times to improve or eliminate those pieces that are harmful or not adding value.
Well, Who, I think you're under the assumption that programs are always looking to improve their program methods. Truth is- they make adjustments when the market demands it. There is just so much they can/will change because they wouldn't even appear to 'work' without the isolation/abuse pieces- whether we agree on what constitutes abuse/isolation, this is what it feels like to the kids, and what 'motivates' them to demonstrate compliance. Without those austere control measures, they would have nothing to sell. They would be total failures... unless they adopted a respectful approach to dealing with their charges. Postive regard, conflict resolution, finding their lost zest for life, dispelling hopelessness. Haven't seen a program yet, that was genuninely able to assist in this way. You can't punish away these kinds of issues. It takes genuine caring and finely developed skills to build trutst with teens and help them sort out the confusion and misbeliefs they have been inundated with."
--- End quote ---
I see what you are saying Deborah, there are core requirements that make the programs work like removing the children from the home, shutting down some of their access to cell phones mp3's etc. But not knowing the industry well personally one would think that from just a pure business/ competitive / improving the success rate for the kids/ improving market share etc. Straight would monitor themselves and try to improve and make changes as at least part of their corporate strategy or do they think that they are so powerful and the market is overflowing that they don?t need to care because the money will always be coming in so they don?t feel they need to be more humane or compassionate.
Is it mostly that they don?t care? Feel they will grow anyway and gain market share despite the allegations or growing public opinions against them? Maybe they are owned by one family who doesn?t care to address any issues because they are happy and rich enough?
I am curious because straight seems to be the worse of the worse (from what I have read here) and at the same time have been around a long time (since the ?70s?)
Nonconformistlaw:
--- Quote ---On 2006-02-18 15:27:00, TheWho wrote:
"or do they think that they are so powerful and the market is overflowing that they don?t need to care because the money will always be coming in so they don?t feel they need to be more humane or compassionate.
Is it mostly that they don?t care? Feel they will grow anyway and gain market share despite the allegations or growing public opinions against them? Maybe they are owned by one family who doesn?t care to address any issues because they are happy and rich enough?
I am curious because straight seems to be the worse of the worse (from what I have read here) and at the same time have been around a long time (since the ?70s?)
--- End quote ---
Well Straight got free advertising/press in the 80's from Nancy Reagan's numerous visits, was praised by Bush I, etc. Straight was held out to be the best drug rehab in the country for years. I'm sure those running Straight never felt the need to change anything....they always claimed that the program worked, then spouted off extremely exaggerated stats about their so-called success rates. Mel Sembler's (former US Ambassador to Austrailia and Italy) involvement also did a lot to ward off serious investigation, monitoring etc. And yes, Straight existed between 1976-1993. But there are current Straight copy-cat programs still running to this day.....same program, just a different name. There's much more to this, Eudora is better at explaining it than me.
Deborah:
***I see what you are saying Deborah, there are core requirements that make the programs work like removing the children from the home, shutting down some of their access to cell phones mp3's etc.
Well, as you and I know, their isolation from the world entails a hell of a lot more than ?shutting down some of their access to cell phones and mp3s?. For instance, no contact with parents, siblings, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins. Any useful ?therapy? would not require this kind of isolation from the real world. And it wouldn?t take a year or two to notice any results. These long stays and total isolation, even if it is temporary, serve the program, not the teen. You don?t teach someone ?balance? by subjecting them to total deprivation. A person doesn?t need to be ?working their program? 24/7 in order to make positive changes in their life.
***But not knowing the industry well personally one would think that from just a pure business/ competitive / improving the success rate for the kids/ improving market share etc. Straight would monitor themselves and try to improve and make changes as at least part of their corporate strategy or do they think that they are so powerful and the market is overflowing that they don?t need to care because the money will always be coming in so they don?t feel they need to be more humane or compassionate.
As I?ve said before, programs change when pressure is applied. And as someone else stated, the changes revert when the pressure is lifted. Ironically, the exact same dynamic you can witness in kids who have been conditioned with BM.
Some kids find it difficult years later to make choices. Would you prefer your child to learn how to make useful decisions for themselves, rekindle their passion for life, or to be conditioned to respond and react to an external authority? Like Pavlov?s dogs?
I think that program owner?s and staff believe in their methods. To date there have been enough parents that have been deceived or approve of the methods, to keep the money flowing in. That could change. Some programs have gone under due to excessive legal settlements, poor financial management, etc. Sometimes an investor comes along, scoops them up and throws money at the problem in order to revive it. Some have been shut down by the state due to neglect, abuse, death. A few months later they are operating under a new name in the same, or a different state. There?s a lot to know about this industry.
***Is it mostly that they don?t care? Feel they will grow anyway and gain market share despite the allegations or growing public opinions against them? Maybe they are owned by one family who doesn?t care to address any issues because they are happy and rich enough?
When I first started posting on Fornits five years ago, there wasn?t all the activity you see today. Word is spreading. Some people are waking up to what?s going on in their own backyards. Prior to my ex incarcerating both our sons without my knowledge or consent, I knew nothing about this industry. I thought ?reform homes? had died with Roloff. They didn?t. Some of those still exist and a new breed was created with a new marketing spin. ?Therapy?. What parent wouldn?t abdicate parental rights and control for a chance at their kid being saved in a residential setting, isolated from all the ills and risks of the real world?
As far as Straight? a lot of politics there. A lot of support from the government. When you have that kind of backing, you can literally get away with murder.
There are more humane models out there. They aren't employed because people don't know about them or they are incapable of positive regard. There is a state program for juvenile offenders in Tx that is run more humanely than some programs. It's all about the methods and techniques. If I were forced to to choose, I personally would rather my sons have gone through a few months there than the ultra expensive, private programs they endured. One to a military institution, one to a military institution followed by a mind raping mill.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version