Keepers of the cell keys

[Anonymous]

Mr. Chase: I think you should be concerned about firemen hovering
over these facilities with barred windows in direct violation of safety
codes.
How do you justify the fact, Mr. Minister, that the keepers of the
bedroom cell keys for the at-risk newcomers are themselves at-risk
old-comers who have been in the program only a few months longer
than those over whom they wield authority and for whom they
assume the liability that this government has left?

Alberta Adolescent Recovery Centre - March 2nd 2009
http://www.assembly.ab.ca/ISYS/LADDAR_f ... 01_han.pdf

[Anonymous]

yeah, cause it's all about fire safety. :rolleyes:

(no disparagement towrd user "A mom")

[Anonymous]

http://www.assembly.ab.ca/ISYS/LADDAR_f ... 01_han.pdf

Page 356 to 360

Harry Chase - We recognize the tremendous
problems that addiction poses, but we do not have the infrastructure
at this point. We do not have the number of accredited,
trained professionals – psychologists, doctors, nurses, social
workers, counsellors, degreed individuals – to make sure that this
treatment takes place. Now, what we do have are unaccredited
institutions competing for grants from the province to provide
degrees of treatment.
I have brought up in this House the concerns I have for organizations
like the Alberta Adolescent Recovery Centre. I also pointed
out the good intentions this program had, but the reality is that it
lacks the professional accreditation. It basically has a business
licence to operate as opposed to a medical recognition. It is not a
residential treatment centre. It does not have the status that is
required to have professionals on a day-to-day basis providing the
one-to-one treatment that is at times necessary in the stages of
overcoming addiction.
What it does have is a requirement on parents to at some point
keep in their custody in a barred-window bedroom someone else’s
358 Alberta Hansard March 11, 2009
child, and it is the responsibility of their child, who has gone months
further into the program, to be the guardian for the child. The new
person who has recently been introduced to treatment is referred to
as the newcomer, and the other student, who could be maybe 14,
with four months more of experience through the program, is
referred to as the old-comer. The old-comer holds the keys and
becomes the jailer for the other member.
Now, in that this program has gone on for over 20 years in the city
of Calgary, the number of barred bedrooms – illegally barred
bedrooms, I would add – is probably in the area of 200-plus. This
is not an accredited type of treatment program. Therefore, if there
is a suggestion within Bill 6 that there would be a referral to a
program, a nonaccredited, nonresidential treatment centre program
such as this, then I would have great difficulty. It is putting undue
emphasis, undue liability on a child to be a counsellor for another
child and for a parent to act as a warden and at the same time be a
prisoner to their own institutional responsibility. While the other
child is in their care, they can’t go anywhere because they have to be
the supervisors. Now, these are untrained parents. These are not
psychiatrists. These are not psychologists. These are not, in general,
doctors although some of those professions may come into it by
coincidence. There’s nothing to say that because you’re a professional,
your child isn’t going to become addicted to drugs.
The point I’m making is that if this program is going to work, it’s
got to be longer than 10 days. It has to be more than just an entry.
There has to be an exit, and that exit has to involve treatment by
accredited professionals in facilities that, if not currently under
construction, have to be a priority. If Bill 6 increases the speed at
which suitable clinical facilities are provided to treat these young
individuals and support their families, then I can be supportive of
that portion of the bill, but right now, unfortunately, it is all about
good intention and not about the funding that is sustainable, that is
needed to build the infrastructure, to pay the wages of the psychologists,
the psychiatrists, the professionally trained clinicians, the
social workers involved in the follow-up. That is not apparent to me
in Bill 6.
5:00
I cannot emphasize how important it is for Alberta, partly due to
its, you know, fast lifestyle – yes, the recession has slowed it
somewhat – that the children have the proper treatment. When I say
proper, I’m talking about government regulated.

and

Rachel Notley - I also want to raise, you know, an additional concern, that was
also raised by my colleague from Calgary-Varsity, with respect to
the reliance of – well, I don’t know if it’s the government; we don’t
know yet – some people on the ARC program, the Alberta Adolescent
Recovery Centre, in Calgary. Now, I’ve been invited to go
down and visit that centre, and I will be doing that. But I will say at
the outset that I have some significant concerns. Those concerns are
very similar to those that have already been raised. They are
concerns about the level of qualification and the level of oversight
and the level of skill that is brought to bear in that setting and the
degree to which it has any similarity to best practices that are
identified through peer-review processes by professionals who work
in the field. I suspect, unfortunately, that there appears to be quite
a bit of divergence from what is considered best practice on one
hand and what happens at ARC on the other. Then, of course, we
also have numerous allegations which at this point nobody wants to
acknowledge or actually investigate, which is deeply concerning to
us.
All of that aside, what I do see in that program is a number of very
well intentioned and often almost desperate parents who are
supportive of that program because they need a place for their
children to be. What concerns me is that they have to turn to a
program that may be fairly flawed. Frankly, we provide nothing
through our ministry of health – and I think that’s where it should be
provided – in a way that is or can be effective or accessible. We just
don’t have the proper number of beds or the level of expertise.
On top of that, what we’re now hearing is that there is a plan to
lower the certification standards for child and youth care counsellors.
We know that for child and youth care counsellors in forensic
settings a good portion of their job deals with the issue of addictions
management. What we’re actually doing as a government is
reducing the level of qualification and training that people working
in that area need to have. Again, what’s the likely outcome? A
reduction in the quality of support and assistance that we can provide
to children in crisis.

Indeed. Assuming these kids are actually ADDICTS and the desperate parents are not just being made MORE desperate by being convinced their kids are going to die if they don't join the AARC community.

 :tup:

[Mel]

These are some great points being discussed regarding AARC and the avoidance of dealing with it within Alberta. Its focusing on the big picture though that Alberta needs a government regulated facility so that "desperate parents" don't have to run to a privately licensed facility. Often facilities for teens know they aren't dealing with true addicts and that they are essentially babysitting and trying to help a family through a phase they haven't been able to deal with, but at least they are doing so in safe ways.

The focus at this moment however needs to be "This is a problem, who is going to take charge and deal with it? Where was the breakdown in the system that let this go unregulated for so long, and how are we going to change that?"

Fortunately there are some positive changes happening in Alberta! We need to give thanks to those who are helping to make them happen, and not focus on how the issue was avoided before. It may FEEL like change is happening too slowly, but for those directly involved I think it's fair to say that it actually is happening very fast.

Every time another person speaks with the proper authorities we are one day closer to being rid of homes with barred windows.

[Antigen]

Does this portend AARC's loss of government funding?

[Anonymous]

Does this portend AARC's loss of government funding?

Hopefully, but considering AARC pulled in over $6 million last year, and having Markin, and his billions and the likes of Canadian Natural Resources backing them up, I doubt AARC really cares about the $300,000 from the Prov gov't anymore.

 :whip:

[anonAARCgrad]

Does this portend AARC's loss of government funding?

Hopefully, but considering AARC pulled in over $6 million last year, and having Markin, and his billions and the likes of Canadian Natural Resources backing them up, I doubt AARC really cares about the $300,000 from the Prov gov't anymore.

 :whip:

AARC is addicted to cash. They have a multimillion $ nut every year. They go after every donor possible. They have learned from the Conservative Party that it is more sustainable to go after thousands of small donors as well as a few large ones - the small ones sustain you in hard economic times. Don'y forget - every client pays. If you have low paying job, but own your house, you must mortgage it or take out a loan. RRSPs? Great! Cash em in. Unless you are welfare recipient with no assets, you pay.

AARC has a huge fund of cash just sitting, accumulating. But there expenses do not add up. Low paid staff, a paid for building, dozens of paying customers. Why are their expenses so high?

[dishdutyfugitive]

how do they justify their exorbitant program

( a program backed by zero scientific data)
( a program for the wealthy)

their expertise

and

the fact that it is the 'only' solution to an emotionally charged, unresolvable problem


what else are you going to do? Let the individual sort it out for himself?
Fuck that.
He doesn't deserve that opportunity.

He deserves a botched solution derived from a self serving, white collar zombie.

[Anonymous]

Why are their expenses so high?

At one meeting Vause said a lot of their money went to legal fees.  Interesting.

[psy]

Why are their expenses so high?

At one meeting Vause said a lot of their money went to legal fees.  Interesting.

I wonder if that translates into "bribing judges"... a-la Pennsylvania style.

[Anonymous]

Why are their expenses so high?

At one meeting Vause said a lot of their money went to legal fees.  Interesting.

I wonder if that translates into "bribing judges"... a-la Pennsylvania style.

ok, got it - you do appearto be a paranoid schizophrenic. my apologies for comments in other thread.

[FemanonFatal2.0]

Why are their expenses so high?

At one meeting Vause said a lot of their money went to legal fees.  Interesting.

I wonder if that translates into "bribing judges"... a-la Pennsylvania style.

ok, got it - you do appearto be a paranoid schizophrenic. my apologies for comments in other thread.

And you appear to be a cult member.... My recommendation for being burnt at the stake.