it's really hard folowing conversations between loads of people called 'guest' can't you get a username or something?
Anyway guys & girls, all this nastiness isn't getting to the root of the cause is it? This is not a constructive converstaion, it doesn't help kids who are in abusive programs and it doesn't help parents make choices, it doesn't help anyone seek out the programs that may well be a life saver for certain kids and weed out those who'll end up traumatising the children for life
The problem is a "program" is intrinsically... not therapeutic!
A "program" is an institution that holds captive, isolates, and instigates coersive behavior modification, usually through psycho-bullshit like you're all too familiar with now.
ACTUALY THERAPY is... ACTUAL therapy! You can't coerse it!
I do agree that a real, non-coersive "therapeutic community" might be a good idea, but I have yet to see one!
not knowing what you call a "program" vs. a residential therapeutic enviornment, or what would be therapy to you at all, it isn't easy to counter. Pray tell, what is therapy ... to you???
Life is full of coersive things. Get a drivers license or face posible fines. Register your car or face fines or impound. Give your kids a state-standard education of be subject to child abuse penalties. Work hard and well and get the legal means for a nice new car and fancy dinners, otherwise eat what you get at a shelter.
The concept of child suggests guidance/direction from parents etc is in order so they can learn generally accepted standards. Parents have a duty to impart those things. The concept of adult suggests maturity of independent judgment. Laws set the split between child and adult usually around 18 - 21, but there really is no magic "click".
Doesn't someone who has legal right to a home and shares that with another has the right to "demand" certain conduct in order to let that other person continue to reap the benefits of occupancy?? With kids, those "benefits" include food, clothes, etc. Are such "demands" as to conduct as a condition of continuing to get residency etc a coercive practice? Or are parents required to accept/allow whatever their kid does indefinitely without consequence? Are the parents obligated to provide the same benefits regardless of behavior or be deemed coercive?
Somewhere along the line, parents are morally and legally obligated to provide certain things for their kids, whether or not the kids ask for them. Parents are at least morally obligated to guide behavior, and often are legally responsible if the behavior doesn't conform to established standards.
So, if the kids behavior is not conforming to established standards, aren't the parents legally (forget morally for the moment) required to get that behavior to become modified? Or does that become the awful "behavior modification" to be avoided?
When the kid doesn't substantially conform to legal standards of conduct, what should a parent do - or not do - to meet their legal obligation? ...their moral obligation?
