Author Topic: Why spend a year in a program when it can be done in a week  (Read 8811 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Why spend a year in a program when it can be done in a week
« on: October 04, 2008, 02:28:17 AM »
Why should programs take years when behavior can improve in a week.

Look at the MTV Exiled.

You take some 18-20 year olds which their families have spoiled and promoted as spoiled in a previous serie and send them to some far out country living - good Lord no - like most of us when we are hiking in various countries.

So they break down and cry regardless of the fact that they dont even risk being abducted or killed like most of us if we visited the same countries because they have some 50-100 filmcrews and security living around the corner.

So ....

Why have programs at all?

Could parents not make arrangements with families living primitive in Norway, Sweden and Finland (They are regarded as safe counties) and ship their at-risk teen up there for a week among the reindeers instead of putting themselves into debt for decades?

(I was almost dying from laughter when one of the girls came back and showed her ability to make it on her self by making a burger on her own for the first time in her life; A job I could make my 9 year old daugther do with a better result).
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Re: Why spend a year in a program when it can be done in a week
« Reply #1 on: October 05, 2008, 01:39:19 PM »
I think it's because programs aren't really designed to improve behavior. Well, they sort of are, and sort of aren't. From the perspective of a parent, this might be what they assume. After all, they are told some form of this variant to assuage their fears of the obvious intrusion into person hood they find themselves ready to engage in. To be honest though I have no idea what future program parents think, and I never will. Some say wait, when your kids are teenagers and become crack whores you will empathize with our decisions. The problem with that though is simple. I have already been through the wringer and my judgment is very much dependent upon my experience and memories. I just can't forget it at will, or even pretend to. I can theorize what a parent might think, a truly ignorant parent whose knowledge of programs is little more than a brochure and phone call. But I will never really know.

Back to behavior and whether or not it is improved. Some might tour a program, say a parent, and be amazed at how well behaved the kids are. From this outside perspective it might be surprising that a group of the roughest teenagers you could find, are so quiet and cordial. The problem with this assumption is two fold. First, the kids are not bad or as bad as most make them out to be. Second, the well behaved group of kids is trained in the art of emotional assassination and physical pain. They know not to speak out of turn for those simple yet effective reasons.

So it really depends and goes back to intent. We must question if the parents wish to have a well behaved, rather, quiet and obedient child, knowing full well of the means used to reach such a conclusion. One might assume that those receiving tours of programs who are amazed at the appearance of order might ask how it is done. You might also assume that the parents might ask this same question, and if we are lucky some sort of government official might become curious and ask this question. For it is in this question wherein lies the secrets.

How do you get a kid who smoked pot a couple times to admit freely and publicly to being a full-on drug addict for life?
How do you get a kid to admit their darkest deepest secrets in front of a large group of strangers, secrets they know full well will be used to hurt them, yet still reveal what most would take to the grave?
How do you change a rebellious free spirit into a sycophantic, fearful automaton in just a few months?
How exactly are these things accomplished, one might assume someone would ask.

The answers to these questions are complicated, brutal and ugly. Behavior modification is a codeword, euphemism for abuse, plain and simple. The idea so goes if you make a child so uncomfortable, as in pushing them to their human breaking point until you hear snap, they will be forced to reevaluate their life, and the decisions which led them to this reprogramming in the first place. The problem is the instant and most obvious, and usually correct answer is what led them to this place is their parents ignorant, mean-spirited, or generally stupid decision to send them. They might answer they would be in high school right now like a normal teen if not for their unnecessary and grossly overbearing parental intervention. They would probably be right. The programs feels otherwise.

Fast forward a few months and now ask that same kid why they are at the program. Nine times out of ten, the answer might surprise you. They will make no mention of their parents, or bad decisions. They have now learned to take "responsibility" and "accountability" for their actions in a way that would make any paying parent proud. The burden lifted and replaced, absolved, forgiven and forgotten. At this point the parents don't ask why or how, they are just happy with their adolescent 2.0, reprogrammed to be the stepford parents dream child.

The problem is there is a bug in the software. It only seems to work when installed on program hardware. You take the immense fear, intimidation, snitches, controlled environment, fence, censorship, abuse, emotional turmoil, sickness, terrible living conditions, relentless brainwashing sessions, blackmail familial love, etc, away - well then there is a problem. Suddenly the program software doesn't work so well. At this point you might assume the parents ask why that is. Were we conned, duped, bamboozled in an elaborate, expensive, diabolical hoax? Is that why the program limited and censored our contact and only sent us quarterly pictures, like a child held for ransom? Could what my child is telling me be true? Did I really spend all of that money to subsidize the systematic, long-term, unforgettable emotional and physical abuse of my very own child?

I assume people ask these questions. In that sense I think I might be wrong though. These are questions coming from an insider, courtesy of a front row seat to the all inclusive, parental endorsed horror show. So to me the questions are obvious. To them, well, I really don't know.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Froderik

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7547
  • Karma: +10/-0
    • View Profile
I'm Working For the Federal Bureau of Narcotics.
« Reply #2 on: October 05, 2008, 02:07:03 PM »
Ah, my first "host family." Right cunts they were, the lot of them. My "oldcomer" was the gung-ho, 'in your face' type. In the midst of the emotional turmoil I faced during that first week at Straight, I sometimes wished I could get a hold of a knife or something to just get out of that fucking place somehow.... God how I hated them!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Froderik

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7547
  • Karma: +10/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Why spend a year in a program when it can be done in a week
« Reply #3 on: October 05, 2008, 02:13:27 PM »
Quote from: "alabama"
Were we conned, duped, bamboozled in an elaborate, expensive, diabolical hoax?
Why yes, yes we were.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Froderik

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7547
  • Karma: +10/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Why spend a year in a program when it can be done in a week
« Reply #4 on: October 05, 2008, 02:32:48 PM »
Quote from: "alabama"
How do you get a kid who smoked pot a couple times to admit freely and publicly to being a full-on drug addict for life?
How do you get a kid to admit their darkest deepest secrets in front of a large group of strangers, secrets they know full well will be used to hurt them, yet still reveal what most would take to the grave?
How do you change a rebellious free spirit into a sycophantic, fearful automaton in just a few months?
How exactly are these things accomplished, one might assume someone would ask.
You fill his head full of LIES, scare the shit out of him, threaten and humiliate him, make him believe he is insane and that "a power greater than himself can restore him to sanity," subject his hapless mind to GROUPTHINK, insist that he always PAY ATTENTION :wall:, reward him with "privileges" (for compliance to their bullshit, of course) that merely equate to basic human rights as an American citizen, constantly remind him of his need to "work on himself," fill him full of fear and loathing for all things "druggie" in their eyes, someone would answer.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline TheWho

  • Posts: 7256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Why spend a year in a program when it can be done in a week
« Reply #5 on: October 05, 2008, 05:02:50 PM »
It would be nice to be able to effectively alter risky or self destructive behavior in shorter periods of time.

There was a guy in the 1970’s who tried to influence peoples perspective, self awareness and behavior in about 60 hours.  He conducted it in two weekends of seminars (60 hours I believe) I had a friend who went thru it, the guys name was Erhard or Enhard.  It is way before many people here I am sure and I think it faded in popularity in the early 1980’s.  But I dont think it was very effective or long lasting and that is around the time when people discovered “time”  was a major factor in lasting change or behavior modification.



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

Offline Ursus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8989
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Why spend a year in a program when it can be done in a week
« Reply #6 on: October 05, 2008, 07:55:24 PM »
Quote from: "TheWho"
There was a guy in the 1970's who tried to influence peoples perspective, self awareness and behavior in about 60 hours. He conducted it in two weekends of seminars (60 hours I believe) I had a friend who went thru it, the guys name was Erhard or Enhard. It is way before many people here I am sure and I think it faded in popularity in the early 1980's.

Feigned ignorance? You know EXACTLY what his name is. Interesting that you (of all people) should intimate that Werner Erhard's est/The Forum/Landmark Education was a forerunner of programs. I wouldn't exactly regard that association as a good selling point, ha ha.

Quote from: "TheWho"
But I dont think it was very effective or long lasting and that is around the time when people discovered “time” was a major factor in lasting change or behavior modification.

Well, yeah...but if there is supposedly "lasting change or behavior modification" from spending time in program, how come none of us are significantly "changed," nor our behavior "modified?" The only thing that seems to LAST over the years is the trauma of having been put through all that!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
-------------- • -------------- • --------------

Offline TheWho

  • Posts: 7256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Why spend a year in a program when it can be done in a week
« Reply #7 on: October 05, 2008, 08:55:51 PM »
Quote from: "Ursus"
Feigned ignorance? You know EXACTLY what his name is. Interesting that you (of all people) should intimate that Werner Erhard's est/The Forum/Landmark Education was a forerunner of programs. I wouldn't exactly regard that association as a good selling point, ha ha.

Why are you so assuming?  Why are you being a dick? I don’t see it as a direct connection at all.   Those seminars ended in the 80’s.  Dont be such a prick.  I am sure there were people who influenced him also (good and bad) and continues back to the stone age.  You could trace the best medical practices today back to barbaric bloodletting or the use of lobotomies etc. if you felt the need to discredit someone.  You pick a small threaded connection to suit your purpose.

Quote
Well, yeah...but if there is supposedly "lasting change or behavior modification" from spending time in program, how come none of us are significantly "changed," nor our behavior "modified?" The only thing that seems to LAST over the years is the trauma of having been put through all that!

The friend that went thru it said it wasn’t bad at all and he felt really good afterwards (except not being allowed to use the bathroom) and that was after only 60 hours.   As far as the programs today, I don’t think there is a question on whether or not they are effective.  The change is lasting and the kids are moving on to better lives and getting back on track.  I don’t think we can attribute this to einhard because the programs have evolved so much since then that there is little left of his influence.  It seems the programs of the 70’s and 80’s were much harsher.  If you look at the programs today you will see that they are less harsh and the child works for longer periods of time (1 year plus) so that the behavior modification has time to take hold.  If you look at the ABA work that is being done on children with autism you will see what I mean about the time factor and criticality of addressing the issues as early in the persons life as possible, that is what made einhards 60 hour seminars short lived.  The key to lasting change is time and slow change over a longer time frame and there were many people taking his seminars who were in their 20’s and 30’s which would reduce the overall effectiveness or success rate.

So I think if his seminars taught us anything it was the time factor and earlier intervention.  This is why programs continue to grow and become more effective is because they are constantly adjusting and reacting to what works and what doesn’t.  This is why it is so critical to continue to gain feedback on how the graduates are doing after they leave.  The better programs get better by doing this.  The ones that are ineffective and don’t give into change will wane and eventually tank on their own like any other business would which ignored their customers feedback.



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

Offline TheWho

  • Posts: 7256
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Why spend a year in a program when it can be done in a week
« Reply #8 on: October 05, 2008, 09:37:49 PM »
The programs look at their installed base (kids who have passed thru their program/system).. how many are out there?… how are they doing?..... how many did they help?.... How many didn’t they help?... were the changes they made to their program model effective or ineffective.  This is the only way to stay competitive and to continue to increase the number of kids that are helped each year.  There is no doubt in my mind that some kids are not  helped by the programs they attend which is evident by those who come on here to fornits to tell their story.

The frustrating part is that fornits doesn’t have a sense to gauge or measure the feedback they are getting.  The old arguments that todays programs are traced back to the harsh programs of the past doesnt really mean anything.  Telling new readers the story of the 300 pound staff person who sat on a kid and killed him as a way to convince people that all staff people are evil is nuts or showing pictures of the “Hobbit” from the 1960’s doesn’t relate to what is going on today.

If fornits was trying to convince people that public schools were unsafe your methods would include telling stories of columbine massacre and the teachers who raped their students or gym teachers who forced kids to run until they died, pictures of the riots in the 1960’s due to busing etc…..but would this be a fair analysis of what our typical public school system is like?  Of course not…should we be aware of these..yes.  But they need to be placed in perspective is all I am trying to say.

Parents should be made aware of the risks involved in sending their children to a TBS but they should also be offered the advantages and successes at the same time.  Fornits only offers a very heavily downside and not very representative view of what programs stand for and what they accomplish each year for many children.  It would be nice to see fornits someday move off the fringe and more towards the center and start talking about the pros and cons of residential treatment and start helping some of these parents that pass thru here looking for information.



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

Offline dishdutyfugitive

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1105
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://www.foxmovies.com/fightclub/
Re: Why spend a year in a program when it can be done in a week
« Reply #9 on: October 05, 2008, 11:25:04 PM »
It would also be nice for rape victims to take accountability for their actions.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Ursus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8989
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Why spend a year in a program when it can be done in a week
« Reply #10 on: October 06, 2008, 12:35:30 AM »
Quote from: "TheWho"
Quote from: "Ursus"
Feigned ignorance? You know EXACTLY what his name is. Interesting that you (of all people) should intimate that Werner Erhard's est/The Forum/Landmark Education was a forerunner of programs. I wouldn't exactly regard that association as a good selling point, ha ha.

Why are you so assuming?  Why are you being a dick? I don’t see it as a direct connection at all.   Those seminars ended in the 80’s.  Dont be such a prick.  I am sure there were people who influenced him also (good and bad) and continues back to the stone age.  You could trace the best medical practices today back to barbaric bloodletting or the use of lobotomies etc. if you felt the need to discredit someone.  You pick a small threaded connection to suit your purpose.

Quote
Well, yeah...but if there is supposedly "lasting change or behavior modification" from spending time in program, how come none of us are significantly "changed," nor our behavior "modified?" The only thing that seems to LAST over the years is the trauma of having been put through all that!

The friend that went thru it said it wasn’t bad at all and he felt really good afterwards (except not being allowed to use the bathroom) and that was after only 60 hours.   As far as the programs today, I don’t think there is a question on whether or not they are effective.  The change is lasting and the kids are moving on to better lives and getting back on track.  I don’t think we can attribute this to einhard because the programs have evolved so much since then that there is little left of his influence.  It seems the programs of the 70’s and 80’s were much harsher.  If you look at the programs today you will see that they are less harsh and the child works for longer periods of time (1 year plus) so that the behavior modification has time to take hold.  If you look at the ABA work that is being done on children with autism you will see what I mean about the time factor and criticality of addressing the issues as early in the persons life as possible, that is what made einhards 60 hour seminars short lived.  The key to lasting change is time and slow change over a longer time frame and there were many people taking his seminars who were in their 20’s and 30’s which would reduce the overall effectiveness or success rate.

So I think if his seminars taught us anything it was the time factor and earlier intervention.  This is why programs continue to grow and become more effective is because they are constantly adjusting and reacting to what works and what doesn’t.  This is why it is so critical to continue to gain feedback on how the graduates are doing after they leave.  The better programs get better by doing this.  The ones that are ineffective and don’t give into change will wane and eventually tank on their own like any other business would which ignored their customers feedback.



...

Geez Louise, Who, now you're calling me names!? Dick, prick...that's some pretty mean-spirited language there... I'll try to see a back-handed compliment in all that somehow.
 :D

If you really want to be an effective program advocate, Who, I'd suggest doing a little more research before you fly off the handle like that. Even your friend and mentor Lon Woodbury cites the importance of the Human Potential movement in the 70s as being part and parcel of integral program "philosophy." In his essay "INNOVATION AND PREDICTABILITY" (August 31, 2004), he even mentions Werner Erhard's est (colored emphasis mine):

    ...and by the 1970s parents of struggling teens needing residential placement had for the most part only clinical choices - hospitals or residential treatment centers to choose from.

    However, the 1960s and 1970s saw a tremendous surge of innovative ideas and new approaches for these teens. Synanon, Daytop, Elan, DeSisto, EST, boy’s ranches, LifeSpring, the Dallas Salesmanship Club, wilderness adventure, back-to-nature communities and many other innovative approaches proliferated, challenging the system of predictability then in vogue. The founders of those facilities that were focused on struggling teens developed philosophies and approaches they thought would better meet these children’s needs because they felt the standard approach to helping teens who were making poor decisions did not help many of them...
    [/list]

    He describes the evolution of CEDU, his old haunting ground:

      ...One of the most influential approaches to the network of emotional growth/therapeutic schools and programs was Mel Wasserman’s CEDU School, founded in 1967.

      Wasserman concluded, like many other innovative founders of the time, that there was nothing available to adequately help teens with problems, so he went into the school business. Since the psychological research of that time focused on abnormal behaviors, Wasserman discarded the mainstream treatment practices as too limiting, and he adapted from many of the other alternative education currents of thought flourishing during the 1960s and 1970s, and from the self-improvement movement....
      [/list]

      Lon rambles a bit, and the context may not be entirely clear from the snippets above, but the basic gist of this particular essay is that 1.) society, public schooling, and the psychiatric treatment of troubled teenage souls were -- at the time -- too predictable and limiting; 2.) innovations in approach brought about by the human potential movement (he cites Synanon, est, etc.) offered new possibilities; and 3.) "humanitarian" and innovative folk such as Wasserman saw the opportunity to make a difference and ran with it.

      I may not agree with Lon's POV or conclusions in this essay, but that's not my point. My point is this: even Lon Woodbury, diametrically opposed to the mindset of many, if not most, of those who post on fornits, focuses on the human potential/self-improvement movement as being critical to the development of programs and sustenance of their "success."
      « Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
      -------------- • -------------- • --------------

      Offline TheWho

      • Posts: 7256
      • Karma: +0/-0
        • View Profile
      Re: Why spend a year in a program when it can be done in a week
      « Reply #11 on: October 06, 2008, 11:07:10 AM »
      @ Ursus, Sorry I got overly emotional with my response.  I was thinking of another post at the same time I was responding to yours so the energy flowed over into yours.  I understand what you are saying.



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

      Offline Anonymous

      • Newbie
      • *
      • Posts: 164653
      • Karma: +3/-4
        • View Profile
      Re: Why spend a year in a program when it can be done in a week
      « Reply #12 on: October 06, 2008, 06:19:12 PM »
      Dear Mr. Who

      The interesting thing about this serie is that there is no therapy done in those programs by professionals.

      The youth are sent out and meet someone of their own age and get inside knowledge about who life is for this foreign youth.

      It is almost like wilderness therapy without the therapists.

      But somehow the exiled youth change from inside. Can you explain the sudden drive those youth get from talking with youth from another culture?
      « Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

      Offline Anonymous

      • Newbie
      • *
      • Posts: 164653
      • Karma: +3/-4
        • View Profile
      Re: Why spend a year in a program when it can be done in a week
      « Reply #13 on: October 06, 2008, 06:23:48 PM »
      For those who aren't familiar with TheWho's troll tactics, this is when he asks himself questions and talks to himself. Pretty sad, huh?

      Cue TheWho in 5..4..3..2....
      « Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

      Offline TheWho

      • Posts: 7256
      • Karma: +0/-0
        • View Profile
      Re: Why spend a year in a program when it can be done in a week
      « Reply #14 on: October 06, 2008, 06:33:18 PM »
      Quote
      The interesting thing about this serie is that there is no therapy done in those programs by professionals.

      You apparently have never attended or had someone you know attend a program.  They have licensed professionals who conduct the therapy for those who require it.  These therapists keep in constant contact with the childs therapist at home.

      Quote
      The youth are sent out and meet someone of their own age and get inside knowledge about who life is for this foreign youth.
      ?

      Quote
      It is almost like wilderness therapy without the therapists.

      I guess some places can be this way, depends on what the child needs and the wishes of the parents and childs therapists.  Each program is a little different.

      Quote
      But somehow the exiled youth change from inside. Can you explain the sudden drive those youth get from talking with youth from another culture?

      The only natural way to change is from the inside.  This is what makes the better programs so successful.  Some children respond from interacting with successful peers, so this is also used.



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