Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > PURE Bullshit and CAICA

SUE SCHEFF and ISABELLE ZENDHER (PURE, CAICA, WWASP lawsuit)

<< < (27/74) > >>

Anonymous:

--- Quote from: ""Guest"" ---
--- Quote from: ""Guest"" ---We are trying to help kids.  We're warning their parents about unscrupulous, greedy bitches like Sue Scheff who will sell their souls for a price.
--- End quote ---

Not exactly twice Isabelle...............................................From the Court

"The Court found that defendants PURE and Sue Scheff, ?[C]ompete with the schools associated with World Wide.  PURE schools pay Ms. Scheff a substantial sum whenever a child enrolls in its program based on her recommendation.?   . . . . In contrast, although winning the defense, Ms. Scheff and PURE lost on all counter-claims against WWASP."
--- End quote ---


Oh, okay I get it now.  Do you mean this covers her daughters claim of abuse at Carolina Springs Academy?  Is that what you mean by her counterclaim?  Can someone explain?  And what is PACER?  Is it free?  Someone told me you can get court information from it.

Anonymous:

--- Quote from: ""the world looks red"" ---Forget that; I'd like to know what Sue's wearing right now..
--- End quote ---


Dude have you seen the Google download with her on it.  She called herself a goddess.  Someone on here called her, yea, a RAT FACE GODDESS.  Dude you are sick.

Anonymous:

--- Quote from: ""Guest"" ---
--- Quote from: ""the world looks red"" ---Forget that; I'd like to know what Sue's wearing right now..
--- End quote ---

Dude have you seen the Google download with her on it.  She called herself a goddess.  Someone on here called her, yea, a RAT FACE GODDESS.  Dude you are sick.
--- End quote ---

No I haven't seen it! I know I am; only Sue can help me!

Anonymous:

--- Quote from: ""Guest"" ---
--- Quote from: ""the world looks red"" ---Forget that; I'd like to know what Sue's wearing right now..
--- End quote ---

Dude have you seen the Google download with her on it.  She called herself a goddess.  Someone on here called her, yea, a RAT FACE GODDESS.  Dude you are sick.
--- End quote ---

Link, please.

Anonymous:
CCM, I have just a few questions for you. And no, Im not attacking you.


* What defines a good program?
* How can a program be 'good', but still be... a program?
* How do you justify lock-in forced 'treatment' if nothing if they dont justify for in-patient treatment in a psychiatric hospital morally, and ethically?
* How can you ethically force treatment on a kid and make it effective?
* How do you defend the fact that not one program has ever proven its efficacy and that all programs we've seen here boil down to nothing more than isolation and coersion with the intent of creating a regression and a euphoric feeling after the regression so they're easier to indoctrinate, aka "brainwash", dont provide therapy, dont provide any lasting 'fixes', and leave them more messed up than they went in.

Or, gimme the cliffs notes on how a program can still be a program but not abuse them, not lock them up, not isolate them from family and friends and legal representation, and not fuck them up socially and hurt them deeply psycholgoically, but still actually be effective at all... especially when you cant FORCE therapy on anyone, programs only 'work' by breaking them down, and the medical profession has committed itself to "minimal control and discomfort" in treatment - if theyre not a danger to themselves or others, they're not locked up, basically.

You cant MAKE a kid change without resorting to mind control, so what are you saying, that there are some forms of coersion that are ok, and some that are not?

This isnt intended to be an attack or affront at you, just asking you to think about what you say and try to come to terms with the facts about what makes a "program" a "program" and not a "school for kids with problems and/or bad parents who want to ditch them".

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page