Academy at Swift River - Split from TTI

[TheWho]

I have to go with thewho on this one.  Anyone can write that and claim it came from a paper.

Show him the link !!

[RobertBruce]

To which one? The laws or the article stating ASR had been cited by OCCS?

[Troll Control]

That same article has been posted probably two dozen times here on fornits.  TheWho has read it and commented on it before.  He wants a link to the law ASR violated, not the link to an article he already read.

The fact that ASR was cited for a violation of the law is proof that the law exists, is it not?

[Troll Control]

It was an article writtem by Stepanie Kraft for the Valley Advocate.  It's archived on cafety.org.

So this is where we're at until someone can show otherwise:

Ha,Ha,Ha...  I'm not going to do your busy work.  If you have documents that show otherwise, post them.

We have already established these facts and I think everyone is comfortable with where we're at in this debate:

[/u]"OCCS also cited the school for monitoring students' telephone calls and mail. The agency said that the right to privacy incommunications, even for juveniles, can be restricted only by court order -- for example (editing note: this is exactly the argument TheWho used earlier in the thread and it's 100% illegal!), if a therapist believes that the teen's communication should be monitored, perhaps to support a young person through a crisis in relations with his orher family -- and then only temporarily."[/u]

Sorry, Who, but these are the facts.  I guess you can take it up with OCCS and investigator Lieberman and try to change the records Ha,Ha,Ha...

I know you get mad mad about this, Who, but you can't change history and the state's records to suit your agenda...Ha,Ha,Ha.  You'll have to take this up with the state if you don't like their ruling, not fornits!  Do your own work, I'm not going to do it for you.  Ha,Ha, Ha...

If someone was a convicted rapist, would you not believe rape was against the law unless someone posted the actual law that says it is?  That's absurd.  

The fact that ASR was cited by state officials for breaking the law is ipso facto proof that the law exists.[/quote]

[Troll Control]

Was DJ right about your daughter not talking to you anymore?

Here's your answer.  Even though TheWho went back and deleted the post where he admiited this, it was his admission nonetheless - made in the comfort of anonymity.  He later agreed to have all his anon posts linked to his user account after people hounded him about posing as different people (a parent, a kid, even an HLA parent!) while trolling anonymously.

This is the last refuge for someone caught blatantly lying so many times that he has no other excuse but "They altered my posts!" What a LOSER.

 :rofl:
That's about the size of it. He hasn't a leg to stand on in an honest debate, so he resorts to attacks and false allegations. I could provide links to many posts that I would've loved to dump. They're still there.
The only one 'editing' Who's posts is Who. Remember the one in which he stated his daughter split and didn't talk to him for 2 years. He apparently forgot he posted that back when he was anon- before his picked a user name. When I linked to it, he promptly deleted it.
Wah, wah, wah.  :cry2:

The funny (not "funny ha-ha", but "strange") thing is that he incessantly pimps Aspen, even though his sending his daughter there destroyed their relationship, witihin days of being home "she went back to her old ways," moved out and she no longer has anything to do with him.

It gives a sense of how these people buy into twisted program doctrine.  By his own admission, his daughter showed no change at all after 22 months (and $80,000!) and cut him off from her life.

Sure sounds like the program "helped her grow" and "healed the family," huh? :roll:

[TheWho]

Wow DJ,  I didnt realize you are really this bent out of shape since I proved you wrong once again..... I am sorry this is the way you need to respond.  You are revealing alot about yourself.

[hanzomon4]

Link to the EEC (formerly OCCS) licensing regulations. This is from sec 3.07: part 7-(g)

(g) No resident shall be subjected to abuse or neglect, cruel, unusual, severe or corporal punishment including the following practices:
     

• any type of physical hitting inflicted in any manner upon the body;
       
       
• requiring or forcing the resident to take an uncomfortable position
        such as squatting or bending or requiring or forcing the resident to   repeat
        physical movements, when used as punishment;
       
• punishments which subject the resident to verbal abuse, ridicule or
        humiliation;
       
• denial of visitation or communication privileges with family, when
        used as punishment;
       
• denial of sufficient sleep;
       
• denial of shelter, bedding, food or bathroom facilities;
       
• extensive separation from the group.

sec 3.07: part 9 details the rules regarding mail/phone-calls/visits

(9) Visiting, Mail and Telephones.
                   

• (a) The licensee shall have written policies which encourage and support
                     family visits, mail, telephone calls, and other forms of communication with
                     family, friends, or other persons.
                           
  
  • 1. Such policies shall be developed with the goal of encouraging
                             healthy family relationships, maximizing the individual resident's growt
                             and development, and protecting the residents, staff and program from
                             unreasonable and unsafe intrusions.
                             
  • 2. Such policies shall be distributed to staff and residents, persons othe
                             than a parent with custody of the child, and parents prior to admission,
                             when possible, or within 72 hours after admission.
     
  -------------------------------snip---------------------for-readability-------------
  
• (g) It shall be each resident's right to open and send mail unread by staff
      except in accordance with the following circumstances:
               
  
  • 1. Any restrictions or censorship must be no greater than necessary to
                 achieve the therapeutic purpose described in the individual service plan.
                 
    
  • 2. Mail restricted or censored must be returned to the sender with
                 reasons therefore.
                 
  • 3. Staff may open and inspect a resident's mail for contraband only in
                 his or her presence.
             
• (h) Telephone communications may not be monitored or unreasonably
               restricted unless there are specific therapeutic reasons justifying such
               limitations.
  
  
  • 1. Such therapeutic reasons must be developed in the child and/or teen parent's
        individual service plan and must be no greater than necessary to achieve the
                 therapeutic purpose.
                 
  • 2. If phone conversations are monitored, the parties to the conversations
                 must be informed.
             
• (i) Communication with a resident's social worker, attorney, or clergy
               person may not be prohibited, restricted or censored.
                       

[/li][/list]

[Troll Control]

Wow DJ,  I didnt realize you are really this bent out of shape since I proved you wrong once again..... I am sorry this is the way I want you to respond.  You are revealing alot about yourself.

"DJ repeated what I said!  He's bad!" ::crybaby::

If you don't want these details to be public, don't say them in the first place.

[hanzomon4]

Fixed some stuff in my last post....

[TheWho]

Okay,  Someone came thru it looks like…Thanks guest... Let me get my glasses on.  Ahhhh EEC, we have been thru this.  They fall under the requirements of Private Residential Schools not serving children with special needs, so they don’t need a residential license.  The stickler here as I remember was the definition of “Special needs”.  In Massachusetts you need an I.E.P. developed for your child and if I remember correctly 30% or more of the students need to qualify under this definition to require the school to seek a residential license…I am sure greater than 90% if not all the kids do not have an IEP and are not on a state ED plan…..anyway that is a different battle.

But anyway looking at sec 3.07 part 7 and part 9 that was provided for us:

Part 7:  No resident shall be subjected to abuse or neglect, cruel, unusual, severe or corporal punishment

Looking back on the past few pages I don’t see any disagreement that they do indeed meet these requirements…. Lets move on………

Okay here is where we had our discussion, let’s take a look:

Part 9:  Visiting, Mail and Telephones

“Any restrictions or censorship must be no greater than necessary……”   Okay

“Staff may open and inspect a resident's mail for contraband “   Okay

“Telephone communications may not be monitored or unreasonably
restricted unless there are specific therapeutic reasons justifying such
limitations…………………………. If phone conversations are monitored, the parties to the conversations
must be informed”       Okay, I think we mentioned the counselors keep a log to ensure each child completes the phone call and if any problems occurred, so they are well within this requirement.

So as far as we see ASR is meeting or exceeding these standards as I had indicated.

There was mention of a report from a walk thru or inspection, but we haven’t seen it yet.

[Anonymous]

I get the distinct feeling  Who is making things up as he goes.

[Troll Control]

It was an article writtem by Stepanie Kraft for the Valley Advocate.  It's archived on cafety.org.

So this is where we're at until someone can show otherwise:

Ha,Ha,Ha...  I'm not going to do your busy work.  If you have documents that show otherwise, post them.

We have already established these facts and I think everyone is comfortable with where we're at in this debate:

[/u]"OCCS also cited the school for monitoring students' telephone calls and mail. The agency said that the right to privacy incommunications, even for juveniles, can be restricted only by court order -- for example (editing note: this is exactly the argument TheWho used earlier in the thread and it's 100% illegal!), if a therapist believes that the teen's communication should be monitored, perhaps to support a young person through a crisis in relations with his orher family -- and then only temporarily."[/u]

Sorry, Who, but these are the facts.  I guess you can take it up with OCCS and investigator Lieberman and try to change the records Ha,Ha,Ha...

I know you get mad mad about this, Who, but you can't change history and the state's records to suit your agenda...Ha,Ha,Ha.  You'll have to take this up with the state if you don't like their ruling, not fornits!  Do your own work, I'm not going to do it for you.  Ha,Ha, Ha...

If someone was a convicted rapist, would you not believe rape was against the law unless someone posted the actual law that says it is?  That's absurd.  

The fact that ASR was cited by state officials for breaking the law is ipso facto proof that the law exists.

[/quote]

This is the most direct source we have stating the facts about the state's inspection of ASR resulting in at least two citations for violating the law.

I think we're all comfortable with the state's findings and the journalist's accurate reporting of it.  We all agree.

So this is where we're at until we see some proof that the journalist was lying about the state's two citations.

I know certain people would like to say that the reporter was lying in the article, but they'll have to take it up with her or the state.  We have established that these events took place and that the record is clear.

[Anonymous]

They fall under the requirements of Private Residential Schools not serving children with special needs, so they don’t need a residential license.

This isnt true by any means. "Special Needs" in Massachusettes is very broad. A kid with dyslexia is considered special needs, as are kids in which the school requires mandatory therapy for. I spoke today with the OCCS today asking for an exact definition of what constitutes special needs. They have promised to email me such a definition straight away, so once again Who you can look forward to being embarrassed.

In Massachusetts you need an I.E.P. developed for your child

Back up this claim please. It isnt true but I'd like to see you try.

and if I remember correctly 30% or more of the students need to qualify under this definition to require the school to seek a residential license…I am sure greater than 90% if not all the kids do not have an IEP and are not on a state ED plan…..anyway that is a different battle.

Funny you mention that. According to the licenser I spoke with today the 30% rule came about because of ASR's whining. See the last time OCCS came in, they found ASR in violation of several laws and cited them stating they needed to become licensed as a RCF. ASR cried to the legesilature and got them to enact this 30% law. It worked back then only because ASR had literally just opened their doors and special needs was soley considered kids with IEP's. Thankfully the law has caught up with them and special needs encompasses so much more. ASR will not be able to hide behind anything this time and neither will you Who.

[hanzomon4]

Part 7: No resident shall be subjected to abuse or neglect, cruel, unusual, severe or corporal punishment

Looking back on the past few pages I don’t see any disagreement that they do indeed meet these requirements…. Lets move on………

Who, don't try to bullshit me. The subparts of part 7 outline the very things cited in the news story.  

Part 9: Visiting, Mail and Telephones

“Any restrictions or censorship must be no greater than necessary……” Okay

“Staff may open and inspect a resident's mail for contraband “ Okay

“Telephone communications may not be monitored or unreasonably
restricted unless there are specific therapeutic reasons justifying such
limitations…………………………. If phone conversations are monitored, the parties to the conversations
must be informed” Okay, I think we mentioned the counselors keep a log to ensure each child completes the phone call and if any problems occurred, so they are well within this requirement.

So as far as we see ASR is meeting or exceeding these standards as I had indicated.

Again, halt the b.s.

ASR did not adequately meet the requirements in regards to a "therapeutic need" to monitor phone calls. It was a program wide policy and not specific to the child's individual service plan as called for in sec 3.07: part 9-(h1). This was a violation cited in the news report and unless you can show that the reporter lied it stands.

[Deborah]

Who, dude, the horse is dead, stop beatin it.
The issue of licensing and 'special needs' was hashed to death in this thread:
http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.ph ... 666#248666

From that thread:
A Group Care Program is a program or facility that provides care and custody for one or more children by anyone other than a relative by blood, marriage or adoption on a regular 24-hour a day, residential basis.

Group care program includes private residential schools that provide to children with special needs in which children with special needs constitute 30% or more of the school?s population.

Special Services are any services provided to children with special needs by a private residential school that are special education services similar to those referred to at 603 CMR 18.05(3)(a)  and (b); or social, psychological or psychiatric services; or self-help skills or activities of daily living training.

A Child with special needs is a child who, because of a disability consisting of a developmental delay or an emotional, communication, specific learning impairment or combination thereof, is or would be unable to progress effectively in a regular school program. This may include, but not be limited to, a school age child with special needs as determined by an evaluation conducted pursuant to M.G.L. c. 71B, § 3, and as defined by the Department of Education in 603 CMR 28.00.

Group care program includes but is not limited to:
*programs serving teen parents under the age of 16 years;
*transition to independent living programs;
*private residential schools that provide special services to children with special needs in which children with special needs constitute 30% or more of the school?s population; and
*group residences or group homes.

ASR provides assessments, requires group/individual therapy, and treats the following 'special needs':
Emotional and behavioral disturbances
Anxiety disorders including post-traumatic stress disorder
Defiant and/or rebellious
Mild to moderate mood disorders
Academic underachievement and/or school avoidance
Attention disorders
Low self-esteem
Adoption related issues
Unresolved grief reactions including parental divorce
Substance abuse
~~

If you feel a need to do something productive, Who, why don't you read through the regs ASR should be subject to and list those you belive would 'interfere' with treatment, one of your favorite contentions.