Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > The Troubled Teen Industry

John Hubner Book- Criminal Youth

<< < (3/3)

AtomicAnt:
1. Okay, they compare the program against no program. That only says something is better than nothing, but doesn't mean this is the best something.
 
2. A basic tenet of juvenile justice philosophy is that the offenders are too young and immature to understand the consequences of the their actions and are therefore not entirely culpable. This means, and it is stated, that the severity of the crime is not as important as the state of the offender and should not necessarily be taken into consideration when deciding the best intervention.

For Example: A boy of teases another boy about losing a baseball game and there is a scuffle. One boy has a bat. He swings it and the other boy dies. The killer is 13 years old. Is this really murder, or an accident? The boy had no prior history of problems. In theory, those dealing with this kid are supposed to consider his potential for rehabilitation as well as his maturity level more than the seriousness of what happened. Do you mess up the rest of the offender's life by treating him as a cold blooded murderer? Is that in his best interests? Is that in society's best interest? In the real live case, the kid got the maximum juvenile sentence of 8 years. He was not charged as an adult.

3. Julie has a very strong point when she mentions they only tracked graduates. I read a critique in Salon.com about a faith based rehabilitation program that did the same thing. The study showed good results for graduates, but Salon pointed out that when drop-outs of the program were included, the recidivism rate was actually worse than the control group (no rehab program). Salon then described the length and difficulty of the program and pointed out that those who graduated were probably the most dedicated to their own success in the first place. It would take a great deal of self-discipline and motivation to complete the long and difficult program which required continuous employment, daily meetings, and many hours of church/community service. Their conclusion was that post release support programs are better than no post release support programs for those with the desire to fully use them. Gee, no big surprise there.

4."TYC's success in contrast to national recidivism rates for youthful offenders, which hover between 50% and 60%; a 2004 study reported that only 10% of graduates of the school's Capital Offenders group have been rearrested for a violent crime after three years on parole."

This quote from the review on Amazon.com is comparing apples to oranges when it limits the second part (10%) only to graduates and only to violent crimes and compares it to all other youthful offenders nationwide. Keep in mind for example, the new Missouri system reports only a 32% recidivism rate overall. So, time and place make a difference.

5. I'm not sure if I can buy into the psychodrama stuff, but I did not see where they used 'confrontational' or 'attack' therapy. The latter is basically sitting in a chair while people scream at you (the Scared Straight model, which does not work). The re-enactment stuff is a bit different. I went through some of the psychodrama, re-enactment stuff at a retreat for couples once. It seemed powerful, but it was not life changing. Looking back on it years later, as I do now, it seems hokey. I got the divorce, so if outcome is a measurement of success, I count among the technique's failures. I don't think the re-enactment stuff is necessarily abusive for the offender. For a victim to be forced to do this, it would definitely be abuse.

6. As for odie's remarks:
"So if something works on them who is anyone on this board to say it shouldn't be done. Do you think they will end up more fucked in the head or something?...sheesh!"

This smacks of programs parents 'last resort' arguments. Two wrongs still do not make a right and the ends do not always justify the means. As horrible as their crimes were, they are still children. They are still human beings. They still have feelings and clearly suffer from a lot of emotional pain. If torture 'worked' would you advocate for it?

7. On a final philosophical note. We are talking about growing kids. There is always the issue of physical/emotional growth playing a strong role in improvements regardless of the type of program. As for those that don't make it and go on to prison, think a bit. Are there some people that simply cannot ever be helped? Perhaps some people have a specific biology or psychological damage (sociopaths?) that prevents any form of rehabilitation from being effective. And if that is true, perhaps there are kids that are genetically/psychologically so easy to rehabilitate, that almost any kind of rehabilitation program would work. Of course, there would be kids everywhere in the range between.

Anonymous:
Life Stories - Empathy - Thinking Errors

I'm about half-way thru the book. The program is run a lot like CEDU. The kids aren't from normal dysfunctional families. These are children who have been brutalized.

The author gives credit for the low recidivism rates to the shrink stuff but the atmosphere at the facility is nurturing and the kids are treated respectfully so if you hacked the shrinks to death you might get the same outcome. I dunno.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX8tZqXTopE

Che Gookin:
Interesting.. I might just buy the book..

seamus:
see heres the problem that no body wants to address,
I went about 20 months thru Straight Inc and never in that time did any body ask me "seamus what is wrong with you" I HAD issues
and all I got was a 1 size fits all group "therapy" that consisted of some no-nothing asshole screaming at me.I left straight as a confused sad and angry X -staff trainee.I went on to be a WORSE junkie,a big time thief ,an armed robber and a 200$ a day night mare. At a point I said fuck all of this Went to detox and decided about how I was gonna live. I went FURTHER down a real bad road because I didnt get treated, I was mistreated,by a fraudulent "system" that paid no attention to me as an idividual.Needless to say thying to convince me that a program is a "good" program is ,well at best , a hard sell.

It eats me up some times that some poor depressed sob of a teenager is getting the same treatment some where,and he (or She) has yet more shit coming their way.Its FRAUD,and in my opinion IT IS CRMINIALY NEGLIGENT. Some body writes a "novel" like its no big deal,well at the risk of sounding like Im talking out of my ass,as Ive not read that novel,IS'Nt that at least really flippant to come here and spout such shit? Goddamn its my life being treated like a used car.

Anorexic Cokehead:
For the truth about The Giddings State School read Nell Bernstein's Burning Down the House.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page