Author Topic: Entire evaluation study of AARC - Dr. Michael Patton  (Read 4913 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TheWho

  • Posts: 7256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Entire evaluation study of AARC - Dr. Michael Patton
« Reply #30 on: April 07, 2009, 09:20:27 PM »
Quote from: "Guest"
Wow, you are very sensitive.  No one has ever spoken to me that way before, I apologize, but you should be aware that there are many people in history who became experts through exposure and self study.  A degree isn’t the only measurement of expertise on a subject.  Many become experts thru emersion.  This man may have spent many years doing what he is doing and gained his expertise that way.  Some people attain a phd and decide to publish it without having  any (or very little) working experience.  Take a look at this mans history he may have gained his experience prior to getting his Phd.  You may be surprised, a lot of people gain a degree later in life.

Welcome to fornits guest.  People are really angry here,its best not to bring up any information unless it is shows programs in a bad light.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Entire evaluation study of AARC - Dr. Michael Patton
« Reply #31 on: April 08, 2009, 02:30:13 AM »
Quote
This outcome study was conducted by Michael Patton  not Vause.  Seems they let Vause get involved in the final write up so he could get his name listed.

So Patton himself was lying when he told 5th Estate he did NOT conduct the study??

From: http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/2008-2009/power ... study.html

Quote
The fifth estate also asked the man who AARC says completed the study—Dr. Patton. He told the fifth estate his involvement was largely limited to supervising a graduate student who crunched the data—data gathered by people associated with AARC.

“I did not conduct the study. They conducted the study. I oversaw the analysis,” he said.

Patton said that while the study was a good preliminary “internal evaluation” with positive results, the next step would be to review AARC’s success rate independently. He noted that the study was rejected for publication by two journals.

 :trophy:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Entire evaluation study of AARC - Dr. Michael Patton
« Reply #32 on: April 08, 2009, 02:40:55 AM »
Quote
you should be aware that there are many people in history who became experts through exposure and self study. A degree isn’t the only measurement of expertise on a subject. Many become experts thru emersion. This man may have spent many years doing what he is doing and gained his expertise that way.

Except what Vause is doing with his AARC is hardly new!

Miller Newton did it with KIDS, where Vause admittedly worked. Other than the lack of motivating I challenge anyone to demonstrate any other differences between the two programs AARC and KIDS or even STRAIGHT for that matter. People keep saying there's differences but won't say what those differences are. If the KIDS "model of treatment" is abusive the AARC "model of treatment" is just as abusive.

Vause claims he started his OWN program, but he was was supposed to start running KIDS of the Canadian West here in Calgary until KIDS/Newton came under such harsh scrutiny. Was in Vause's best interest to cut Newton out of the picture, and run his "own" program anyway.

All these programs using a "STRAIGHT-like" treatment model are the same.

It's bad news, it destroys people, don't use it.

Pretty simple.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline ajax13

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1614
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Entire evaluation study of AARC - Dr. Michael Patton
« Reply #33 on: April 08, 2009, 11:34:23 AM »
The putrid sack of puss knows all about this subject.  He is still subscribed to this thread via his profile, under which he no longer posts.  The usual method used is to make reference to some entirely unrelated, irrelevant subject, usually having to do with his own experience since he loves to talk about himself, suffering from the egocentrism so common to such child molesters.  As soon as there is a post, he derails the discussion by creating a straw man.  In this case, rather than addressing the fact that the Wiz operates a facility where procedures, that are covered by laws that govern health care in our province, are performed by completely unqualified individuals, the Wiz included, thepervert in question ignores the fact that the program at AARC was created by charlatans, even though it is well established.  He ignores the fact that provision of health care is not a field in which amateurs acquire practical skill through work experience, particularly in this case, where the entire treatment model is rooted in pseudoscience, and serves as a cover for the operation of a socio-religious organization for parents who are unable to cope with their children, rather than as a health care program for adolescents as claimed.  He ignores the fact that psychology and psychiatry are well-established fields in Western society with a basis in scientific study going back to the nineteenth century.  But most importantly, he ignores the fact that he is posting in a forum dedicated to the particular phenomenon of Straight Inc. and the programs that grew from Straight.  Ignoring the history of Straight's illegitimacy and completely pervasive illegality, and that of it's subsequent developments like Kids, is absolutely dishonest, and speaks volumes as to the completely degenerate nature of the poster.
Again, save a child, go fuck yourself.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
"AARC will go on serving youth and families as long as it will be needed, if it keeps open to God for inspiration" Dr. F. Dean Vause Executive Director


MR. NELSON: Mr. Speaker, AADAC has been involved with
assistance in developing the program of the Alberta Adolescent
Recovery Centre since its inception originally as Kids of the
Canadian West."
Alberta Hansard, March 24, 1992

Offline TheWho

  • Posts: 7256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Entire evaluation study of AARC - Dr. Michael Patton
« Reply #34 on: April 08, 2009, 01:34:32 PM »
He may use a strawman and you use ad hominems but the man still manages to sustain an 85% success rate with his graduates.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Entire evaluation study of AARC - Dr. Michael Patton
« Reply #35 on: April 08, 2009, 02:01:26 PM »
Yeah, right. Ignorance is bliss. It was not an accurate external evaluation, whether you want to accept that or not. More like an internal guess, slanted towards the results AARC was hoping for.

You all know that too - even "the man."
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline TheWho

  • Posts: 7256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Entire evaluation study of AARC - Dr. Michael Patton
« Reply #36 on: April 08, 2009, 02:10:08 PM »
Quote from: "Guest"
Yeah, right. Ignorance is bliss. It was not an accurate external evaluation, whether you want to accept that or not. More like an internal guess, slanted towards the results AARC was hoping for.

You all know that too - even "the man."
Yeah, I think we all know it was biased.  It was an internal study, but it is still pretty impressive.  I would like to see it stacked against a totally independent study to see how far off it was.  My guess would be closer to 60%.  What is AA like 5% which is basically a wash. I dont think we should hold our breath,though, for an independent study anytime soon.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
60%
« Reply #37 on: April 08, 2009, 02:20:43 PM »
Considering most of the kids weren't addicts anyway AARC has done a great job creating them.

 :peace:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Entire evaluation study of AARC - Dr. Michael Patton
« Reply #38 on: April 08, 2009, 02:21:35 PM »
Quote from: "Guest"
Yeah, I think we all know it was biased.  It was an internal study, but it is still pretty impressive.

My response: :roflmao:

I give myself a 10/10 on my response. I'm very impressed with myself.  Does that mean anything to you?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Entire evaluation study of AARC - Dr. Michael Patton
« Reply #39 on: April 08, 2009, 04:33:44 PM »
Quote from: "Guest"
What is AA like 5% which is basically a wash.

A.A. has a 5% success rate?! lol I didn't know that, but I'm not surprised. Don't you think that says more about A.A. being a failure than AARC being a success? And isn't AARC based on A.A., which apparently isn't working? Maybe it's time to step into the 21st century and use methods that aren't based on cultism, mind control, and degradation.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline TheWho

  • Posts: 7256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Entire evaluation study of AARC - Dr. Michael Patton
« Reply #40 on: April 08, 2009, 05:14:04 PM »
Quote from: "Guest"
Quote from: "Guest"
What is AA like 5% which is basically a wash.

A.A. has a 5% success rate?! lol I didn't know that, but I'm not surprised. Don't you think that says more about A.A. being a failure than AARC being a success? And isn't AARC based on A.A., which apparently isn't working? Maybe it's time to step into the 21st century and use methods that aren't based on cultism, mind control, and degradation.

Its best to stick with what works until something better comes along.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Entire evaluation study of AARC - Dr. Michael Patton
« Reply #41 on: April 08, 2009, 06:00:39 PM »
LifeRing Secular Recovery
Moderation Management (MM)
Rational Recovery
Recovery, Inc.
Secular Organizations for Sobriety (SOS)
Smart Recovery
Women for Sobriety, Inc................

Or my #1 pick, growing up and becoming mature enough to choose a lifestyle that is not conducive to constant partying.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline TheWho

  • Posts: 7256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Entire evaluation study of AARC - Dr. Michael Patton
« Reply #42 on: April 08, 2009, 08:38:38 PM »
Quote from: "Guest"
Or my #1 pick, growing up and becoming mature enough to choose a lifestyle that is not conducive to constant partying.

I hear ya on that one.  Its every parents dream and a $100k bonus stays in the retirement account ta boot
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline anonAARCgrad

  • Posts: 52
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Entire evaluation study of AARC - Dr. Michael Patton
« Reply #43 on: April 08, 2009, 09:43:57 PM »
Quote from: "Guest"
He may use a strawman and you use ad hominems but the man still manages to sustain an 85% success rate with his graduates.


AARC can certainly afford to poll it's former client base yearly. Two questions. Are you abstinant? Have you maintained abstinance since graduation? Pretty simple, they can poll a family member as well. What would this cost - $5000?

They choose not to. They go off a study they had every reason to manipulate. One "study" in 17 years? WTF?

I have known well over 100 graduates. Of that sample, their is no way more than 50% are sober today. I doubt more than 20% have maintained sobriety continuously since leaving AARC. They are pretty open about their usage, once they turn 18 and can't be interned in AARC. Not to mention all the non-addicted kids which is a large proportion. Another polling question - did it take more than a month to accept you were an addict? Thats a pretty good indicator you are not. But you can learn to sound like one to get the hell out of there!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Entire evaluation study of AARC - Dr. Michael Patton
« Reply #44 on: April 08, 2009, 10:18:34 PM »
I would also put AARC's 'success' rate at around 20%. As for clients who have the disease of addiction, in my opinion- 0 - 5%.
Have you ever met any teens who liked to have one glass of wine while they discussed politics over cheese fondue? Pretty much any kid who drinks is going to do it in excess. Programs like AARC take the criteria for adult addiction and apply it to teens, but it's so blatantly inaccurate - if an adult drank and acted like a 16 year old, then yeah - there's probably a problem there. Of the app. 10 close friends I had before AARC (who were all doing the same things I was), every single one of them is a university graduate and doing great. For those of us who were put into AARC (esp. in our early teens), we never got a chance to grow out of our 'delinquent' phases. Sure, our parents were trying to do they best they could for us, but many of us were just trying to do the best we could as teenagers.
I took several months to get my Step One. The day after I got it, I talked to my old comer because I thought that I'd fooled the staff - I STILL knew that I wasn't an alcoholic. My o/c said, 'Don't worry, we all feel that way.'
Looking back, the moment AARC staff thought I'd admitted powerlessness and finally surrendered to my disease, I'd simply resigned myself to the fact that I was stuck in there. After that, I didn't care that I was there anymore, and by the time I graduated, I was terrified to leave.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »