Definitely a fine balance exists between the rights of the parents to seek out the best care possible, and the rights of the child to not be sent to a BM torture dump. I agree with the entire premise of the 14th ammendment in principle, I do not agree with fact that it is outdated, and lacks adequete protection for children against unscrupulous program owners and lazy parents. I also feel it does not account for the notion that a significant portion of the Parent population involved are to consumed with their own lives to be bothered with those of their children. Rather than a decision reflecting the best possible choice to their children, it is the most convient choice.
What balance!?
If the kid doesnt NEED any treatment, dont try to 'fix' them! That alone would put a stop to all of this abuse and bullshit in one fell swoop.
If society did not let kids get shoved into 'programs' without having something actually wrong with them, and then only consentual treatment, and then ACTUAL treatment that WORKS (mental hospitals wont keep a kid locked up for no reason... and IIRC you're only kept captive in one if you're a proven risk to yourself or others and only during such time that you are one, no matter how brief) they wont be there in the first place, they wont be abused, and if nothing is wrong, they are released!
Simple as that.
I think the real problem is that currently children are more or less chattel property to thier parents and they have basically no right to not be emotionally or psycholgoically abused, and that needs to change. They should also have the right to not be locked up or made to live in a restrictive environment without a good reason, and have the right to legal representation and to not be held in isolation from society.
Not even PRISONERS are totally kept in isolation, they have visitation, mail, and can see attourneys and have access to the law to their hearts content.
When I look at this objectively, it just makes no sense that this exists, that people get sucked into it, and that its still tolerated. Its nonsensical at best and ludicrous at worst.
One of the problems with kids who are sent to mental hospitals is the short stay. Insurance usually will only cover a week to two weeks on average, because it's so expensive for them they put pressure on the treating psychiatrist to release the child. That is why a lot of kids are sent to RTCs or programs from mental hospitals, because the parents, psychiatrist and sometimes child agrees they need long term care. That is how I ended up in Provo Canyon. It happened the same way with WWASPS a little while later. They show you brochures and you think you will have more freedom than at the lockdown hospital and you agree. Once you figure out what's going on, you're fucked, your parents don't believe you and the shit hits the fan.
I don't think your argument works for some kids because in their parents view, and sometimes the child, they do need help with something. If you refuse to acknowledge there is anything wrong, it will only get worse. I would say the problem with most families is communication. Obviously sending a child two thousand miles away without phone calls will not solve that problem. That is the issue here, parents are seeking ineffective treatment, wharehousing at best. The quality treatment is out there, it's just to damn expensive to pay for to keep a kid in it full-time. So bargain basement versions of treatment showed up, like WWASPS, where medical insurance pays nothing. One 'good' thing for kids who are victims of crazy parents in the psychiatric setting is they get third parties to review their case constantly, mostly because the insurance company wants you out of there! In a private pay situation, nobody gives a shit but your parents... so it's a different setup completely.
Just a few points
1. WWASPS aint bargain basement. Its like 4-5K a month... I dont see that being lower than a psych hospital!
2. Programs state that they dont provide therapy. Rarely clearly, but when pressed or in the fine print, they do! They also state they cant deal with kids with acutal psychological issues.
3. "I don't think your argument works for some kids because in their parents view, and sometimes the child, they do need help with something." - Ok... imagined problems are still IMAGINARY. You cant take a kid in for an operation that isnt necessary, so why can you throw a kid away for imagined problems?
I cant get my tonsils scraped out or an appendectomy done without a reason, or a colonscopy put in, now can I?
Making these places either close or turn into ACTUAL mental hospitals (And tell the greedy assholes who run them to take a hike) and thus bring in checks and balances, and make them run ETHICALLY would fix all of this. REAL mental hospitals only lock up someone if it is absolutely necessary to protect themselves or others - and its also part of their ethics that treatment be given in the least restrictive way possible, period. If its not necessary to be locked up, they're not.
Oh, and they get phonecalls and shit too.
Sorry but I just dont see how your counterarguement really has anything to do with what I said, or makes any sense, no offence intended. Programs are more expensive, dont give any treatment or therapy at all, and if someone just has it in their head something is wrong with the kid, a real MD should say "no, nothing is wrong with them, sorry you're worried" and do their job, not let snakeoil salesmen peddle mental torture behind the guise of 'emotional growth' and other new-age psychological technobabble and lock up and abuse children they hold incommunicado.
