Academy at Swift River: Private School or RTC

[Anonymous]

Why do you think that after 15 years Aspen has made no movement toward "getting with the program"?

Hubris.

[TheWho]

And Aspen is still just as unregulated as it ever was.  Why do you think that after 15 years Aspen has made no movement toward "getting with the program"?

I think we have been over this and concluded that no company is ever going to seek regulation on themselves, doesn?t make any sense.  Its like calling DSS and asking them to come over to your house twice a month to see if you are doing a good job raising your kids, why would someone do that?
Secondly, the fact that they are not regulated is a strong indication that there have been very few complaints against them over the past 20 years, the kids have benefited and parents have been happy with the outcomes, otherwise regulation would have been forced upon them years ago.

[Troll Control]

Suuuure, Who.  Whatever you say.  Everyone knows that it takes extreme effort to force regulation on a facility and that most people are either financially unable or too embarrassed to do the extremely hard and thankless work it entails.

This place is as abusive as they come.  It's history is well documented.

[Deborah]

And Aspen is still just as unregulated as it ever was.  Why do you think that after 15 years Aspen has made no movement toward "getting with the program"?

I think we have been over this and concluded that no company is ever going to seek regulation on themselves, doesn?t make any sense.  Its like calling DSS and asking them to come over to your house twice a month to see if you are doing a good job raising your kids, why would someone do that?

A program should do it because they are caring for a hundred or more kids who are not 'related' to them and subjecting them to god knows what, restricting communication with parents and the outside world. That's two reasons of many.
It's more like an abuse complaint is file against a parent, the parent claims to have no children, and the state takes the parents word for it without investigating.

Secondly, the fact that they are not regulated is a strong indication that there have been very few complaints against them over the past 20 years

Indicates no such thing. They will remain unlicensed until DHS is properly educated on the services provided and pressured, if necessary, to force licensure. Licensure/regulation is not determined by the number of complaints filed against a program. It's based on the state knowing what services the program is providing.

[TheWho]

A program should do it because they are caring for a hundred or more kids who are not 'related' to them and subjecting them to god knows what, restricting communication with parents and the outside world. That's two reasons of many.
It's more like an abuse complaint is file against a parent, the parent claims to have no children, and the state takes the parents word for it without investigating.

Sorry, I just disagree.  If I read all the requirements and felt I was doing the best job possible and that regulation may, in fact, reduce the services and quality given to the kids and parents I would opt not to seek regulation.  I think what a company needs to do is weigh the pros and cons to their customer and do what is right by them.
Communication is restricted in varying degrees in all educational settings (Private and public), wilderness and Therapeutic Boarding schools are no exception.

Indicates no such thing. They will remain unlicensed until DHS is properly educated on the services provided and pressured, if necessary, to force licensure. Licensure/regulation is not determined by the number of complaints filed against a program. It's based on the state knowing what services the program is providing.

It may or may not be, but if the parents didn?t receive the services they paid for and their kids were abused, you can bet there would be lawsuits left and right and the schools would have closed 20 years ago.  Around here if a child is denied the use of the bathroom in school during testing or a teacher makes an inappropriate comment to a student, people are fired and lawsuits are filed within days.

[Troll Control]

A program should do it because they are caring for a hundred or more kids who are not 'related' to them and subjecting them to god knows what, restricting communication with parents and the outside world. That's two reasons of many.
It's more like an abuse complaint is file against a parent, the parent claims to have no children, and the state takes the parents word for it without investigating.

Sorry, I just disagree.  If I read all the requirements and felt I was doing the best job possible and that regulation may, in fact, reduce the services and quality given to the kids and parents I would opt not to seek regulation.  I think what a company needs to do is weigh the pros and cons to their customer and do what is right by them.
Communication is restricted in varying degrees in all educational settings (Private and public), wilderness and Therapeutic Boarding schools are no exception.

This is absurd.  In what public or private school are the kids forbidden to speak to family for months on end?  Name one.

Indicates no such thing. They will remain unlicensed until DHS is properly educated on the services provided and pressured, if necessary, to force licensure. Licensure/regulation is not determined by the number of complaints filed against a program. It's based on the state knowing what services the program is providing.

It may or may not be, but if the parents didn?t receive the services they paid for and their kids were abused, you can bet there would be lawsuits left and right and the schools would have closed 20 years ago.  Around here if a child is denied the use of the bathroom in school during testing or a teacher makes an inappropriate comment to a student, people are fired and lawsuits are filed within days.

Uh, sounds good on paper, but when there's no mechanism to report abuse, the kid is shit out of luck.  Also, the parents are manipulated so heavily by the program that if there kid complains to them, they are not believed.  Often kids will not risk angering their parent or the program out of fear that they will be kept longer.

Your excuses just don't cut the mustard, Who.

[Deborah]

Sorry, I just disagree.  If I read all the requirements and felt I was doing the best job possible and that regulation may, in fact, reduce the services and quality given to the kids and parents I would opt not to seek regulation.  I think what a company needs to do is weigh the pros and cons to their customer and do what is right by them.

So, programs should weigh the pros and cons of being licensed and choose for themselves, even though this would be a violation of law if the state they operate in requires residential facilities to be licensed? Lie to the state regarding 'services provided', claim to be a traditional boarding school? In fact that's what most have and are doing. Until they get caught. Clearly a double-standard to profess to treat law-breaking kids while you are intentionally violating the law.

I've read many regs and can't think of one rule that would jeopardize the therapeutic value of or "reduce the services" of any 'evidence-based' program. Can you cite one? Specifically, not some vague response, designed to set off a trolling extravaganza.

[TheWho]

So, programs should weigh the pros and cons of being licensed and choose for themselves

If it is the law then it should be done, if not they should do what is best for their customers.

I've read many regs and can't think of one rule that would jeopardize the therapeutic value of or "reduce the services" of any 'evidence-based' program. Can you cite one? Specifically, not some vague response, designed to set off a trolling extravaganza.

Not real familiar with the regulations, but from what I have read I don?t see how they would limit the effectiveness of the schools either.  I don?t see regulation as a bad thing.

[RobertBruce]

If it is the law then it should be done, if not they should do what is best for their customers.

Who are the customers the parents or the kids?

Not real familiar with the regulations, but from what I have read I don?t see how they would limit the effectiveness of the schools either. I don?t see regulation as a bad thing.

My how youve changed your tune.

Why should they embrace regulations and oversight? Why would anyone, it?s a ton of paperwork, costs money.

[Anonymous]

And Aspen is still just as unregulated as it ever was.  Why do you think that after 15 years Aspen has made no movement toward "getting with the program"?

I think we have been over this and concluded that no company is ever going to seek regulation on themselves, doesn?t make any sense.  Its like calling DSS and asking them to come over to your house twice a month to see if you are doing a good job raising your kids, why would someone do that?
Secondly, the fact that they are not regulated is a strong indication that there have been very few complaints against them over the past 20 years, the kids have benefited and parents have been happy with the outcomes, otherwise regulation would have been forced upon them years ago.

they are not a company. They are ostensibly providing medical services to sick children. Hospitals and doctors are under strict regulation. This is acceptable to all (drs dont lobby poliicos demanding that they be able to declare themselves drs without med school) and necesary becasue they recognize they are dealing in human life not widgets - a fact you are insenstitve to. In calling ASW a compnay you unintentionally reveal what you really are all about

[TheWho]

And Aspen is still just as unregulated as it ever was.  Why do you think that after 15 years Aspen has made no movement toward "getting with the program"?

I think we have been over this and concluded that no company is ever going to seek regulation on themselves, doesn?t make any sense.  Its like calling DSS and asking them to come over to your house twice a month to see if you are doing a good job raising your kids, why would someone do that?
Secondly, the fact that they are not regulated is a strong indication that there have been very few complaints against them over the past 20 years, the kids have benefited and parents have been happy with the outcomes, otherwise regulation would have been forced upon them years ago.

they are not a company. They are ostensibly providing medical services to sick children. Hospitals and doctors are under strict regulation. This is acceptable to all (drs dont lobby poliicos demanding that they be able to declare themselves drs without med school) and necesary becasue they recognize they are dealing in human life not widgets - a fact you are insenstitve to. In calling ASW a compnay you unintentionally reveal what you really are all about

I may be mistaken but I believe they are in business to make a profit and are a company.  They may not all be, not sure which schools you are refering to, but I believe the Aspen group is a company.

Does anyone have the answer to this?  I am just speculating here.

[RobertBruce]

A company that claims to put the safety and well being of children first, yet avoids regulation and oversight like the plauge.

[RobertBruce]

Looks like ASR was never really confused on the whole licensure matter. They knew from the beginning what they were supposed to be licensed as but, like most TBS's fought against it.


http://cafety.org/index2.php?option=com ... f=1&id=279

[TheWho]

Looks like ASR was never really confused on the whole licensure matter. They knew from the beginning what they were supposed to be licensed as but, like most TBS's fought against it.


http://cafety.org/index2.php?option=com ... f=1&id=279

Typical..... you failed to mention that it is a newspaper article from 9 or 10 years ago .....  and but your right "ASR was never really confused and still isnt" but it seems you are, Bob.

[RobertBruce]

Still making excuses Cindy? Typical is right. What difference does it make how long ago the article was written. The fact of the matter is that ASR knew what it was doing when it tried to get around licensure.

They like HLA and like so many other TBS's will lie to the state, violate kids rights, break laws, and do anything they can to avoid oversight and regulation.

And you defend them?